Soxbadger Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Right so on a night when his fastball isnt that great as a reliever, you can pull him and put some one else in. On a night when his fastball isnt that great and hes the closer, he has to figure out a way to finish the game. Most other closers will start to go more to the second pitch in a game like tonight. Hence my problem with the stubborn refusal to use his off speed more often. The guy should be unhittable with his stuff, they just have to call it a little smarter. Use the off speed to set up the fastball as an out pitch, but at least show it early in an inning so players think it might come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Well it's official. According to box score, All of thornton's runs were unearned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 11:23 PM) I disagree that there are more high leverage situations than being the pitcher to have to make the last 3 outs. Sure there is a lot of pressure with the bases loaded and no outs in the 8th. But if you fail, your team still at minimum has 2 chances to pick you up. Not to mention the manager is more likely to make a switch if you get a bad match up. As a closer you are the last line, it lives and dies with you. Its a different situation and there is a reason where there are numerous examples of guys who were great as closers and bad as relievers or vice versa. Furthermore, statistics are only good at telling you what has happened in the past. If you watched the game tonight, his fastball was pretty hittable and a guy that had no business beating Thornton hit a HR off him. That wasnt the defense, that was Thornton's best pitch being destroyed by a left handed hitter. Im a huge Thornton fan, but what I saw tonight was a concern, the past isnt going to change what happened tonight. And if the player isn't hurt or doesn't decrease his talent somehow, it's also a good indicator of what can happen in the present or future. Especially when you have 4-5 years of data to look off of. You are right about the velocity being off. Thornton's fastball averages around 96-96.5 in recent years. Today he was barely touching 95. If you ask me, it's just an off-day for him. He was averaging 96.1 in the two outings before this. The only possible worry from me about him is that he's somehow hurt or trying to overcompensate. The last thing you need is Thornton trying to overthrow the ball. Edited April 9, 2011 by chw42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 11:31 PM) Well it's official. According to box score, All of thornton's runs were unearned. I'm pretty sure one of them was. Because Upton's single happened before the second error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 But you dont have 4-5 years of data of Thornton as closer, he hasnt been a closer. The entire premise of my argument is that being a closer is different than being a reliever, thus using reliever statistics are worthless when talking about his ability to close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 11:31 PM) Well it's official. According to box score, All of thornton's runs were unearned. Rosenberg has to have changed the hit/throwing error on Ramirez (Fuld's soft liner) to an error all the way. They took the unusual approach of even highlighting him in the press box. Seems that the radio and tv teams really don't like that guy so much with all the criticism Farmer and Hawk/Stone Pony give him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 11:33 PM) But you dont have 4-5 years of data of Thornton as closer, he hasnt been a closer. The entire premise of my argument is that being a closer is different than being a reliever, thus using reliever statistics are worthless when talking about his ability to close. You can make the same arguments about Dotel or Linebrink as closers versus set-up guys. Just because Linebrink was a GREAT set-up guy in San Diego, nobody ever thought he had the ability to be a great closer. He always struggled mightily with the Sox when he was used in the 9th or in tie games after Jenks had already been used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I cant explain it, it doesnt make any sense, but there are seemingly guys who can close and guys who cant. I mean its just as strange that some closers seem to do worse in tie games or when the team is down. I dont get it, and I think Thornton should succeed, I just wish they would show is offspeed a little more. Not a huge change, just average 1 out of 5 pitches (basically 1 time to each hitter), just keep them a little honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 11:33 PM) But you dont have 4-5 years of data of Thornton as closer, he hasnt been a closer. The entire premise of my argument is that being a closer is different than being a reliever, thus using reliever statistics are worthless when talking about his ability to close. So you're saying there's absolutely zero correlation between a pitcher's ability in a non-closing situation vs. a pitcher's ability in a save situation? I understand that there is a difference between pitching in the 9th and pitching in any other inning as a reliever, but the difference cannot be THAT drastic. I don't have the time right now, but I'm pretty sure you can compare the performances of setup men turned closers and spin a pretty good argument that the correlation between their performance in a closer's role vs. their performance in a reliever's role is pretty high. Examples off the top of my head: Heath Bell, Jonathan Broxton, Brian Wilson, Joe Nathan, Francisco Rodriguez, Carlos Marmol, Rafael Soriano, Brad Lidge, and I can't think of any other guys. I'm sure you can compile of list of the guys who have failed to convert, but I don't think the list is all that long. Plus, just how good were those guys as non-closers? Edited April 9, 2011 by chw42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Everyone can remember the success, because well, almost every closer relieved for at least a few innings before they closed. Even Mariano Rivera was set up for a year. The point is you dont know until you try, but when you try you cant just assume that because they were relievers they can close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 11:44 PM) Everyone can remember the success, because well, almost every closer relieved for at least a few innings before they closed. Even Mariano Rivera was set up for a year. The point is you dont know until you try, but when you try you cant just assume that because they were relievers they can close. But you said the data where they weren't closers is completely useless. Does that mean Tony Pena should have a try at being a closer tomorrow? We've never seen him close, so we'll never know. My argument is that the data where they weren't closers is not completely useless, it's still in fact, useful. The 9th inning isn't a whole new ball game. It's different, but it's not something where you can throw everything out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Good luck on getting into a statistical debate with chw42. You may as well try to convince me that Juan Pierre is better than Cargo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 11:44 PM) The point is you dont know until you try, but when you try you cant just assume that because they were relievers they can close. See Hawkins, LaTroy. Something about that 9th inning destroyed him, he was lights out as a set-up guy. That being said, I think it's too early to just say Matt can't be a closer. He had been so successful before, I think you have to give him more chances, but definitely keep him on a short leash, don't want the season to get out of hand. Plus, it's not like you have a proven closer lurking in your bullpen anywhere anyway. I think he will be OK. (fingers crossed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flippedoutpunk Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 wow thank god todays tickets were free! how bout givin ol jesse crain a shot at closing i think hed be at least a little better than chet steadman over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Your taking the words to literally and using them in a way that they werent intended to be used. It was clear that my intention was merely about a great reliever not necessarily being a great closer. I merely was saying that you can quote as many stats about Thornton that you want, but it doesnt mean he can close. I was in no way suggesting that statistics in general have no use, if a guy had a 100 era in A, I doubt he could be a closer in MLB. The argument was that just because a guy has a sub 3 era as a reliever, does not mean hell be able to close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 9, 2011 -> 04:35 AM) Rosenberg has to have changed the hit/throwing error on Ramirez (Fuld's soft liner) to an error all the way. They took the unusual approach of even highlighting him in the press box. Seems that the radio and tv teams really don't like that guy so much with all the criticism Farmer and Hawk/Stone Pony give him. I don't see what the big hurry is in calling it a hit or error. They should just let the official scorer take some time to think about it. After watching the replay a few times the right call would be made 90 percent of the time probably. Why make the official scorer decide immediately? I mean rosenberg knows baseball. He just quickly made the wrong call. Edited April 9, 2011 by greg775 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted April 9, 2011 Author Share Posted April 9, 2011 I turn the game off with 1 out in the 9th, only a runner on 1st, and a 3 run lead, and I come back to see a loss. Wow, s*** the bed. It's sounds like Matty Dice is not fooling many people in the closer role for whatever reason. I'd like to see Santos get a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (chw42 @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 09:33 PM) I'm pretty sure one of them was. Because Upton's single happened before the second error. I'm not great with box scores, but I'm pretty sure that the homer he gave up to Johnson was earned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Homer wasnt earned because had the Sox made the 2 outs previously the inning would have been over. Ive never kept score but it was my understanding that if the out(s) would have ended the inning then the runs scored after are unearned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 10:31 PM) Homer wasnt earned because had the Sox made the 2 outs previously the inning would have been over. Ive never kept score but it was my understanding that if the out(s) would have ended the inning then the runs scored after are unearned. I see. Despite what the box score says, Thorton still s*** his pants tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitoMB345 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 SO who is our new closer going to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 QUOTE (TitoMB @ Apr 9, 2011 -> 12:37 AM) SO who is our new closer going to be? Do you really think Ozzie is going to pull the plug on Thornton this early. He is a vet. It will take a few more crushing losses to get him to think about it. The first half of this season is kind of brutal from a scheduling standpoint. Losing games that should be won is sickening. Speaking of sickening. Every f***ing year we hear about fundamentals and how ST is going to be different that year. Then these guys get on the field and kick the ball all over, run the bases like they are blind, and then fail in basic baseball. The only reason we do not have a losing record is that the offense has been on a run. Real simple strategy. The brown thing on your non throwing hand is a mitt. It's used to catch the ball. Don't chew on it, wear it as a hat or whatever they are doing with it besides using it as a hand warmer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnCangelosi Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I said it after the first blown save and got flamed for it but I am going to say it again: Matt Thornton is NOT a closer. The quicker we realize this the better off we'll be. Keep him in his traditional role as a setup guy where he's been one of the best for the past 3-4 years. Period. /end of story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paint it Black Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) Because I'm too drunk to make a thread to embarrass myself: Why was Danks allowed to pitch to 1 to many hitters? Although I know the pen looks bad to start the season, lets be realistic on the "omg new closer time" nonsense. If two awful errors and a broken bat base hit are grounds for a new 9th inning man then I don't know what to tell the baseball retarded. Although it would nice to see something else other than a fastball from Thornton. I'd like to go with a closer by committee and I have felt like that for a long time. If Thornton is the best guy in the 9th to get the final 3 outs, do it. If it's Sale, do it. If it's Santos, do it. Use the situation, not "oh s*** it's the 9th time to put Thornton out there." Besides Rivera, closers are overrated. The save stat was essentially created by a guy in his moms basement and it has changed the game for the worse. **edit for drunken spelling errors** Edited April 9, 2011 by Paint it Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts