Putz for Closer

[Greg Hibbard]

I just don't understand applying ERA and WHIP to all pitchers under the same auspices.

 

We've gone over this ad nauseum, but certainly coming into a 1-run game in the ninth inning is nowhere near pitching with a 1 run lead in the 2nd. Moreover, ERA is also a troublesome stat for middle-of-the inning appearances, because Inherited Runners Scored tells more of the complete story.

 

In my mind, saving games is an entirely different mentality. Certainly saves are an oversimplification, but it's not as if we can categorically apply the same standards to closers that we do to starters .

[Balta1701]

I was more or less talking about what would happen if you took him out of the closer's role. Not if he was still in it. I have a feeling Bobby wouldn't be very good as a middle reliever or a setup man given his history in the 8th inning.

There's 2 things that could happen. It could either break him and he'd go off and be nearly worthless, putting up horrible stats like a 1.50+ WHIP and ERA's above 5 and have occasional outings where he's flat out unable to get a single out and makes Randy Williams look like a decent option, or it might finally be the thing that tells him to get his tail in gear because his career is breaking down.

 

I'll give him a little bit more rope because of his good June. I just think we all feel like he's going to hang himself with it.

[clyons]

Even at his best, Bobby's always been a "tightrope" rather than a "shut down" closer. That kind is always going to have outings like yesterday, painful as they are. And those outings are always going to result in calls for the closer's job, more so when they come against the Twins.

 

As bad as Bobby's looked for most of this year, he was looking pretty good before the bereavement leave he took. I'm in the "give him more rope" camp, because I'm hopeful he can get back in the groove that those layoffs disrupted.

 

Also, unless Kenny can swing a deal (which I doubt, given the Phillies' needs and resources), I think we have to go "all in" with the bullpen structure we came out of camp with, because, as stated, if Bobby's worthless as a closer, he's going to be even more worthless in any other slot. And while I think Putz can be an effective closer, I don't see Santos or Jenks being effective main set-up men over the stretch. The adverse trickle down effects of reshuffling the pen are likley to exert themselves alot more in the second half than they did when Bobby missed time during our hot streak, as our starters wear down and pens become more important in the dog days.

 

I believe an effective Jenks is key to this team's chances this year. If he can't effectively close, and continues to pitch like yesterday, we're not going to win the division, and I don;t think changing roles with Putz will change that.

Edited July 19, 2010 by PlaySumFnJurny

[whitesoxfan101]

I don't think we can ditch Jenks as closer yet, he's still 20 for 22 in saves and that's still very good. However, the Todd Jones and Joe Borowski point lostfan made is fair when you consider yes his save percentage is great, but he has an ERA in the high 4's and a WHIP over 1 and a half, and both of those just aren't good enough for a closer. But making Jenks anything other than closer weakens our pen because I don't think he's capable of doing anything other than closing.

 

So I guess to make a long story short, I say keep Jenks as closer, but make the leash short because the numbers say that while he deserves to stay closer since he's saved over 90 percent of his chances, he could be due to blow several games, and if such a streak of blown saves starts, intervetion is needed rather quickly. I can understand the anger though, as all blown saves are not created equally. A blown save when you're up 1 against a non divisional opponent isn't equal to blowing a 3 run lead against the Twins in a game that would have given us a road series split, for instance.

Edited July 19, 2010 by whitesoxfan101

[elrockinMT]

Frankly, I don't see anyone giving Bobby good money next season. He might well make less than we're paying Putz right now, based on his performance this year. Relievers with WHIP over 1.5 who can't pitch outside the closer's role aren't exactly going to be in huge demand.

 

I don't think Putz would have any interest in signing an extension right now, and I can't imagine the Sox would be able to do so. If he keeps up this performance the whole season, I could easily see someone going out and signing him for 3/$30 to be their closer.

 

 

I think those were the numbers I read tht could be offered to Jenks. At this point in time Putz probably has earned that, but not Jenks

[Balta1701]

I think those were the numbers I read tht could be offered to Jenks. At this point in time Putz probably has earned that, but not Jenks

Jenks would get $10 million next season if he was offered arbitration.

 

MLB GM's aren't that stupid though. Jenks won't be offered arbitration by the Sox, and no one would trade for him at that salary level or sign him at that level.

 

Jenks right now makes Fernando Rodney's numbers look good, and he got 2/$11 from the Angels.

[greg775]

so he has had 6 bad outings this year in 37 appearances.

 

Those six bad outings:

 

1) April 24th vs Sea - the team wins anyway, 5-4, Jenks gets the Win. Doesn't hurt us.

2) April 29th @ Tex - the team wins anyway, 7-5. Doesn't hurt us.

3) May 7th vs Tor - the team was losing already when he entered the game. Doesn't hurt us.

4) May 9th vs Tor - Bobby blows the game. Hurts us.

5) May 26th @ Cle - the team wins 5-4. Doesn't hurt us.

6) July 18th @ Min - Bobby blows the game. Hurts us.

 

In other words, Bobby Jenks has lost us two games in 37 appearances...31 he has made with the lead.

 

The team is 21-1 since May 11th when he enters the game with the lead.

 

Seems pretty good to me.

 

Hibbard is poster of the year. The closer will always get the wrath of the fan when he blows a save, hence the greatest sports saying of all time, "JUST WIN BABY."

[WCSox]

Jerry Krause, the worst GM of the modern era

 

Krause drafted Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant, and brought Cartwright, Rodman, and Phil Jackson into the fold. He was an egomaniac douche who couldn't get along with anyone, but there's no way that the MJ wins six rings without that supporting cast.

 

Agreed with your overall point about loyalty to friends going WAY too far on Jerry Reinsdorf teams, though.

 

Edited July 19, 2010 by WCSox

[Milkman delivers]

Frankly, I don't see anyone giving Bobby good money next season. He might well make less than we're paying Putz right now, based on his performance this year. Relievers with WHIP over 1.5 who can't pitch outside the closer's role aren't exactly going to be in huge demand.

 

I don't think Putz would have any interest in signing an extension right now, and I can't imagine the Sox would be able to do so. If he keeps up this performance the whole season, I could easily see someone going out and signing him for 3/$30 to be their closer.

 

But he's not good enough to be our closer.

[witesoxfan]

If we define things this way:

 

1) Great game (A) - no walks, hits or runs

2) Good game (B) - 1-2 walks/hits, no runs.

3) Mediocre game ( C) - not more than 3 walks/hits, not more than 1 run, no BS/loss.

4) Bad game (D) - 3-4 walks/hits and 1-2 runs, or 3 walks/hits + 1 run + BS/loss.

5) Horrible game (F) - 3-4 or more walks/hits, more than 2 runs, or 2 runs with a BS/loss.

 

Bobby has had:

 

A - 11 outings, 7 saves

B - 15 outings, 11 saves

C - 4 outings, 2 saves (no losses, no blown saves)

D - 3 outings, 1 win (no losses, no blown saves)

F - 3 outings, 2 losses, 1 blown save (one of the appearances the white sox won anyway)

 

so he has had 6 bad outings this year in 37 appearances.

 

Those six bad outings:

 

1) April 24th vs Sea - the team wins anyway, 5-4, Jenks gets the Win. Doesn't hurt us.

2) April 29th @ Tex - the team wins anyway, 7-5. Doesn't hurt us.

3) May 7th vs Tor - the team was losing already when he entered the game. Doesn't hurt us.

4) May 9th vs Tor - Bobby blows the game. Hurts us.

5) May 26th @ Cle - the team wins 5-4. Doesn't hurt us.

6) July 18th @ Min - Bobby blows the game. Hurts us.

 

In other words, Bobby Jenks has lost us two games in 37 appearances...31 he has made with the lead.

 

The team is 21-1 since May 11th when he enters the game with the lead.

 

Seems pretty good to me.

 

Including the four "mediocre" appearances:

 

1) Apr 7 vs Cle - entered the game losing.

2) Jun 12 vs Cubs - gave up 1 run, made it closer, got the save anyway.

3) Jul 5 vs LAA - entered the game winning 9-1, gave up one run.

4) Jul 18 @ Min - gave up 1 in that 8-7 win, got the save anyway.

 

I'd call the non-save 2 of those non-factors. The Minny and Cubs games were made sweatacular, but that's what closers do - they still ultimately save the games, and those were rival situations.

 

I think any outing where a reliever gives up a run or allows 2 or more base runners per inning can be classified as a bad outing. Using that as a rubric, Jenks has had 12 bad outings (and that is not including the first game back against Minnesota when he allowed 2 hits and a run in 1.1 IP against the Twins). That is 32.4% of his appearances. Using that same measure, Putz has had 6 bad appearances and Thornton is at 10.

 

For further comparison's sake, both Thornton and Putz have only allowed multiple runs twice. Jenks has allowed multiple runs to score 6 times.

 

You cite examples of when it did or didn't hurt the Sox, and you mention that one time it didn't hurt the Sox. I fail to see how you can justify those as "not hurting us" when, had it not been for the offense, those games WOULD have hurt the Sox. On April 24th, it took TWO 9th inning homers off of David Aardsma for the Sox to win the game. On April 29th, had Konerko not hit a 2-run insurance homer in the top half, the Rangers would have tied that game up. On May 7th, the Sox and Blue Jays were TIED in the 9th inning and he gave up the LEAD. AJ tied it in the bottom of the 9th, and Putz gave up a 3-run homer. On May 26th, he was given a 4 run lead and allowed the first 5 baserunners to reach and damn near let the Indians tie a game when there was no save situation.

 

Relievers are allowed to f*** up, but to suggest that Jenks has pitched well this year is an absolute farce. He's been mediocre all season.

[lostfan]

Bobby could intentionally set an orphanage on fire and there are a handful of posters here that'd say "oh but he only did it one time"

[Mr. Wedmesday]

Bobby has never been in "shape". He is one of the few modern-day pitchers that has had relatively long term "success" (CC Sabathia is another) while playing at a weight that would be considered obese to morbidly obese. Not to mention the screw in his elbow...

 

What's more, closer is a position that requires exceptional focus, self-control, determination and the ability to enter the "zone" at will in incredibly pressure-packed situations. Mariano Rivera is the best example ever. His ability to control his mind, and hence his body, is indeed freakish.

 

Bobby's ability to get his head in the game has fluctuated as wildly as his weight. He looked lost from his first warmup pitch yesterday--in no way dangerous.

 

Putz's focus is obvious and he has the record to prove it. Love the sneer!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jordan4life_2007]

Krause drafted Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant, and brought Cartwright, Rodman, and Phil Jackson into the fold. He was an egomaniac douche who couldn't get along with anyone, but there's no way that the MJ wins six rings without that supporting cast.

 

Agreed with your overall point about loyalty to friends going WAY too far on Jerry Reinsdorf teams, though.

 

I was exaggerating a little. But between the major role he played in the premature break-up of a 6-time champion all the way through his final year in 2003, you're going to struggle to find a more inept and just overall pathetic display of general managing in the last 25 years or so.

[WCSox]

I was exaggerating a little. But between the major role he played in the premature break-up of a 6-time champion all the way through his final year in 2003, you're going to struggle to find a more inept and just overall pathetic display of general managing in the last 25 years or so.

 

Yeah, the last half of his tenure in Chicago was awful. All he had to do was shut up and stay out of the way, but he just couldn't help himself.

 

I think that Hawk may be the worst GM I've ever seen, as he didn't even show up for work half of the time. That said, this is a discussion for a different thread.

 

[greg775]

Bobby could intentionally set an orphanage on fire and there are a handful of posters here that'd say "oh but he only did it one time"

 

Please respond to Greg Hibbard's post indicating just how not-so-bad Bobby has been this season.

[Greg Hibbard]

I think any outing where a reliever gives up a run or allows 2 or more base runners per inning can be classified as a bad outing. Using that as a rubric, Jenks has had 12 bad outings (and that is not including the first game back against Minnesota when he allowed 2 hits and a run in 1.1 IP against the Twins). That is 32.4% of his appearances. Using that same measure, Putz has had 6 bad appearances and Thornton is at 10.

 

 

Using that rubric, 16/40 of Heath Bell's appearances have been bad. 10/35 of Papelbon's appearances have been bad. Those are just the first two random names I looked at.

 

7th inning situations are tough, so are 8th, but I don't think you can apply the same standards to the ninth inning. I also don't think you can apply the same standards when someone is up 9-1 (or even 6-3) when seeing if they gave up 2 walks/hits. Occasionally relievers pitch around a particular batter, for example .

Edited July 20, 2010 by Greg Hibbard

[Balta1701]

Using that rubric, 16/40 of Heath Bell's appearances have been bad. 10/35 of Papelbon's appearances have been bad. Those are just the first two random names I looked at.

 

7th inning situations are tough, so are 8th, but I don't think you can apply the same standards to the ninth inning. I also don't think you can apply the same standards when someone is up 9-1 (or even 6-3) when seeing if they gave up 2 walks/hits. Occasionally relievers pitch around a particular batter, for example .

Papelbon's been very disappointing this year and has gone through probably the worst stretch of his career mid-june. The BoSox have one of the bottom bullpen ERA's in the AL and are looking at the same trade names we are, including possibly Soria.

[Greg Hibbard]

Papelbon's been very disappointing this year and has gone through probably the worst stretch of his career mid-june. The BoSox have one of the bottom bullpen ERA's in the AL and are looking at the same trade names we are, including possibly Soria.

 

There are a lot of bad closers by that rubric, then.

 

J. Rauch - 14/34 (41.2%)

M. Capps - 17/42 (40.5%)

F. Cordero - 18/45 (40.0%)

K. Gregg - 14/37 (37.8%)

O. Dotel - 14/37 (37.8%)

H. Bell - 15/40 (37.5%) (initially counted one 1.2 IP appearance by accident )

D. Aardsma 12/32 (37.5%)

F. Rodriguez - 16/44 (36.4%)

C. Marmol - 15/43 (34.8%)

J. Soria - 13/38 (34.2%)

M. Lindstrom - 12/36 (33.3%)

B. Jenks - 12/37 (32.4%)

R. Franklin - 11/35 (31.4%)

L. Nunez - 12/40 (30.0%)

J. Papelbon - 10/35 (28.57%)

B. Wilson - 11/39 (28.2%) (he also had 3 appearances over 1 inning where he blew way up)

B. Fuentes - 8/29 (27.6%)

J. Valverde - 10/41 (24.4%)

A. Bailey - 9/37 (24.3%)

N. Feliz - 10/42 (23.8%)

J. Broxton - 9/40 (22.5%)

R. Soriano - 7/34 (20.6%)

M. Rivera - 6/36 (16.7%)

B. Wagner - 6/40 (15.0%)

 

[Greg Hibbard]

I guess my point is that wite's rubric (and WHIP) are oversimplifications of a closer's role. You have to differentiate the following situations a little more:

 

blowout game either way, closer comes in for some work, gives up a walk and two singles and one run, ultimately gets three outs.

 

3 run lead, get one out, walk 1, get the second out, pitch around a dangerous hitter, get the third out.

3 run lead, get two outs, give up a double to a batter hitting third, and an intentional walk to a cleanup hitter, get the third out.

 

certainly in situations like that, it's perfectly understandable why a closer would give up 2 walks/hits and/or one run.

 

In 1 or 2 run situations, obviously the tolerance must be much lower for error.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

There are a lot of bad closers by that rubric, then.

 

J. Rauch - 14/34 (41.2%)

M. Capps - 17/42 (40.5%)

F. Cordero - 18/45 (40.0%)

K. Gregg - 14/37 (37.8%)

O. Dotel - 14/37 (37.8%)

H. Bell - 15/40 (37.5%) (initially counted one 1.2 IP appearance by accident )

D. Aardsma 12/32 (37.5%)

F. Rodriguez - 16/44 (36.4%)

C. Marmol - 15/43 (34.8%)

J. Soria - 13/38 (34.2%)

M. Lindstrom - 12/36 (33.3%)

B. Jenks - 12/37 (32.4%)

R. Franklin - 11/35 (31.4%)

L. Nunez - 12/40 (30.0%)

J. Papelbon - 10/35 (28.57%)

B. Wilson - 11/39 (28.2%) (he also had 3 appearances over 1 inning where he blew way up)

B. Fuentes - 8/29 (27.6%)

J. Valverde - 10/41 (24.4%)

A. Bailey - 9/37 (24.3%)

N. Feliz - 10/42 (23.8%)

J. Broxton - 9/40 (22.5%)

R. Soriano - 7/34 (20.6%)

M. Rivera - 6/36 (16.7%)

B. Wagner - 6/40 (15.0%)

 

That list really doesn't surprise me at all. Marmol makes up for letting as many base runners on as he does because of an insane K rate (17 K/9). Soria has made up for it by inducing a lot of infield fly balls (14.8%). Bell makes up for it by having a high fly ball percentage (33.3%) in what is probably the hardest park to hit home runs in. And a lot of the other guys really shouldn't be closing, but are doing so simply because they're the best of a bad bunch of relievers or because they're being paid a lot of money. Beyond even that, Jenks has a very high line drive rate - 22.8% - which is an indication that hitters are squaring him up really well.

 

On this list, I would list Marmol and Soria above Jenks. As such, I would say Jenks is about a 3rd or 4th tier closer, which basically means he's adequate but not desired. When the Sox have a guy in Putz who has done a phenomenal job all year (with his numbers this year, he'd be in that upper tier), it would make sense to flip flop the two.

 

All I really hope is that it doesn't come back to bite the Sox in the ass.

 

 

[Greg Hibbard]

I don't think anyone here would call Jenks an elite closer. I think he is an adequate closer, and that's the only role he can play on this team.

 

I doubt Putz would perform at quite that insane of a clip in the 9th inning exclusively. Another point is that typically the 9th inning is set up to go through the heart of the order, whereas typically the 7th inning is going through the bottom of the order.

[witesoxfan]

I don't think anyone here would call Jenks an elite closer. I think he is an adequate closer, and that's the only role he can play on this team.

 

I doubt Putz would perform at quite that insane of a clip in the 9th inning exclusively. Another point is that typically the 9th inning is set up to go through the heart of the order, whereas typically the 7th inning is going through the bottom of the order.

 

That's probably not true at all. In the 9th inning, you will see more pinch hitters to pitch against the closer, but (very obvious point coming) who you face in the 7th and 9th innings depend entirely on how you do in innings 1 through 6. It's entirely random.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

That's probably not true at all. In the 9th inning, you will see more pinch hitters to pitch against the closer, but (very obvious point coming) who you face in the 7th and 9th innings depend entirely on how you do in innings 1 through 6. It's entirely random.

 

And I'd add that because of that reason, often times the set-up men have to deal with more difficult situations.

[Greg Hibbard]

That's probably not true at all. In the 9th inning, you will see more pinch hitters to pitch against the closer, but (very obvious point coming) who you face in the 7th and 9th innings depend entirely on how you do in innings 1 through 6. It's entirely random.

 

It's not entirely random. Check out the number of typical ABs per game. I'm not saying this is true all the time, but IMO the lineup is set up to go through the heart of the order in the ninth with an average number of hits/walks.

 

I guess I can't really prove this point, but I seem to remember Hawk saying something along these lines. Then again, it's Hawk.

Edited July 20, 2010 by Greg Hibbard

[heirdog]

Misleading title. I thought the OP was suggesting trading Putz for a closer. 2 points:

 

1) The bridge to the closer is as important as the closer so the 8th inning guy is valuable

2) Jenks is pretty useless outside of being a closer since he needs that adrenaline/stage so basically, you try a new closer but lose out on the valuable 8th inning guy.