Page 109 of 152

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:39 pm
by Skin Blues
Over the past 10 years, using all 300 team-seasons, save opportunities correlate to wins at 0.40 which is not very strong. It's about the same correlation (0.40 vs 0.38) as just looking at a team's IP total.

Within the range of 60-100 win teams there is very little correlation (0.29) between wins and saves. I've heard the saying "the world correlates at 0.3" so I'm inclined to consider 0.29 insignificant, although it's still enough that you should expect an extra save opportunity or two over the course of a season. It's the extremes that are affected pretty strongly, though. Very bad teams that win less than 60 games, and very good teams that win 100+ games have their wins correlated much more strongly (0.79) with save opportunities.

One caveat here is that save opportunities are an imperfect stat and includes blown saves in the 7th and 8th innings, due to MLBs silly save rule. It would be nice if those were recorded as blown holds, but I can't find any data on strictly save opportunities occurring in the 9th inning or later. Suffice it to say that most of the time, the strength of the team should be ignored and you should focus on the actual talent of the closer.

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:32 pm
by J35J
Skin Blues wrote: Suffice it to say that most of the time, the strength of the team should be ignored and you should focus on the actual talent of the closer.


;-D

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:24 pm
by lyons595
Just found this thread...this is GREAT. I love the discussions. Sorry if this is the wrong forum...I can re-post if it is. Thanks is advance.
Street and Perez both are on the WW until Thursday this week in my h2h league. I have Brandon League and am considering dropping him for either one of these 2...probably Street. Where do y'all see these 3 finishing? I think Perez >/= Street >> League.
I know I will lose out on a few saves in the next 2 weeks if I make either one of these moves, but I want to be good in September, not the first week of June.

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:38 pm
by Crippler
J35J wrote:
Skin Blues wrote: Suffice it to say that most of the time, the strength of the team should be ignored and you should focus on the actual talent of the closer.


;-D


Well of course you should focus on the actual talent of the closer. What a total straw man argument. That's like me saying "When drafting pitchers, you should ignore the strength of the team and focus on the actual talent of the pitcher" as a reason to ignore the W category. Yes, the talent is more important, but it's ignorant (literally) to ignore the fact that W's correlate with having a stronger lineup, all else equal.

The fact of the matter is that SVs correlate to W's and good teams generate more SV opportunities. You can derail the conversation all you'd like, but it's common sense.

Just like the W's example above, SV's are more closely correlated with good teams than with bad teams, all else equal. You shouldn't base a decision between closers solely on that, but it does make a slight difference and can be used when you consider the two basically equal.

Nobody was ever arguing that the strength of the team matters more than the talent of the closer.

I guess when in doubt, bring out the straw men and try to change the subject :-P

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:43 pm
by Crippler
Skin Blues wrote: Very bad teams that win less than 60 games, and very good teams that win 100+ games have their wins correlated much more strongly (0.79) with save opportunities.
.


;-D

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 8:48 am
by Niffoc4
Crippler wrote:
Skin Blues wrote: Very bad teams that win less than 60 games, and very good teams that win 100+ games have their wins correlated much more strongly (0.79) with save opportunities.
.


;-D
That's not the situation with the Rockies or the Padres though, they fall in the middle, where wins and saves don't correlate well.

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 3:57 pm
by BuckeyeSal
Perez being investigated for a drug delivery. Might be something to watch for owners of he or Vinnie:

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/eye-o ... possession

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 6:22 pm
by kimchi_chigae
Jim Henderson to start rehab and likely to be activated on Sunday. K-rod with 3 saves while Hendo was out.

Hendo or K-rod going forward?

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 9:08 pm
by daullaz
kimchi_chigae wrote:Jim Henderson to start rehab and likely to be activated on Sunday. K-rod with 3 saves while Hendo was out.

Hendo or K-rod going forward?


Henderson for sure.

Also, for those interested, I made a ranking of NL interim and potential interim closers in the most recent Bottom of the 9th. Feel free to click on Articles and Tips on the left side of the page to read and tell me why I'm wrong in the comments section. ;-D

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 9:25 pm
by SpecialFNK
the longest Addison Reed has ever gone before tonight was 1.2 innings. tonight he went 3 innings, with 55 pitches, giving up 5 hits, 1 BB, and 5 ER.
does going 3 innings have an effect on his success going forward? not often closers go 2 innings, yet tonight Reed went THREE!

EDIT: make that 55 pitches.