You mean whether or not the psychological mindset of hitters is important?
A little off topic, but I think it's more about approach, battling to get on base, not free swinging, making every pitch count. I think all those things go up a notch in the late innings of close games.
I would submit that despite the save statistic not existing teams would still use their "closers" to finish games. Yes they went more than one inning but when they had a lead if they went to their BP they went to their best pitcher in it.
I think the save stat is overrated by some and underrated by others. Closers are important but when you have an incomplete team the importance level goes down quite a bit.
"it's the fact that hitters know its their last chance to do something."
that implies that certain pieces of information would change a player's approach and mindset.
"A little off topic, but I think it's more about approach, battling to get on base, not free swinging, making every pitch count. I think all those things go up a notch in the late innings of close games. "
i don't think any of this has changed at all. the game itself has not changed. there was still situational hitting and strategy during the steroid era. it's not like everyone said, "i'm gonna start swinging like phil plantier" after they took their "b12 shot"
I really have no idea what you're talking about, during the steroid era? Huh?
My statements imply exactly what they say, late in close games hitters may change their approach and battle a little more to make something happen, which is a factor in the importance of a good bullpen.
What are you talking about?
Roach promoted to Double-A San Antonio
SAN DIEGO -- As expected, Padres pitching prospect Donn Roach has been promoted from Class A Lake Elsinore to Double-A San Antonio. Randy Smith, the Padres' vice president of player development and international scouting, confirmed the promotion on Wednesday. Roach, a 22-year-old right-hander, was obtained on May 3 from the Angels in the deal that sent reliever Ernesto Frieri to Anaheim. Roach went 5-1 with a 1.74 ERA in eight games (seven starts) after the trade. All told, he went 10-1 with a 1.94 ERA in 14 games, 13 starts, pitching in the hitter-friendly California League. "He's been unbelievably successful," Smith said of Roach, a sinkerball pitcher. "And his ball should sink more in San Antonio. He's going into a good pitching environment." The Padres hold Roach in very high regard, and several members of the front office, including general manager Josh Byrnes, have seen him pitch in person on several occasions. Roach is considered the 20th-best Padres prospect, according to MLB.com.
The origin of “That is a clown question, bro,” revealed by Bryan Harper, Bryce Harper's brother: After hitting a monster home run in Toronto earlier this week during a successful Nationals’ road trip, Bryce Harper was asked a question. A Canadian reporter asked him, since the legal drinking age in Ontario is 19, if the 19-year-old was going for a celebratory beer. And what kind of beer it would be. A Nationals public relations person tried to head off a potentially damaging answer. Bryce Harper looked at the reporter and gave an all-time one liner. “That is a clown question, bro.” “I thought it was great,” Bryan said. The snappy retort is already on T-Shirts and getting references on the late night talk show circuit. “That is actually from one of my good friends,” Bryan Harper said referring to Donn Roach, a friend from the Harper’s hometown of Las Vegas. Roach was drafted by the Angels and is now in the Padres system. “That is one of his (Roach’s) words. He has always used 'clown' as an (adjective),” Bryan Harper said. As for how his brother used the reference in context: “That is some saltiness. A little bit of veteran swagger right there for Bryce.” Everything ultimately came back to what Auburn’s Harper has in common with Washington’s. Brothers playing a common game in a common organization. One of them famously using, “clown" and "bro.” One of them talking about where it came from. “We love to play the game and that is the way that we carry ourselves,” Bryan Harper said. “We want to be another one of the guys.” One of the bros
Some good stuff in there too about the role reversal of being Bryce's OLDER brother
Where are they now?
The lone 'major league' player in the infamous Adrian Gonzalez trade, Eric Patterson, has been DFA'd from the tigers AAA squad. Like Patterson, another key piece is hitting ~240 in the minor leagues, reymond Fuentes is toiling in AA. While none of the 4 players have any positive impact in the bigs, 18 months after the trade, it looks like Rizzo will get his shot soon.
"Why don't you look at the correlation with winning % in games with blown saves."
Becasue it's unimportant. In the 50's and 60's, before teams ever thought about using closers, they won 95% of their games when leading in the 9th inning. In the 70's and 80's, when they started to use guys as "Firemen" like Gossage and Fingers, they won 95% of their games when leading in the 9th inning. In the 90's and 00's, when having a closer was "essential," they still win 95% of their games when leading in the 9th inning.
If having a closer is so crucial, vital, essential, if those last 3 outs are SO hard to get, teams should be winning more of their games when lading in the 9th inning now that they've figure this out and started using a closer, but they don't. So how can a guy who does NOTHING to win you more games than you would otherwise win be so important?
"A bad team can have a good closer, but not so much vice versa."
" Closers are important but when you have an incomplete team the importance level goes down quite a bit."
Having a good bullpen is important. The way the closer has come to be used, vast majority of apperances are only for one inning, generally the 9th but could be the "last" inning of extra innings, with their team in the lead, renders them unimportant.
The role has only recently been defined, but are you saying in the 50s and 60s teams didn't have relief pitchers that closed out games? That is pretty hard to believe, I realize they may have thrown more than one inning, but I think it's safe to say teams had better relievers who would be put in late in close games to 'close', whether that was 1,2, or 3 innings, that's another issue. Starters used to throw 300+ innings, does that mean starters today are less valuable than they were back then?
As far as bad closers on good teams, sure I'll look into it when I have some time. Maybe I'll look at playoff teams over the past 5-10 years, and evaluate their closers wrt others in the league.
Go to baseball reference and look at how many pitchers in the 50s and 60s pitched complete games.. Yes they had bullpens.. but not really a "closer".. Pitchers prided themselves on pitching complete games, even when the games went longer than 9 innings..
Closers used to pitch more than an inning.. Goose pitched a lot of 2 and 3 inning games.. Fingers the same.. Smith the same.. then it became more defined with setup guys.. 7th and 8th inning guys.. That wasn't how it was back in the 50s and 60s.. go do the research.. instead of having others do it for you..
I did discuss the number of innings issue and the fact that starters threw more innings then, did you even bother to read my post, or did you just decide to add your 2 cents agreeing with everything I had just posted about relievers pitching more than 1 inning?
As far as the number of complete games goes, that doesn't change the fact that there were relief pitchers during this era and were still called on to 'close' out games. What it does change is the importance of those players, because starters do not throw more than about 200 innings now, again exactly as I stated in the previous post, that means relief pitching is a more important part of the game than it was back then.
"go do the research" - on what? What are others doing for me? Please respond and don't go running away with one of your 'Im done' bailouts.
I didn't go through the whole thread again.. you tend to say one thing and then another.. so would have got lost in your logic anyway..
They weren't called closers in the 50s or 60s.. they were one of the bullpen guys who finished a game.. semantics.. but the way it was.. I was around for a lot of those years and watched how things were done.. they carried less pitchers.. pitchers pitched more often.. pitched a lot more innings and number of pitches per game.. a totally different approach than today..
whether the closer is progress or not or even necessary is based on today.. not 50 to 60 years ago.. the game has changed.. players are pampered a lot more due to how much money they make.. the funny thing, to me, is with the less innings/pitches thrown/games pitched.. we see a lot more injuries than the "old days".. is pampering and defining setup/7th/8th/closer helping or hindering??
btw.. if you want to insult.. I will be done with this conversation. it's that easy
Say one thing and then the other? Who's insulting here?
Why don't you give even 1 example of me contradicting myself, before talking trash.
How about answering the question, what do I need to research?
What am I asking others to do for me?
"Say one thing and then the other? Who's insulting here? "
No insult intended.. you take positions just to argue.. it is common knowledge.. was stating what I thought was a fact.. if you took it as an insult.. I am sorry.. not intended that way at all..
The research comment was concerning the need for a Closer in the 50s and 60s.. you told someone to prove stuff to you.. sometimes you can do your own research and find out for yourself.. baseball reference is a great site and I have fun looking up obscure information, for my own benefit..