The Closer
Okay, so, let’s talk about the closer role. As you probably know, the M’s are having an open audition for the 9th inning relief spot, and the current leaders in the clubhouse appear to be Miguel Batista, Mark Lowe, and Roy Corcoran. Tyler Walker would be in the mix if he wasn’t battling injury issues, and David Aardsma is a longshot unless he shows significantly improved command this spring.
When you hear teams and the media talk about the closer role, they’ll usually refer to several points of significance that are necessary for being a closer. They are, in some order, velocity, mental toughness, and owning a swing-and-miss pitch. The prototypical closer is someone like Jonathan Papelbon – a mid-90s fastball that he throws a ton of and gets a lot of swinging strikes with along with the desire to take the ball in the 9th inning. Since that is what closers are “supposed to look like”, you’ll see the discussions about who should close center around who looks most like that ideal.
Batista throws hard and wants to close, so he’s in the mix. Lowe throws hard and gets a lot of strikeouts, so he’s in the mix too. Corcoran doesn’t throw hard and doesn’t have a strikeout pitch, but he’s getting endorsed as a guy who has the mental toughness to pitch in the 9th inning, so he’s in the mix too, but with a lot of skepticism due to his lack of velocity and knockout pitch.
However, what actually is the most important aspect to being able to successfully pitch in the 9th inning? Does this fit-everyone-into-a-box method actually yield the best results? What should the team be looking for in a relief ace?
I’d argue that the most important quality a closer needs to have is the ability to get opposite handed hitters out. This is the thing that is hardly ever talked about, but is vital to being able to perform as a closer. Due to the way the modern bullpen is handled, all non-closer relievers can have significant platoon splits minimized through managerial decisions. Sean Green didn’t have anything to throw at LH batters, and they gave him fits throughout his career, but he was an effective reliever because he was put in the game when RH batters were due up and removed when a string of LH came to the plate. His strengths were maximized and his weaknessses minimized by his usage.
That doesn’t apply to closers. Managers just aren’t willing to let the 9th inning be decided by the handedness of the opponents batters, and the closer is expected to be able to come in and get three outs regardless of who is due up. If the opposition sends three LH pinch-hitters to the plate, the closer has to stay in and get those guys out – the manager won’t be summoning a LOOGY from the pen to go after those guys. We can see this effect in the ratio of batters faced by closers and non-closers.
Last year, right-handed batters accumulated 48,549 plate appearances while left-handed batters racked up 38,809 trips to the plate. That is, 56% of all batters faced by pitchers last year were right-handed. The 56/44 split is pretty normal historically. There are more RH hitters than LH hitters in baseball, so right-handed middle relievers can easily be spotted against same-handed hitters and achieve success.
However, the majority of hitters faced by closers are opposite handed. I grabbed the PA splits for eight prominent right-handed closers (Jenks, Rivera, Papelbon, Nathan, K-Rod, Lidge, Cordero, and Valverde), and 51% of the batters they faced as a group were LH. Lidge faced 54% left-handed batters. Because of their inflexible usage patterns and managers knowing they won’t be removed if a pinch-hitter is used, closers will simply face more opposite handed batters than other relievers. This is why you rarely see a closer with significant platoon splits.
So, how does that affect the M’s candidates?
Batista is a fastball-slider guy, neither of which are good pitches against LH batters. For his career, LH batters put up an OPS 100 points higher than RH batters, and last year, he looked just miserably lost against them – 55 walks and against 38 strikeouts in 303 PA versus left-handed batters. He’s vulnerable to LH bats, and his skills are best suited to righty specialist work. In reality, if used correctly, he’s not all that different from Sean Green, just with less sink on his fastball.
Lowe is a fastball-slider-change-up guy, and the change-up is usually the pitch that is best suited to getting opposite handed hitters out. A knockout change-up is what has allowed Trevor Hoffman to succeed as a closer despite losing his fastball and having no real breaking ball, for instance. So, in terms of repertoire, Lowe would seemingly have an advantage with a pitch that should allow him to keep LH hitters at bay. However, in practical results as a major leaguer, that hasn’t been the case – LH batters have posted a .983 OPS against Lowe compared to a .637 OPS for right-handed batters. All eight home runs he’s allowed have been to left-handed bats. Lowe’s change is a good pitch, but his command needs a lot of work, and when he misses his spots, it gets crushed. He’s going to have to show that he can locate his change-up better or he’s going to run into some problems as a 9th inning guy.
Corcoran is a sinkerball guy who throws a slider and a change, but not very frequently. For the most part, he’s just trying to get you to hit the ball on the ground, and that means a lot of fastballs. Sinkerball pitchers often run significant platoon splits, and Corcoran is no exception. LH batters had an OPS 98 points higher than RH batters, and he walked 19 and struck out just 12 left-handed batters in 151 plate appearances. Like Green, his sinker is so good that he can overcome some weakness against LH bats and be used as an effective RH reliever despite mediocre BB/K rates, but he’s miscast as a guy who has to face predominantly LH batters. His stuff is just made for right-handed specialist work, and no amount of moxy can make up for the fact that he just doesn’t have a weapon against left-handed hitters.
So, where does that leave us? Batista and Corcoran are both better suited for setup work, while Lowe has the repertoire of a relief ace but not the command. However, there is reason to believe that Lowe could succeed as a closer – a three pitch guy with a 94 MPH fastball who gets a lot of swinging strikes has some upside potential, which is more than you can say for Batista or Corcoran. In a season where developing talent for the future is in the plan, Mark Lowe as closer looks to be the best choice. There’s still reasons to think he could struggle there, but at least there’s some breakout potential.
Cool beans as usual.
Interestingly, Putz has significant platoon splits (being 118 pts of OPS worse against lefties than righties) and he’s faced roughly the same number of batters from each side of the plate (51% of PAs came from righties).
He has a significant number of non-closer PAs in there that I didn’t bother to parse though.
So why don’t the M’s break the mold, when suitable and bring in a LOOGY from the pen in the 9th when they need to? There isn’t a need for the closer role to be that rigidly defined if he pen has the arms available to be flexible.
Agree completely, Dave.
Hopefully Lowe’s splits become less of a problem as he throws the change/split more; he’s clearly throwing it much more than he did before the injury, and he now throws it more than his slider.
How much of his atrocious performance against lefties was the result of luck? His BABIP against them was nearly .400, though I don’t know if he gave up a ton of line drives. He was also awful on the road, so I don’t have a sense for how much the platoon split was just a sample size issue – particularly given his pitch mix.
And how much of this might improve just given more time since he had his microfracture surgery?
Pinch hitters.
I’m glad I’m not alone in boosting Lowe. If he can return to 2006 form he will be an absolute beast of a relief ace. His changeup is also absolutely sick, so as long as he locates it against lefties he should be really effective against them.
If any year can be Lowe’s comeback year, this has to be it. I’m hoping that he can put it all together and be the face of the Mariners bullpen this season.
This is exactly why I love USSM so much. An issue about which I had never read or thought (the relative importance of performance against off-handed batters) explained cogently, with team-specific analysis presented convincingly.
I agree with the crux of your post Dave, but I tend to agree with Kazinski in that if there were any year for the M’s to test the closer-committee (or as I prefer, the use-your-best-relievers-when-the-given-situation-calls-for-it plan), then this is that season. With no clear closer, and unclear options as to who should even be chosen, I’d really like to see us just use the best arm we have against a team’s 3-4-5, whether it’s the seventh or the ninth.
Like wishing for a four man rotation or the team to move the fences in, the bullpen without a closer idea is something that I thoeretically support, but also realize is just not practically possible given the current climate of MLB.
Managers like having closers. Players like having closers. The media likes having closers. Fans like having closers.
There’s just a tidal wave of support for the 9th inning relief ace, and it’s not worth the marginal gain of performance to try to swim upstream and buck the trend.
Not even a mention of David Aardsma? (Or Tyler Walker, for that matter?)
The only question I have regarding the bullpen-by-committee (BBC) is whether or not it would tax the arms to the point where by the end of the season they become ineffective.
Forgive me if this is a unfounded statement, but doesn’t the continual warm-up plus insertion into the game on a semi-regular basis, even more so if you’re doing BBC, tire out the arms more? Or is it insignificant?
I’m not opposed to a BBC, but I’m not sure what the effects (or lack thereof) are in doing so.
“I’d argue that the most important quality a closer needs to have is the ability to get opposite handed hitters out.”
“LH batters have posted a .983 OPS against Lowe compared to a .637 OPS for right-handed batters”
“Mark Lowe as closer looks to be the best choice”
Very interesting work. Thanks. Your article make me wonder… why isn’t every team beating the bushes for a lefty closer?
Following is a list the top closers in recent history and some the dominant closers of the past…
Rob Nenn – rh
Troy Percival – rh
Bruce Sutter – rh
Billy Wagner – lh
Lee Smith – rh
Trevor Hoffman – rh
Goose Gossage – rh
Rollie Fingers – rh
Dennis Eckersly – rh
Mariano Rivera – rh
Francisco Rodriguez – rh
JJ Putz – rh
Jonathan Papelbon – rh
Joe Nathan – rh
Brad Lidge – rh
Bobby Jenks – rh
Eric Gagne – rh
BJ Ryan – lh
Jason Isringhausen – rh
Francisco Cordero – rh
That’s 18 righties and 2 lefties. Maybe it’s the changing game, maybe lefties with the correct mental makeup are scarce (everyone knows lefties are a little unstable), maybe good lefties are too valuable as starters. Whatever the reason 18/2 is an amazing number in light of your stats.
That’s some excellent cherry picking, Lantern.
Whatever the reason 18/2 is an amazing number in light of your stats.
Not necessarily, if you grasp the underlying premise. It’s easier to rustle up opposite-handed hitters to face a lefthanded pitcher. So if that’s the major point of vulnerability for a closer, lefthanders are even more exposed.
Exactly, except for the part in the first paragraph where Dave mentions them both.
Yes, Lantern, those are three of the things he wrote. Maybe now you should read the rest of the things.
Wow, I’m with isaac — great post.
What worries me a bit about Lowe’s command issues isn’t so much the HRs he gave up (as painful as they might be in a 1-run game) as his walk rate. Even in 2006 when he was (we think) healthy, he was putting more guys on base than a closer should. And that is when giving up the HR can cost you a lot of ballgames.
Any chance Batista’s numbers look different when just taking his relief work into account?
re: closer by committee… i’d want to go with this more if the mariners had better options against LH batters. It would be best if the Mariners would just do away with the idea of having a closer… but i doubt even this version of the Mariners is that progressive.
Lantern wrote:
Ok. Seems OT and perhaps cathartic, but Ok….
BTW…..the Ms are on right now for free via mlbTV
Continually warming up pitchers and overusing them certainly tires pitchers out. I don’t know why it would be more tiring to to do so in the 9th inning versus the 7th inning.
Sean Green was ridiculously overused last year with a closer. Whether you have one “closer” or not, managers need to use the bullpen wisely.
I would take the position that the LaRussa model (left-right-left-right-closer, one or two batters at a time, churn the whole bullpen every game) is the hardest thing for bullpen arms. That’s the traditional model teams all seem to aspire to now.
I tend to think that, along with platoon split, K% is an important stat for a closer. Certainly the two usually go together. That tends to point toward Lowe, although Aardsma could be a dark horse.
I’d really prefer RRS in the rotation, but if having three LHSPs is too much, he’d be a perfect fit in the closer’s role. As a reliever, LH batters’ OPS was .732 while RH batters’ OPS was only .624 in 2008. As a starter, LH batters had a .993 OPS off him last year.
We’ve got depth at starter so what about Bedard for closer? He’s got great control, a good fastball, a plus curve… and zero emotions. He can be the enigmatic, aloof, lights out closer. Later, when we have to trade him because he’s such a pain, we can slide in Josh Fields and the starting rotation will stay intact.
Another awesome post, Dave. This didn’t even feel like an offseason with all the solid USSM analysis.
It would be best if the Mariners would just do away with the idea of having a closer… but i doubt even this version of the Mariners is that progressive.
The real issue is not so much the best-laid plans of management as the self-interest of the players. Fundamentally, the problem is the save rule. The reason the 9th inning is treated differently is that the pitcher who starts in a clear save situation feels something has been taken away from him if he is removed. It’s like sending up a pinch-hitter after someone has already started his at-bat, something else that’s completely legal and could even make sense, but is basically never done except in case of injury.
Wouldn’t you rather have your 2nd best pitcher throwing 200+ innings (if he is healthy enough) than 70-80?
Curse you, Jerome Holtzman!
Thanks, Jeff — I went back, and I could swear that last sentence wasn’t in the first paragraph when I read this post the first time. (I’m sure it was, I just didn’t register it.) I do wonder, though: is Aardsma’s command really that much worse than Lowe’s?
This didn’t even feel like an offseason with all the solid USSM analysis.
It helps that since Zduriencik was hired, the offseason has been significantly less “off” than the season was . . .
Of course it helps that Lowe has the best pitch on the team
Are Lowe’s location issues so much less pronounced than Aardsma’s? Given his performance last year he seems like a better bet to make strides this spring than any of the other three.
Are Lowe’s location issues so much less pronounced than Aardsma’s?
Both of them have had moments in the minors where it looked like they were finding it. In Lowe’s case, when he first came up. But Aardsma has the longer track record of bad command, so it might look like a more intractable problem.
[ot]
What I wonder is, since Lowe is now a full year removed from major surgery, will his velocity go back to where it was?
I remember he hit 100 a number of times when he first came up. Although that’s typically a fast JUGS gun assessment, if he could regain that we’d still be talking a legit 96-97 mph.
Command would be better, but I wonder about this.
This is so obvious in retrospect, yet I’ve never thought of this before. Brilliant. I don’t think I’ve ever heard or read this before. Did you pick this idea up somewhere?
This kind of insight is why I come here every day.
Thanks, Dave.
It seems to me that the team is likely to give Batista the nod just so they can flip him mid-season. I know that people have talked about this notion at great length, but what about the idea of showcasing Lowe so that they can trade him at the deadline if the team is out of contention? Seems like we can move him for a pretty pretty package if he has a good first half. Which would seemingly open up the job for Fields mid-season. Any thoughts?
Also, any chance you guys could put together a post about the Cabrera signing and what it means for the A’s and the AL West? That offense is starting to look scary with Holliday, Cabrera, Giambi, etc.
It’s probably just wishfull thinking to hope that his velocity gets back up into triple digits but Lowe is the best canidate by far.
I know the M’s need him to succeed to trade him but the idea of Batista as a Closer just makes me reach for the Pepto. Remember last year when he figured out the secret to pitching?
Ugh.
Great stuff, Dave. Closers often have the unique pitch (Rivera, Sasaki), or the unique makeup (Everyday Eddie), but this analysis cuts through that and explains the reason those unique pitches each are effective to achieve the same result. I would certainly prefer to have Batista ruining 70 innings than 200, but I agree Lowe is probably the best candidate.
Dave’s written a good post about it at Fangraphs.
There was talk that Juan Cruz wanted to close, but in the end it looks like he will be setting up for the Royals. And also with Cabrera signing with the A’s, the probability the M’s will stay in the cellar has increased. So why not let Lowe sink or swim? The rest are what they are, he has a possible long-future ahead of him, and Fields is waiting in the wings.
don’t forget that the MLBPA wants there to be closers… they get the stats that are sexy enough to get bad GMs to shell out 8 figures per… when comparable or even more effective relievers get a small fraction of that.
So instead of, for example, Carlos Marmol being content to the most effective and valuable reliever on the team… he competes for a less valuable role against Kevin Gregg, who will get paid more just because he piled up a few saves for a bad team, and cost the team a top-5 prospect… whether he’s the closer or not.
I really can’t tell what I want to happen there… on one hand, if Marmol is the closer, it probably means Kevin Gregg will blow leads and widen leads in the 7th and 8th. If Marmol loses out, it’s probably better for the team now, but might hurt them down the road when he would want to leave to get paid bigger dollars to be someone else’s closer.
I really just want all of MLB to just get a clue, but like Dave said… it’s not going to happen.
I think it’s probably too early to figure out the closer…what about Josh Fields?
A guy like Fields who is older than a normal rookie (I think 23) could step in and be lights out, you never know.
Hey, there’s always the Rangers.
Plus, I understand he’s already stocking up on shaving cream and paper plates…
I also like the Lowe idea because of the high ceiling. After seeing the kings ransom we got for Putz, I’d love to see Lowe get the closer role, possibly find his command, and behind our new and improved defense have a great year. Then, flip him this coming offseason to some GM who still overvalues the SV stat. I know a lot has to happen, but its a possibility that would only exist for Lowe out of the possible candidates.
Wow, this Cameron guy is pretty good.
…and the worst control of the fastball on the team.
Josh Fields vs. LH/RH splits (Georgia 2008):
vs. LHB … 40 AB 6 H 6 BB 1 HB 13 K
.150 BA / .277 OBP / .275 SLG / .552 OPS
vs. RHB … 48 AB 5 H 9 BB 2 HB 29 K
.104 BA / .267 OBP / .250 SLG / .517 OPS
Fields might be the closer someday, but I think that the point is to discuss who the closer will be out of spring training…
Z has stated that Fields will start in the minors…
My vote is for Lowe…
It’s ridiculous to think Fields could step in right away — this year even. He hasn’t pitched in a year, and before that he’d pitched 75 innings in 2 years. I don’t care how good his arm is, there are a few things he will have to learn about getting major league hitters out.
Is there any precedent for a guy with that little experience progressing that quickly?
And before anybody says Lincecum, he was a college starter (made 51 starts throwing over 300 innings in 3 college seasons), didn’t sit out a year after being drafted, and he made 13 minor league starts over 2 seasons before being called up in 2007.
I say Aardsma. I’ve seem him hit the mid-upper 90’s and he was quite good at the position in college. Who knows, might be worth a shot to get him used to throwing 15-16 perfect pitches, build up his confidence and let him go. Few hitters at the end of a long game can hit mid/upper 90’s with movement. He has three really good pitches and with his height and velocity he could be the kind of ‘lights out, go eff yourself’ kind of pitcher Papelbon is. I’ve seen him pitch quite a bit and think he could work out quite well for us.
slescotts, your man made you look good as he was awesome against the Aussies while the rest of the candidates stunk. Maybe he IS back in the pool of closer candidates!!!!!
This article has been quoted by Yahoo. The quote is in the bottom third of the article.
I can hear The Jeffersons theme song now.
Aardsma looked REAL good last night. Its also a good endorsement that Clement was very impressed on how hard he was throwing.
um, did this triumvirate of potential closers just give up 10 earned runs in a combined 2.2 innings to Team Australia?
hmmm, I hope they were all: “It’s early spring, I’m just trying to get it over the plate at this point”
Aarsdma. Seriously!!! Let the guy do what he was meant to do. So far, he’s bounced around because these Org’s see his arm strength and think, “what if he could do that as a..’starter’…hmm, Ok, but what if, you know, as a ‘reliever’…!?!”. Major league folks apparently don’t value the position of ‘closer’ enough to allocate young talent to the position. Boston saw Papelbon (as did Papelbon) closing as a waste of his ability and worked towards getting him starting or reliving for quite awhile…UNTIL both parties got a clue and saw what he was a great fit as a closer. Aardsma is a similar case: great potential starting, relieving…’if only…’ Screw it, let the guy throw his best 15-20 pitches–he’ll dominate.
Walk a bunch of guys?