The Value of a Great Closer vs a Starter or Position Player

[3and2Fastball]

For a long time I've considered a Great Closer to not be the equal of a great starter or great position player, but recent events with the Brewers have me questioning that to a degree.

 

If you could choose between (in their peaks), say, Mariano Rivera or Willie Mays or Greg Maddux, the addition of which of those players on the 2012 Brewers would put the Brewers in the playoffs?

 

In the past I would have considered that a foolish question. But no matter how many extra runs Mays would provide, or how much value having Maddux in his peak every 5th day would add, would it really matter if the bullpen kept blowing the games? In terms of this years Brewers, Rivera might be the best choice

 

But then that is too simplified a question. It still seems to me that if you have a solid but unspectacular bullpen, it is still more important to have great starting pitching or great position players. I'd rather have Warren Spahn with Hoyt Wilhelm in the bullpen than, say, Jim Palmer with Mariano Rivera in the bullpen

 

What do you guys think? If you could add Willie Mays or Greg Maddux or Mariano Rivera to your team, which player would you add?

[rwa12]

It's kind of a stilted question, as we now know the hole in the team this year. Obviously, having Rivera would have led to a few more wins this year.

 

If you asked at the beginning of the season, I take Mays. Superior defense in CF, one of the best offensive players in history. Adding him makes the rest of the team deeper.

 

Maddux is intriguing, as you can never have too much pitching, but I was pretty happy with our rotation pre-season.

[zzzmanwitz]

Willie Mays and it isn't even close.

[3and2Fastball]

Thanks for your responses. Maybe my choices were wrong (I spose I consider both Maddux & Mays around #4 or #5 all-time, maybe I'm overrating Maddux)

 

What I'm mostly interested in is do you value pitching over hitting or vice versa? What if the choice was Walter Johnson vs Babe Ruth? Or Rogers Clemens vs Oscar Charleston? And is there ever a time when Mariano Rivera would be considered as important as a great pitcher or position player?

[igor67]

Team context does matter a lot. Mays is generally the most valuable, but on say the 1992 Brewers you'd probably take Maddux, since we already had Yount. That said the bullpen as a group has blown many leads, so just having Rivera isn't going to turn it around. It would take at least 2 of him if not 3.

[pogokat]

The main thing about closers for me has always been that there is a much smaller difference between the average guys and mariano rivera than an average starting pitcher/ hitter and maddux/mays...

 

so, while i think having an amazing closer does make a difference, he can't carry the team like a mays or maddux can because he only controls a small portion of the game...

[3and2Fastball]

The main thing about closers for me has always been that there is a much smaller difference between the average guys and mariano rivera than an average starting pitcher/ hitter and maddux/mays...

 

so, while i think having an amazing closer does make a difference, he can't carry the team like a mays or maddux can because he only controls a small portion of the game...

 

That is true. But then the difference between, say, Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman seems fairly monumental (in terms of blown saves in big games and ERA in the postseason) than the difference between say Willie Mays and Tris Speaker....

[dlk9s]

That is true. But then the difference between, say, Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman seems fairly monumental (in terms of blown saves in big games and ERA in the postseason) than the difference between say Willie Mays and Tris Speaker....

You are WAY too hung up on postseason performance. Every time you talk about a player, it seems like you bring up their playoff numbers, even if it was only one series.

 

For one game, I'd go SP >>>>>>> position player >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Closer

For a season, I'd go Position Player >>> SP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Closer

 

You don't need a great closer. You just need someone who is adequate. A mediocre closer is more than capable of protecting a lead for one inning, especially when a lot of those leads are greater than one run. The Brewers' problem is that every relief pitcher they have is awful.

 

Additionally, the closer's role is dependent on the SP and position players actually handing him a lead in the 9th, and a narrow lead at that.

[Baldkin]

Do you think Rivera would've had any post season success had he played for the Pirates from 1996-2011?

 

Or would the Pirates had any post season success had they had Maddux or Mays for that 15 year period?

 

Rivera is great, but he was a subject of the teams he was put on.

[3and2Fastball]

You are WAY too hung up on postseason performance. Every time you talk about a player, it seems like you bring up their playoff numbers, even if it was only one series.

.

 

Thanks for your response. I will think about that. I admit I do take postseason performances into consideration quite a bit, however I tend to look at them more as "tie-breakers" (i.e. if 2 players are very close in ability and career stats, a look at their postseason results helps me consider which player performed better on the biggest stage under the biggest pressure)

 

As to your other points, that makes perfect sense. A great closer doesn't matter much if the team can't get them the lead.

 

I would actually advocate using a teams best relief pitcher late in games against the oppositions 2 through 5 hitters, regardless of inning, but that is perhaps a different topic

[Thurston Fluff]

I think the better question would be is a guy like Estrada more valuable to a team as a fifth starter or as a major contributor in the bullpen?

[logan82]

I would actually advocate using a teams best relief pitcher late in games against the oppositions 2 through 5 hitters, regardless of inning, but that is perhaps a different topic

More like a fireman than a closer. Put your second best guy as closer and your best guy as the stopper.

[RockCoCougars]

As others have said, definitely Willie Mays in his peak for me. However, if you replace a guy with Maddux with a horse like Walter Johnson who could give you nine innings almost every time on three days rest AND come out of the pen, I would rethink. The ideal guy might be a young Babe Ruth who could kill two birds with one stone.

[Oxy]

Team context does matter a lot. Mays is generally the most valuable, but on say the 1992 Brewers you'd probably take Maddux, since we already had Yount. That said the bullpen as a group has blown many leads, so just having Rivera isn't going to turn it around. It would take at least 2 of him if not 3.

 

I'd say that team context is everything. A horrible team would probably benefit most from a Willie Mays, an average team would benefit most from Greg Maddux, and a very good to great team would benefit most from Mariano Rivera.

[3and2Fastball]

....and a very good to great team would benefit most from Mariano Rivera.

 

That is very interesting to me, can you elaborate on that please? In what context would a team benefit more from Mariano Rivera instead of Willie Mays? Wouldn't even a great team be better off adding a Mays to an already explosive lineup and just going with a Wilhelm or Hoffman as a closer?

[Nottso]

....and a very good to great team would benefit most from Mariano Rivera.

 

That is very interesting to me, can you elaborate on that please? In what context would a team benefit more from Mariano Rivera instead of Willie Mays? Wouldn't even a great team be better off adding a Mays to an already explosive lineup and just going with a Wilhelm or Hoffman as a closer?

 

This is why the entire exercise is futile. Mays vs who? Maddux vs who? Rivera vs who? And what are the strengths/weaknesses of the rest of the team?

[DuWayne Steurer]

....and a very good to great team would benefit most from Mariano Rivera.

 

That is very interesting to me, can you elaborate on that please? In what context would a team benefit more from Mariano Rivera instead of Willie Mays? Wouldn't even a great team be better off adding a Mays to an already explosive lineup and just going with a Wilhelm or Hoffman as a closer?

 

 

Because as teams that score lots of runs score *more* runs, the 10 run rule actually starts to fall apart in terms of wins and losses. When you already (hypoethetically) lead the league in runs scored, adding another big bat is a diminishing return. Bill James' Total Baseball breaks it down quite a bit better than I do of course, but I just don't feel like looking it up right now.

[3and2Fastball]

Because as teams that score lots of runs score *more* runs, the 10 run rule actually starts to fall apart in terms of wins and losses. When you already (hypoethetically) lead the league in runs scored, adding another big bat is a diminishing return. Bill James' Total Baseball breaks it down quite a bit better than I do of course, but I just don't feel like looking it up right now.

 

thanks.... that is very interesting.... so there is a point in which adding more offense to an already very strong offensive team makes less sense than adding more pitching

[clancyphile]

Because as teams that score lots of runs score *more* runs, the 10 run rule actually starts to fall apart in terms of wins and losses. When you already (hypoethetically) lead the league in runs scored, adding another big bat is a diminishing return. Bill James' Total Baseball breaks it down quite a bit better than I do of course, but I just don't feel like looking it up right now.

 

Of the three mentioned... I still choose Mays.

 

Mays contributes in 162 games, max.

 

Rivera would contribute in 70 games, max.

 

Maddux contributes in about 40 games, max.

 

I'd rather have the contribution of a position player. I'll take the offense any day of the week.

 

EDIT: I am not putting down how good Maddux and Rivera are, but at the same time, they can only prevent runs from scoring - pitching is inherently defensive, and doesn't win the game. Games are won by scoring runs, so I'd pick the offensive player any given time.

[TooLiveBrew]

Maddux contributes in about 40 games, max.

 

However, in those games, he makes a significantly larger contribution than any single position player. Enough that it's a legitimate question to ask if a SP may, in fact, contribute every bit as much as a position player (or perhaps even more).

 

Also, what Baseball Prospectus found while doing research for Baseball Behind the Numbers was that preventing runs has the stronger correlation to winning, not scoring runs. Basic explanation being that even a terrible offense is capable of scoring 1-3 runs in any given game.

[rluzinski]

For one game, I'd go SP >>>>>>> position player >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Closer

For a season, I'd go Position Player >>> SP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Closer

That is the correct answer.

[danzig6767]

While i do think the closer role can be underrated by some, at least on legit playoff contenders, they are just one piece of the bullpen.

 

Take the Brewers this year. Even if Axford hadn't blown so many games as the closer, the team would still be out of playoff contention because the 7th and 8th innings guys have also been so terrible.

 

Given how all of baseball now has followed a similar blueprint for how to use a bullpen, especially in close games and/or when having say a 1-4 run lead after six innings, it's become pretty much essential to have a quality back end of the bullpen if a team wants to make the playoffs. Just like you need a good rotation and lineup.

 

If your team just has a good closer though, but not reliable 7th and 8th inning pitchers, they'll blow a lot of games before it even gets to the closer. If your team has a 1-3 run lead after six, those setup guys in the 7th/8th inning can blow the lead just as a closer can.

 

For example, in the majority to vast majority of games a closer enters into a save situation, the 8th inning setup guy also had to get the same three outs to protect that lead, and about half of the time having to face a tougher part of the batting order. He doesn't get a save for it though, but those three outs were just as important.

[JohnBriggs12]

I agree with danzig6767, it's the bullpen overall, in particular the guys who cover the 7th inning on. The Brewers starting pitching in 2010 for instance was lousy, but once Axford took over, and Loe came up, they played .500 ball from mid May on. In 2011, the bullpen was ok in the first half but got considerably better when K-Rod and Saito took over roles that the inconsistent Loe held earlier.

 

It's nearly impossible to win without a solid pen. Period. Most games are close and there are tense moments in the late innings virtually every night. Often times a weak rotation will affect a pen later on by requiring too many innings too.

[3and2Fastball]

I've been thinking more about this while I read all these great responses.

 

I think some of the most valuable pitchers of all-time have been the durable workhorses like Walter Johnson, Warren Spahn and Satchel Paige who could start games and be dominating as starters but who also could come out of the bullpen on their days off in big games.

[Ennder]

I would rather have 200 great innings of RP than 200 great innings of SP. So if your question was say Maddux or Rivera and Hoffman it would be tough to answer. Closers are overrated, RP are underrated, RP are also the most grossly misused asset in baseball.