closers and ERA

[Thedatch]

I've been mulling this over in my head for a few minutes now...and I want to get your guys' opinions on this statement:

ERA is a completely useless stat for closers.


Discuss :D

[StormShadow]

I've been mulling this over in my head for a few minutes now...and I want to get your guys' opinions on this statement:

ERA is a completely useless stat for closers.


Discuss :D

Well if you are a good closer it is useless, you know what is useless for a closer.......IP (innings Pitched) Now that is dumb, most closers go 1 MAYBE 2 innings hence why they are called a closer :D. At least the ERA tells you partially how others hit him, where as IP is totally useless in my eyes :)

[Thedatch]

my reasoning is, it doesn't really matter how the closer does it, as long as he saves games, right?

so say a closer has an era of 3, but has 40 saves and no blown saves that season.

Say another closer has an era of 2, has 37 saves and 3 blown saves the same season.

Which one is the better closer?

[StormShadow]

my reasoning is, it doesn't really matter how the closer does it, as long as he saves games, right?

so say a closer has an era of 3, but has 40 saves and no blown saves that season.

Say another closer has an era of 2, has 37 saves and 3 blown saves the same season.

Which one is the better closer?

Yeah I agree, but just to keep the discussion going. What if there are 2 closers with the same numbers, but different ERA's, whose better? :tongue: (JP)

[Thedatch]

Yeah I agree, but just to keep the discussion going. What if there are 2 closers with the same numbers, but different ERA's, whose better? :tongue: (JP)

as closers I'd rate them the same, wouldn't you? same amount of saves, cost the team the same amount of games...

as a pitcher obviously the one with the lower ERA, but strictly from a closers standpoint, no diff.

[milky_way]

I would say one of the most important stats for a reliever is inherited runners scored.

K-rate, BB/K, G/F and WHIP are also nice, especially in determining what situations a reliever should be placed in. Relievers are more likely to be brought into situations where runners are already on base. That's why all of the K-stats are important, as well as their G/F ratio.

ERA+ is always a great metric to judge any pitcher, regardless of whether he's a starter or reliever. Of course, the ERA+ of a starter will reflect his abilities better than the ERA+ of a reliever simply due to sample size.

So there are really two sets of stats: one geared towards analyzing past performance (ERA+, inherited runners scored), and another geared toward predicting future performance (K/BB, K-rate, G/F ratio).

Saves and blown saves are sketchy stats simply because they are largely dependent on other players (some closers have far fewer save opportunities than others, if a save is blown due to an error it still goes down in the books as a blown save, etc.)

[Thedatch]

I would say one of the most important stats for a reliever is inherited runners scored.

K-rate, BB/K, G/F and WHIP are also nice, especially in determining what situations a reliever should be placed in. Relievers are more likely to be brought into situations where runners are already on base. That's why all of the K-stats are important, as well as their G/F ratio.

ERA+ is always a great metric to judge any pitcher, regardless of whether he's a starter or reliever. Of course, the ERA+ of a starter will reflect his abilities better than the ERA+ of a reliever simply due to sample size.

So there are really two sets of stats: one geared towards analyzing past performance (ERA+, inherited runners scored), and another geared toward predicting future performance (K/BB, K-rate, G/F ratio).

Saves and blown saves are sketchy stats simply because they are largely dependent on other players (some closers have far fewer save opportunities than others, if a save is blown due to an error it still goes down in the books as a blown save, etc.)

hmm, that hadn't occured to me. That certainly does take away a bit from the saves aspect of a closer's importance.

What about holds? :banana:

For a closer inherited runners usually does not matter all too much, since they come in in the 9th with no one on anyway.

[milky_way]

Holds are ridiculous. Say the Yankees have a one run lead in the eighth inning. They bring in Kyle Farnsworth, who proceeds to throw 16 straight balls to load the bases. The fourth batter smashes a would-be-double that is robbed by a diving A-Rod. Then Rivera comes in and saves the game.

In that situation, Farnsworth would have gotten a Hold, despite being a complete ball of crap.

So basically, Holds are a worthless stat.

As for inherited runners - I think it's an extremely important stat. A closer is the best reliever on his team. While closers are often brought in to start the ninth inning, they are also often brought in late in the game with critical runs on base. What separates the great closers from the good closers are the closers who can come in in the 8th inning and clean up the messes of their set-up men.

[rockin500]

inherited runs scoring is certainly a better gauge. I look at the WHIP for a middle reliever, primarily, then K/9. ERA is a nice filler stat, but its pretty much worthless for a reliever.

[Erwin[TP]Baller]

I'd say its more worthless for a Relieving pitcher than a closer but like that one dude said ip is pretty worthless for a closer to. but their just stats, if people have any sence they will know witch stats shouldnt matter to certain pitchers. :P

lol my first post

[ExitLight]

I would say that ERA + Saves= the real stat

But like most stats, it's just fun to look at

[ginalee]

as a pitcher obviously the one with the lower ERA, but strictly from a closers standpoint, no diff.

[Fireball]

I don't know...ERA tells you how likely it is that a pitcher is going to give up runs whenever he's out there. If the closer with 37 saves has a better ERA than the pitcher with forty saves, it could mean that his team isn't giving him the same kind of run support or it could mean that the 40 save closer lucked out in 3 instances that the 37 save guy didn't. You'd still want to go with the pitcher who has the best chance of not giving up runs whenever he's out there. If a starter has a 2 point ERA but somehow has less wins than somebody with a 3.00 ERA, who would you take on their face?

[milky_way]

But closers deal with situations that starters don't: they often enter games with runners already on base. Whether or not those inherited runners score (the primary test of a closer) is not reflected in ERA.

Regardless, saves is probably the worst stat to judge a closer by.

[ginalee]

as a pitcher obviously the one with the lower ERA, but strictly from a closers standpoint, no diff.