Roll Call for NY Yankees Fans

[MilkSpiller22]

It is not counter productive to take the ball out of your closer's hands in many situations. When the bases are loaded with no outs in the 8th, give the bal to the best pitcher. Then start the 9th with anyone else. You will win many more games this way.... Most games are saved in non-'save' situations.... The idea of a closer is excellent. The idea of using him in 'save' situations is moronic.

Thankfully, teams are heading in this direction (I wouldn't say "a lot of cases", yet)... I do think Papelbon will be the last to get "paid" as a closer... Teams are still naming someone a closer, but aren't paying for them.... They are starting with a 'bullpen-by-committee' and letting the pitchers fall into their own rolls...

I don't disagree with the first paragraph, but disagree 100% with the second... it seems like the only teams that are going committee are the teams that don't have a good enough closer... Pappelbon will not be the last closer to be paid like a closer!!! how about Kimbrel(the best closer in the game)...

And Closers do come in in the 8th if needed...

 

[steveringo]

I like how passionate you are... But you clearly over exaggerate... Getting a save is not difficult but to have an ERA below 3 and a WHIP below 1.1 is very good, even if you are only pitching one inning at a time... Consistency is the key, and it is very hard to be consistent.. To say otherwise is just foolish...

And again, isn't it counter productive to take out your best pitcher to put in a lesser pitcher when you
did not have to put in your best pitcher yet?? Of course it is!!! that is the whole purpose of saves... Nobody will disagree with you if you are to say that sometimes a 7th inning is more important than the 9th, but if you put your best relief pitcher in the 7th inning, then you have to rely on someone not as good to close the game!!! I can understand not liking the way closers are used, but to not understand why they pitch the 9th is showing how stubborn you are...

I don't disagree that the stat of saves is over-rated, but I do agree with the logic behind the stat...

There are opposite ends of every spectrum.

I agree with both of you... The theory of a save is a good one - it is just madly misdefined...

With all things equal, the 9th is obvioulsy more important than the 7th or 8th. When all things are not equal, you might need your best pitcher in the 7th or 8th...

Using my example above, would you give the save to the guy that got three outs with the bases loaded in the 8th, or the guy that got three outs with the bases empty in the 9th?


I also do not think we should change the definition of the save. I think we need to create a new stat that is more true to the importance of relievers - that measeure the more important outs - that will become more important than the save...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

There are opposite ends of every spectrum.

I agree with both of you... The theory of a save is a good one - it is just madly misdefined...

With all things equal, the 9th is obvioulsy more important than the 7th or 8th. When all things are not equal, you might need your best pitcher in the 7th or 8th...

Using my example above, would you give the save to the guy that got three outs with the bases loaded in the 8th, or the guy that got three outs with the bases empty in the 9th?


I also do not think we should change the definition of the save. I think we need to create a new stat that is more true to the importance of relievers - that measeure the more important outs - that will become more important than the save...

I disagree. And I have a problem with you stat haters. Anytime there is a stat you people look for the flaw and talk about specific situations to why a stat is flawed. Just like all counting stats the purpose is not the individual game it is to show how often it was done throughout a season or career. So it is irrelevant how easy a specific save was!!!

I would agree that the percentage(saves/save opportunities) is more telling. But a new stat is not needed.

 

[steveringo]

I disagree. And I have a problem with you stat haters. Anytime there is a stat you people look for the flaw and talk about specific situations to why a stat is flawed. Just like all counting stats the purpose is not the individual game it is to show how often it was done throughout a season or career. So it is irrelevant how easy a specific save was!!!

I would agree that the percentage(saves/save opportunities) is more telling. But a new stat is not needed.

I'm a stat lover, not a hater... The save is what it is. As long as everyone understands that, we should be ok. Many people overrate saves (whether or not they are the same people that still talk about Batting Average, who knows?)... If you took a survey of most overrated (or misused) baseball stat, the save would probably be third to BA & W...

Getting a save is a rather arbitrary event. Is getting the last out of a 3 run game better than getting the last out of a 4 run game? Is it hard to pitch the last three innings when you are winning by 15 runs?

The main issue most people have with the save is that managers are saving their closer for only the save situations. I still see managers go to their closer fo the final out of a 4 run game just because there are two men on base! Is it really worth it to being him in just becase 'the tying run is on deck'? There is no one else that can get one out without letting in four runs??

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I'm a stat lover, not a hater... The save is what it is. As long as everyone understands that, we should be ok. Many people overrate saves (whether or not they are the same people that still talk about Batting Average, who knows?)... If you took a survey of most overrated (or misused) baseball stat, the save would probably be third to BA & W...

Getting a save is a rather arbitrary event. Is getting the last out of a 3 run game better than getting the last out of a 4 run game? Is it hard to pitch the last three innings when you are winning by 15 runs?

The main issue most people have with the save is that managers are saving their closer for only the save situations. I still see managers go to their closer fo the final out of a 4 run game just because there are two men on base! Is it really worth it to being him in just becase 'the tying run is on deck'? There is no one else that can get one out without letting in four runs??

Wasn't calling you a stat hater, its just easier to use the generic you... But I just cant stand when people bash a stat using specific scenarios... For example: when people bash Wins they use the fact that a pitcher can let up so many runs and still get a win while they can pitch well and not get a win... Scenarios do not make stats bad, since I can make just as many scenarios to say how good the stat is... In fact you can make a scenario for all stats to look bad... All stats do is tell a specific story, if it is BA it tells how often you get a hit per AB... you can dislike a stat, but that doesn't mean it is not useful...

One of my favorite pitching stats is QS and QS%, and many people will argue that it is a bad stat, but I assure you that if you are looking for flaws of a stat then you are misusing the stat...

I do agree that saves are not the end all stat for relief pitchers... But to say it is not a useful stat is just not understanding the purpose of the stat...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

As for good relief pitching stats... the one I would like to see is a more advanced version of inherited runs.

(Inherited runs scored-(NOT your fault inherited runs))/ inherited runners

definition of not your fault inherited runs- inherited runner on third less than 2 outs and scores or any inherited runner that scores without a walk or hit happening...

-definition needs improvement...

 

[steveringo]

Wasn't calling you a stat hater, its just easier to use the generic you... But I just cant stand when people bash a stat using specific scenarios... For example: when people bash Wins they use the fact that a pitcher can let up so many runs and still get a win while they can pitch well and not get a win... Scenarios do not make stats bad, since I can make just as many scenarios to say how good the stat is... In fact you can make a scenario for all stats to look bad... All stats do is tell a specific story, if it is BA it tells how often you get a hit per AB... you can dislike a stat, but that doesn't mean it is not useful...

One of my favorite pitching stats is QS and QS%, and many people will argue that it is a bad stat, but I assure you that if you are looking for flaws of a stat then you are misusing the stat...

I do agree that saves are not the end all stat for relief pitchers... But to say it is not a useful stat is just not understanding the purpose of the stat...

Great points. You are using the stats properly. Every statistic has a purpose and tells a certain story.

I think the issue many people have is with the people that misuse stats. I have seen arguments that a batter is better because his average is better - or this pitcher must be better becasue he has more wins.