Are closers an over-rated baseball skill?

Question

My Red Sox again this year seem like they will be heading into next season without a proven, established closer, with Papelbon moving to the rotation. Just as in 2003 when they decided to use the failed "Closer by Committee" approach . And of course, Sox went into 2006 with closer questions but happened to luck out with Papelbon.

The so called "Boy Wonder" GM, Theo Epstein, that gutless wonder who sneaks out of Fenway in a gorilla suit seems to under-value the need for a dominating closer year after year as many Sabermaticians of his ilk often do.

To my mind, a great closer along with a great set-up guy can effectively shorten a game to only 7 innings. Combinations like Shields / K-Rod and Nathen / Rincon etc are a must for success. Epstein seems to think otherwise.

Any comments on the need for a great closer , being over-rated or undervalued?

Answer 1

No, Closers are not overrated.

Papelbon's performance out of the pen for ANY pitcher was litterally as unlikely as catching lightning in a bottle. For a rookie, less than that.

A closer is risking damage to his arm each time he goes out there. Pitching one inning a game 4 times in a row is a lot harder than pitching 4 innings at once.

Theo does not disagree with you. I have no idea where you got that. Every one knows that for a team to succeed they need a closer. But it seems like you haven't done your research, because there are no effective closers on the market.

You realize we can't just go up to the Twins and take Joe Nathan, right?

A closer is not overrated, nor undervalued. It is exactly where it should be- Right at the top.

Answer 2

I dont think closers are overrated but I think some of the stats are overrated. It is important to have a deep pen, having a good closer isnt much good if the 7th and 8th inning guys cant keep the lead so they need a better pen. As for the closer by committee I understand the concern but look at this years World Series. The Cardinals used a pen by committee after Isringhausen got hurt and the Tigers used Todd Jones as their "closer" all year. I dont think any team said "oh crap!", better get to the Tigers before they summon Jones from the pen. And every year there are 3 or 4 closers that emerge throughout the league than nobody ever heard of before...maybe Epstien knows that he has one or 2 such candidates (he did last year). Dont get me wrong, it is easier with a dominant closer but it hasnt helped the Yankees (Rivera), Padres (Hoffman), Mets (Wagner), etc. win a World Series lately so dont freak out just yet. Remember just 2 seasons ago the White Sox gave the closer job to Bobby Jenks the last month of the season, he worked out just fine.

Answer 3

No. Without a reliable bullpen, and a top of the line closer, it's almost impossible to win. Ask any Yankee fan who's been the team's MVP for the past few seasons and they will tell you that Mariano Rivera.

The set-up / closer combinations you mentioned could very well give a team a pennant or even a World Series ring. Whatever money is spent on tandems like those is not wasted. By the way, I think that K-Rod is one of the most valuable players in the game today. He's just 24 years old and has had consecutive 40+ save seasons to lead the AL. Think about that.

Answer 4

Both....
The save as a stat is over-rated. You can have some schmoe save 50 games in a year because of the team he's with (most chances, defense behind him, etc) but he may very replaceable. The year after Thigpen set the saves record, saved just over half as many, while his ERA doubled and HRs allowed doubled, his hits and walks per 9 innings increased dramatically and three short years after the record, he wasn't good enough for mop up duties.

Meanwhile, a great closer, ala Mariano Rivera, is an under-rated commodity. Once you've established the dominance that he has, it is a psychological difference maker. The team facing him knows that they have a better chance getting lucky to beat him (a broken bat hit, etc) than blasting one out of the park to beat him. The team with the closer feels less pressure, knowing that if they have the lead, the game's a done deal....even if they make an error behind him, he will pick you up and close the door.

Answer 5

Closers and set up men are not over rated. This is the way the game is played today, even young pitchers from High School to the Minor Leagues are trained to pitch 5 or 6 innings. Sometimes, just for fun I go to the internet and check record of the old timers pitchers, Is amazing how they finish what they started

Answer 6

There is no doubt that a closer has become as important to a teams success as a starting pitcher. That being said, I also feel that a good setup man is gold. There are so many games lost in the 7th or 8th inning by blown saves. The Yankees lost so many games this past year by our team of inconsistent setup guys.

Answer 7

Closers are under valued for teams who have a good closer, but the Braves know how important it is after this season and having lost at least 15 games after 7 innings until they got Wickman so closers are definitely under valued.

Answer 8

The closer is, I think, very important to the game. If it's a close game, you don't want a good, but tired, starting pitcher out there at the end, nor do you want a mediocre reliever. You'll want someone who is great under pressure and who can keep the other team from scoring when it would be most damaging.

Answer 9

closers are absolutely necesary and I think before long papelbon will be back in the bull pen because closer by committie never works. As for importance without Mo Rivera, the yankees only have 22 world series titles and only 33 AL pennants instead of 26 and 39 respectively

Answer 10

Any good baseball team needs a closer (more so in the national league) because they are the ones that keep the rally from happening. Without a closer the other team can rally and then that puts strain on your lineup forcing them to produce. The pressure of producing on ANY lineup causes a decrease in production IMO.