PDA

View Full Version : Should the Sox ditch the Closer all together?


Dadawg_77
06-07-2004, 12:41 AM
I am not a believer in need for a closer as I think a bullpen by committee can work. So can the Sox get rid of the closer position and use the best reliever in highest leverage scenarios.

MRKARNO
06-07-2004, 12:47 AM
Ask any Red Sox fan how that went for them last season

Dadawg_77
06-07-2004, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Ask any Red Sox fan how that went for them last season

They didn't have that great of a pen to do it, Alan Embree was their best RP. The Angels should be able to do it with Troy going down.

JRIG
06-07-2004, 12:51 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Ask any Red Sox fan how that went for them last season

It would have worked a lot better if they had the personnel in the bullpen to pull it off. I'm not sure if the Sox are staffed correctly to do this either, though I like the idea.

Dadawg_77
06-07-2004, 12:57 AM
The reason I think the Sox should consider this, is if Marte so Shingo become the closer, the pen will be hurt overall. Those are the only two guys I feel confident having in there in a high leverage situation. If you save one exclusively for the 9th, then you will have to call on lesser relievers to prevent runs in the 6-8 innings. Those can cost games just as much as runs in the 9th. I also wish Ozzie wouldn't waste those two as he done.

MRKARNO
06-07-2004, 12:57 AM
Well I trust Jackson and Takatsu most to close. These are the only two pitchers in the pen that have actually closed for an extended period of time. Next would be Marte, but he does seem to have problems shutting the door when given the opportunity. Adkins, no way. Cotts, only if there were 2 lefties due up. Politte would need to turn it around for it to make sense. Koch is not a pitcher and therefore should not be in our bullpen, nor even considered

1951Campbell
06-07-2004, 01:03 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Ask any Red Sox fan how that went for them last season

It doesn't have to be the much-hated committee...it could just be be Marte and Takatsu closing, and trade Koch for a bag of baseballs and I'd be happy.

And let's not forget that the Cubs of the AL were, despite their pen, just one floating knuckler away from the WS.

mdep524
06-07-2004, 01:16 AM
Unless they trade for a bona fide stud closer, the Sox should not have a set man who HAS to pitch the 9th inning. They should put in their best possible reliever in the biggest jam, i.e. "Ace Reliever" does not equal "Closer." Takatsu would be the number one guy from the right side, Marte would be the number one guy from the left.

Innings 1-6 go to the starter, or if he doesn't have it this particular day, a long reliever: Cotts, Adkins or maybe Jackson.

Innings 7-9. Starter obviously goes as long as possible, but if he's removed, Takatsu is your number one guy in a jam. (Marte for a lefty dominated line up).

Also, if the heart of the order is due up in the 8th, then bring Mr. Zero in the eighth. If the 7-8-9 hitters are due up, bring in Politte or Jackson. Maximize the usefulness of your best pitcher.

Basically you best pitcher is going to have to pitch in a close game anyway, so why not put him in early in a tight situation? If you "save" him for the glamourous ninth inning, you may miss a bigger jam that he is more needed for.

SSN721
06-07-2004, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
I am not a believer in need for a closer as I think a bullpen by committee can work. So can the Sox get rid of the closer position and use the best reliever in highest leverage scenarios.

There is a first time for everything, and I think this is the first time I have ever agreed with anything you have written here. :D: I think this is the only option for the Sox right now. I dont think it is even a choice. If they rotated between Takatsu, Jackson and Marte (if he can show the aility to close on occasion) I would have absolutely no problem with this situation. I for one have never really beleived that you absolutely need a closer either. I didnt see any reason, other then the fact that teams feel they must use thier closers, that Takatsu didnt just finish the game out after throwing 7 pitches to get through the eighth.

The Critic
06-07-2004, 10:34 AM
I'm in favor of Shingo as the closer.
I don't want too much thought and debate going into the decision.
Shingo has done it before, and I want to see how he fares rather than rolling the dice.

Baby Fisk
06-07-2004, 10:42 AM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JUNE 7, 2004

CHICAGO WHITE SOX ANNOUNCE PHASE II OF UNIQUE BASEBALL FANTASY EXPERIENCE.

Following the success of the first phase of the White Sox Baseball Fantasy Experience, in which rich dudes actually paid us to drag the infield and change the bases, the Chicago White Sox announced phase II of this unique moneymaking initiative.

White Sox fans are now invited to pay us $50,000 for the opportunity to close out an official White Sox future game.

Potential closers must pass a physical, but even then we'll turn a blind eye. It's more about the money. Successful applicants will be provided an official Sox game cap (applicants must purchase remainder of uniform at market prices and provide own glove and footwear).

Prior baseball experience useful, but that's never been a prerequisite with us before.
:reinsy
"I may never have to sign another pitcher again!"

Dadawg_77
06-07-2004, 10:50 AM
Originally posted by SSN721
There is a first time for everything, and I think this is the first time I have ever agreed with anything you have written here. :D: I think this is the only option for the Sox right now. I dont think it is even a choice. If they rotated between Takatsu, Jackson and Marte (if he can show the aility to close on occasion) I would have absolutely no problem with this situation. I for one have never really beleived that you absolutely need a closer either. I didnt see any reason, other then the fact that teams feel they must use thier closers, that Takatsu didnt just finish the game out after throwing 7 pitches to get through the eighth.

Good to see you are finanly coming around to the light. :D:

The need for closer is crutch managers use. Since it is so by the book if you deviate from it and it doesn't work out in the short term, see Boston, you ripped for it. If you go by the book, even though it sucks, people won't rip you as much since you are following conventional wisdom.

batmanZoSo
06-07-2004, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by mdep524
Unless they trade for a bona fide stud closer, the Sox should not have a set man who HAS to pitch the 9th inning. They should put in their best possible reliever in the biggest jam, i.e. "Ace Reliever" does not equal "Closer." Takatsu would be the number one guy from the right side, Marte would be the number one guy from the left.

Innings 1-6 go to the starter, or if he doesn't have it this particular day, a long reliever: Cotts, Adkins or maybe Jackson.

Innings 7-9. Starter obviously goes as long as possible, but if he's removed, Takatsu is your number one guy in a jam. (Marte for a lefty dominated line up).

Also, if the heart of the order is due up in the 8th, then bring Mr. Zero in the eighth. If the 7-8-9 hitters are due up, bring in Politte or Jackson. Maximize the usefulness of your best pitcher.

Basically you best pitcher is going to have to pitch in a close game anyway, so why not put him in early in a tight situation? If you "save" him for the glamourous ninth inning, you may miss a bigger jam that he is more needed for.

And all this would be unnecessary if the Sox would just hit when it counts once in a while. We could've broken the game open last night but didn't. Every game we load the bases at least once with two outs and never come up with ANYTHING.

The offense is the reason why we're only a game up. We should've won 5 more games than we did because the offense either couldn't hit a mediocre pitcher or couldn't drive in runners when they needed to.

SSN721
06-07-2004, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Good to see you are finanly coming around to the light. :D:

The need for closer is crutch managers use. Since it is so by the book if you deviate from it and it doesn't work out in the short term, see Boston, you ripped for it. If you go by the book, even though it sucks, people won't rip you as much since you are following conventional wisdom.

I definately agree with that. I could never understand why you would pull pitchers that have shown the ability to pitch multiple quality innings per outing brought in for the 8th and then pulle in the ninth just vbecause you have to put in your closer. I dont understand why your chances are that much worse of getting three outs in the 9th when you get three easy outs in the eighth. I just want this situation resolved. Closer by committee is fine by me.

mdep524
06-07-2004, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
And all this would be unnecessary if the Sox would just hit when it counts once in a while. We could've broken the game open last night but didn't. Every game we load the bases at least once with two outs and never come up with ANYTHING.

The offense is the reason why we're only a game up. We should've won 5 more games than we did because the offense either couldn't hit a mediocre pitcher or couldn't drive in runners when they needed to.

This is true. Still, no matter how good your offense is you cannot avoid one run games altogether. Even if the Sox pick up the slack offensively, which I agree they need to do a bit, there will still be close games they will need solid bullpen efforts for-- especially in the playoffs.

santo=dorf
06-07-2004, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Ask any Red Sox fan how that went for them last season
To game 7 of the ALCS?

gosox41
06-07-2004, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
I am not a believer in need for a closer as I think a bullpen by committee can work. So can the Sox get rid of the closer position and use the best reliever in highest leverage scenarios.

Closers are overrated. A team needs good releivers. Anyone that isn't a head case (ie Politte) can close.

Which is harder, for a pitcher to come in a game with first and second and no outs and not give up a run in the 7th inning of a 1 run game or a pitcher to come in with no one on and no out and not give up a run? IMHO the pitcher in the 7th inning has a much tougher job.


Bob