I think I have a GOAT candidate that no one will argue against.
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
MLB All-Time Closer --- Mariano Rivera.
Al H.
1
Comments
I think you are right. The thing about Rivera is he did it for SO LONG with that cutter.
Closer is a bogus GOAT category. You are either the best pitcher or you are not!
Coinstartled is a bogus user ID.
there, I fixed it for you!!
Of the new style of "closer" I suppose Rivera could be considered the GOAT. You never know what kind of numbers Goose Gossage would have put up had he pitched less innings per appearance.
Hoffman was great for a long time too, he doesn't have the post season cred that Mariano had, but I don't see much difference between Hoffman and Rivera.
Next the GOAT of middle relievers!
The only GOAT candidate that no one will argue about is a HORSE.
Mike Schmidt - 3rd base
Chipper Jones? I would vote for Mike.
I agree with you 100%.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I agree 150%. Big Red is the GOAT. The Belmont race that year was UNREAL.....winning by 31 lengths and setting a record that will probably never be matched. He was a beast! the only Horse to run the Derby under 2 minutes!
Agreed. In the "1 inning with no one on base" era of closers, Rivera is the #1 with Billy Wagner not too far behind. All-time? No.
Rivera was a LOT better than Hoffman. Career ERA+: Rivera - 205 (all-time record), Hoffman - 141. Rivera's is 40% higher. That's a monstrous gulf between two players.
I looked at all the real numbers (ERA+ I don't bother with) and would give the edge to Rivera. I don't see how he was 40% better in any way than Hoffman. If you want to explain it, I'll surely listen.
Bottom line: it's all about allowing runs. Or not allowing them. Career ERA: 2.21 vs 2.87. Seasons over 3.00 ERA as reliever: 1 vs 7. Seasons under 2.00 ERA: 11 vs 2.
Seriously, they're not close.
I agree with coinstartled. closer is a completely bogus category. I would much rather have Goose than a one inning closer who only enters the game to start a clean ninth inning to earn a "save" often the most important inning is earlier in the game when the starter leaves and there are two men on base and no out. the reliever who gets their team out of that jam is the real closer, not the ninth inning guy.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
to borrow from something Justacommeman said in another thread, I think most MLB General Managers and Field Managers would choose Rivera over Gossage every time.
the starter leaves and there are two men on base and no out
find me the stat that tells how many times that happens because I know it isn't very many. on the other hand, we have a quantitative/qualitative measurement for Mariano Rivera --- over the course of his career, on average, he pitched in more than 1/3 of his Teams games and "saved" almost 1 out of 4. the others most often weren't save oppurtunities, he just came in and made the last three outs.
the guy was money in the bank.
Rivera was one of the first to psychologically change the complexion of the game af far as closers go. Opposing managers managed the late innings differently as did Torre. There was no one better regardless of how important or not you think a closer is. As a Tigers fan I can tell you how crappy it is too have great starting pitching, a star studded offense and no closer.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
that's what the Indians are suffering now except that it's the middle relievers. MLB is changing to a more specialized game, has been for 20-30 years with the DH, set-up man and closer being the biggest roles filled by specific players. when you have a guy like Rivera who was expected to always be ready, who pitched about every other night and sometimes 2-3 days in a row it's special and not some bogus, made up category.
two men on base and no out was just one scenario. what my point is that a reliever who can come into a game at any point and shut down a rally is far far more important than a pitcher who comes in and starts a clean inning and gets three outs to earn a "save." He didnt save anything in that scenario. he just got 3 outs. the real save was earlier in the game when a rally was killed.
it seems to me that the nasty boys predated Rivera by about 7 years or so. myers, charlton and dibble were more revolutionary than rivera. also, Eckersley played the roll of 9th inning "closer"10 years before rivera did. Rivera was a great relief pitcher, but far far less valuable than a good starter. he threw less than 1300 innings in his entire career.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
set-up guys are important, also. right now the Indians are missing Brian Shaw who gave them about 65-70 game appearances for the last three years. it's just that with a closer almost every game is on the line, situations where one bad pitch can be disaster with no one there to clean up the mess and probably half the times no chance for the hitters again. with the guy in the 6-7-8th innings, if he gives up a run or two there's a chance to even it up.
closers are a special breed.
Saves can be recorded with up to a three run lead. Entering a clean ninth with a two or three run lead is not a high leverage pressure situation. That is why the saves stat is so meaningless. I would guess that more games are won or lost much earlier when the "closer" should have been brought in to stop a rally as opposed to being saved for later in the game and a "save" situation.
Rivera was good at what he did, but ultimately was a one pitch failed starter.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
wow............................
Do you disagree Keets? They tried starting him in 1995. That didn't work. He set up and then closed. He never had the arsenal of pitches to make it through a lineup more than once. He threw a cutter.
I'm sure there are many starters who could be similar for one inning. Can you imagine Pedro or Randy Johnson if they didn't have to conserve for multiple innings and could just let it go for one? It would be the 99 all star game nearly every night.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Gossage is one of the biggest critics of present day closers and how they've evolved over time (primarily due to the specialization of the bullpen and relievers and set up men, and of course, salaries), and has said on numerous occasions that he'd have been far more effective if he got to pitch just one inning as a reliever instead of multiple innings, but the truth is that Gossage was not any more effective when he pitched one inning or less (the league hit .297 against him in those situations) and he also blew 102 saves and saved 73.5% of the games in which he had a save opportunity, the lowest percentage in baseball history, so I'd say his criticism may be nothing more than a smokescreen for his own shortcomings and insecurities as a reliever. Goose, however, does have Mo beat handily in the whining and complaining about the good old days category. Unlike Goose, though, Rivera will be a first ballot HOFer.
It should also be noted that during Rivera spectacular postseason run, he frequently pitched more than 1 inning per appearance, including entering games with runners on base. In fact, Rivera pitched more than 1 inning as a reliever on 58 separate occasions in the postseason in 96 appearances (or roughly 60% of the time), whereas that self-proclaimed multi-inning save master who walked uphill to school both ways and back pitched more than 1 inning as a reliever on 12 seprate occasions in the postseason out of 19 appearances (or roughly 63% of the time).
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Rivera pitched 1283 innings in 19 seasons.
Randy Johnson , 4135 innings in 22 seasons.
Closers are the punters of MLB.
I doubt we'll ever see a starting pitcher approach that kind IP total ever again. That's like saying Cy Young won 511 games while Johnson won only 303. The game has changed.
An outstanding starting pitcher is far more valuable than a closer, but the closer position has evolved into a specilaized one. There are very few closers I'd even consider worthy of the HOF, but Rivera is undeniably in that category.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Scherzer Kershaw and Verlander each average triple the innings that Rivera pitched each season. WTH...throw an inning and go home. Nearly as cushy as being DH.
there's no way a rational fan would even try to compare what a starting pitcher does to what a closer does. the starter has his routine which is typically a daily preparation and workout to perform on the 5th day. the closer does that AND has to be ready to go every night.
imagine Justin Verlander with three days rest, shows up at the park for a game and they tell him he has to pitch --- that just won't happen. now imagine a closer watching a game where his Team is down by three runs in the 8th and they rally with four. he needs to be ready right away.
it's a whole different mentality which is why both guys are special.
The word "meaningless" gets thrown around here a lot and I would say that looking at a closer's ERA is the most meaningless number of them all. Bottom line is coming into the game and "saving" the victory. If you give up a run and your team still wins, you have done your job.
I would focus on who did the job they were there for. Hoffman's save % was 88.8 Rivera's 89.1. Pretty close if you ask me.
For you guys bringing up starting pitchers, please stop. Everyone knows they pitch more innings.
Rivera was amazing in the post season for the most part, but since Hoffman had little opportunity I would limit the comparison to regular season.
Rivera certainly a more dominant pitcher, but that's not the comparison here.
Willie Mays, Center Field?
first of all, closers dont have to be ready to go every night. they have rest days after two-three consecutive days pitching.
Second, the difference is that Verlander wouldnt have thrown 110 pitches three days previous. he would have thrown 25 or so. A closers gameday workload is comparable or even a bit less than between start bullpen sessions for a starter. you dont think a good starter could convert to a one inning four days per week closer? strange, because that is exactly what rivera did. 66 minor league starts and 10 in 1995. then he converted to a reliever. happens every year. pretty irrational huh?
again, a failed starter with one pitch.
It is much more irrational to convert a closer into a starting pitcher. just doesnt happen. very very rare. look at john smoltz. great starter turned transcendent closer because his elbow couldnt stand up to the rigors of starting. then after a few years of the lesser workload of closing he returned to starting. Shows you the more difficult job now doesnt it.
can you imagine what an all star level starter could do with one inning four or five days per week? he would dominate. just like smoltz did
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Seems I recall Rivera blowing kind of a big save opportunity in the 7th game of the 01 world series as well. That doesnt get brought up very often.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It was magnificent to watch his collapse live that night. He was a great one inning pitcher unsuccessfully attempting two.
R Johnson brought in as closer for the last 4 outs after pitching over 100 pitches starting the night before was pretty incredible too. Maybe if Jeter had better range he could have caught the bloop that barely reached the outfield.
it would be borderline stupid to take an all-star level starter and make him a closer. I think you know that's 7th game of the WS stuff. but, hey, you win and I give up. Rivera was a bum who couldn't start so he was relegated to the easy closer role. I think he should get the boot from the HOF.
My point exactly about the joke of a position that is closer. `no one in their right mind would take a great starter and make him a closer because the position is far far far less valuable and it is able to be performed by many more pitchers. the closer role is much easier than starter, which is why rivera ended up there yes, he racked up a lot of "saves", but a more meaningless stat does not exist. he pitched less than 1300 innings in his career. I would agree that he, nor any other closer belongs in the hof.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Being the greatest one-inning closer ever is much like being the best pinch hitter or utility infielder ever. Lenny Harris isn't a HOFer, nor is Rance Mulliniks or Maicer Izturis.
couldn't agree more larkincollector
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Rivera is not in the HOF.
He will be in his first year of eligibility.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
So just ignore the 400 or so - 35% of all his appearances - that weren't save situations? For Rivera, that is.
Well the thread title is wrong I guess , its been nothing but arguments from the get go
Am I? I looked them up on Baseball Reference and that's what it said. If you have better numbers, please share.
My main point was that ERA is not as important to a closer as a starting pitcher.
Both looked extremely good to me.
interestingly, for as dominant as Rivera was in the "closer" role, he was at his worst against the biggest rival in his own division, the Boston red sox. He blew 15 saves against this divisional opponent, with a 3.16 ERA. His save percentage against them was a disappointing 79%. could it be that when the pressure was on, it got to Rivera? He did blow the 01 series when the pressure was on. He also blew 9 against the Orioles, another divisional opponent.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
This is a comical assessment. The pressure got to Rivera? Have you checked his postseason stats? The number of postseason and World Series saves? He had a total of 96 appearances in the postseason, so it's not a small sample size. Instead, you keep harping on one of those 96 appearances. Talk about cherry picking, lolol.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
So we are not allowed to look at the negative side of a players career? Couldn't that be considered "cherry picking." Rivera did have good postseason numbers, but he had faults, including blowing a combined 24 saves against division opponents and blowing game 7 of the 2001 world series. not comical, pragmatic. so many want to bow down to the Yankee legend Rivera and not look at the entire picture. He was one of the best at one of the least valuable positions in baseball history. a failed starter with one pitch. not HOF worthy in my opinion. 19 years less than 1300 IP. way way to small of a sample size. less than 70 innings per year. a joke for HOF consideration. If you bump him up to 3,000 or 3500 IP, watch that era and era plus balloon to a very pedestrian level.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Rivera appeared in 1115 games from 1995-2013 in the same years Andy Pettitte appeared in 531.
Innings pitched isn't the ONLY way to compare pitchers. Like it or not the closer position has turned into a one inning appearance. A lot of teams are looking for that guy.
But riveras impact in those games was far far less than Pettittes impact. He pitched three outs in most games. To compare a closer to a good starter is laughable. It doesn't matter if those outs are in the ninth inning or the fourth. They are all worth the same.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
A significant number of Rivera's appearances were longer than 1 inning in the postseason where it matters most. I've already detailed that data above but since it doesn't fit craig's narrative, he discounts it.
To add to what I already stated above, Rivera's postseason record consisted of 141 IP over 96 appearances with an ERA of 0.70, a WHIP of 0.75 and a K/BB ratio of 110 to 21.
I happen to agree that closers in general are not typically viable HOF candidates but like it or not, the role of the closer has been well established over the past 30 years and for a guy as dominant as Rivera was in that role, there's is no question he won't be a first ballot HOFer and rightfully so.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
You are correct in that comparing closers to starters is foolish. Players should be compared to similar players for any kind of reasonable answers.
Where I disagree is that "all outs are the same". The 8th and especially the 9th innings are the most important in "save situations". Your team has worked all game to get a lead, blowing it at the end wastes a starters good start and all the other players efforts. That's why teams have ALL decided to look for that 3 out pitcher to "save" the game.
The fact is, you need good starting, middle relief and a good closer to have a good pitching staff. If ANY one of these areas is lacking, the opponent will usually exploit it and you will lose a lot of games.
Having a good starter means little (with the decline of complete games) if you don't have guys to come in next and pitch well.
below is an interesting list of players by primary position as inducted into the HOF. it is peculiar to me that 3rd baseman and catchers seem under-represented and pitchers dominate. as equally represented as the fielders seem to be I would have thought it would be the same for pitchers.
Pitchers (79)
Catchers (18)
First Basemen (24)
Second Basemen (21)
Third Basemen (17)
Shortstops (25)
Left Fielders (22)
Center Fielders (24)
Right Fielders (25)
Ok, so he averaged 1 1/2 innings per appearance. Big deal. definitely not a hofer for me. I'm still far from impressed he is still a failed starter with one pitch. Any number of starters could do the same or better, just ask John smoltz. He became a transcendent closer with no experience. Can you imagine Pedro for two inning stints? He would have lasted longer and blown Rivera out of the water
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
All outs are worth the exact same amount whether first or eighth inning. "Save situations" are all about context. Some games are lost in the third inning if the fifth starter is having a bad game and the offense is threatening to blow it open. In that context, the "closer" should be brought in then not saved for the ninth. There is nothing inherently special about the eighth or ninth inning.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.