Page 1 of 2

Why aren't there more closer committes?

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 12:23 am
by jfg
I know fantasy owners hate them, but why does every manager feel they need a true closer? If you don't have a good one why wouldn't you play matchups instead of throwing a mediocre closer out there? Doesn't make sense to me.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 12:58 am
by A Fleshner Fantasy
It gives teams a sense of security to have a guy to go to in the 9th inning. Someone who is consistant. And, most of all, some RP, no matter how good, cannot handle the pressure of closing, so you need to make sure you have someone who can to roll out there in the 9th. You want your best chance to win on the mound, not some random RP who is in there cuz its a "committee"

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:33 am
by jfg
Yeah but it's not really a committee it would be just playing matchups and using your bullpen like you would the rest of the time. I suppose teams without a closer don't have much of a bullpen either.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:55 am
by zhutou
i've always wondered this exact same thing. it just seems to make sense to play matchups instead of continually going to one guy, especially during times where the one guy is really struggling.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 3:11 am
by magoosh007
Committee's don't usually work out very well. When teams choose one set closer it usually has better results, less blown saves. There's a lot of pressure pitching in the ninth inning with a one run lead. Some pitchers can't handle the pressure. Look at Octavio Dotel for example. Amazing success in 8th innings, not much success as a closer. Same thing happened with Mota.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 3:20 am
by Laean
magoosh007 wrote:Committee's don't usually work out very well. When teams choose one set closer it usually has better results, less blown saves. There's a lot of pressure pitching in the ninth inning with a one run lead. Some pitchers can't handle the pressure. Look at Octavio Dotel for example. Amazing success in 8th innings, not much success as a closer. Same thing happened with Mota.


yep. latroy hawkins also come to mind.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 4:07 am
by The Miner Part 2
Well how many times has this been accomplished successfully? Once? That Red's team from the early '90s is the only one I can think of.

Closers are a rare breed. When you find one you stick with it. Once the game is on the line, it's a whole different ball game with most of these relief pitchers.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 4:21 am
by THE TERMINATOR
Committee's usely don't last long for the simple fact that they want to go with the guy that proves to be the best for he'll be is the guy that give them the best chance of winning.

Even if they prove to be mediocre they will trust him becouse they don't have anyone better.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 5:57 am
by Half Massed
Because having one closer gives a sense of security. Usually, a closer will have a track record and gives the team a dependable feeling. Trying to play the matchups too much will likely hurt more than it'll help.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:30 am
by Inukchuk
I also think you need to be more than a good pitcher to be a good closer, which is why so many have failed at it. I'd almost be inclined to think that it takes more mental toughness and a proper approach than anything else. Obviously, you need to have decent stuff, but where else can get by with only 2 pitches? If it was all about how well you pitched, I think Lidge and Latroy would still be top closers right now, while Jose Valverde would be sifting through a dumpster behind Dunkin Donuts somewhere...