Why aren't setup men paid better?

[tangotiger]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless I'm mistaken, it seems that setup men are way undervalued and underpaid.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are probably mistaken.

[ QUOTE ]
Nowadays, the setup guys often pitch more innings than the closers and usually come into the game in more difficult situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true, for the most part. Certainly in some cases, it may be true. I have a statistic called Leverage Index (LI) which quantifies the crucialness of a situation. The leaders are almost always the annointed closers. You can read about LI here:
http://www.tangotiger.net/crucial.html
All the links are broken, except for the last one, which you may enjoy.

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, most managers don't like bringing in their closers in any situations except to start the last inning, before anyone is on base.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not "any", but, you are right, they are not very visionary about it, these days. Here is how Sutter and Gossage were used:
http://www.tangotiger.net/bullpenuse.html

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the answer is purely statistics: saves are sexier than "holds." But if I were a gm, I would be placing at least as much importance on getting a reliable setup guy as getting a closer or even a 4th starter.

[/ QUOTE ]

A fourth starter is likely more valuable than a setup guy.

Tom

[THAY3R]

I like the way the Jays have been using Ryan this year.(Not literally, being a Yanks and Rays fan)

[Wynton]

Going to bed now, Tom, but I will look at those links carefully tomorrow. Thanks.

This discussion does remind me of Billy Beane's attitude, as conveyed in Money Ball. If memory serves, I believe he took the attitude that it wasn't such a big deal to lose or trade a closer, since the market tended to overvalue/overpay them so much. He seemed to think that closers were relatively fungible.

This has nothing to do with the debate about setup men viz closers, and you may question the source. But I thought it was interesting anyway.

[tangotiger]

I agree with him. While closers are leveraged at twice what starters are leveraged at (i.e., 1.5 innings of a closer is equal to 3 innings of a starter), most of that leverage is controlled by the manager and can be passed on to the next best guy.

Once you start a chaining process (i.e., take out closer, and move setup guy one notch, and move the #3 guy one notch up, etc), you will find that the closer's true leverage is about 1.3 times, and not 2.0 times. Kinda complicated to explain in one sentence.

Long story short: yup, closers are overpaid, and setup guys too. If I had a ballclub with 75 million$, I allocate 30 million$ to pitchers. Of that, less than 10 million$ would go to relievers. Probably even less than 7. Haven't worked it out yet. If it were me though, I'd turn most pitchers into short-game pitchers.

Tom

[ChuckyB]

[ QUOTE ]
lol. Shawn Chacon had 35 saves with a 7.11 ERA. I think that kinda disproves your point, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who's he closing for now?

[ QUOTE ]
Octavio Dotel was pitching pretty much without an arm.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seemed fine before he bombed out as the closer of the future.

[ QUOTE ]
For all those guys you mentioned...

Gagne <font color="blue">Was a crappy starter, never a setup man </font>
Mo <font color="blue">Remember when his setup man Ramiro Mendoza became a closer? Yeesh.</font>
Lidge <font color="blue">No argument. Stud.</font>
Dempster <font color="blue">see Gagne</font>
Isringhausen <font color="blue">what about Buddy Groom, T.J. Mathews, Brad Rigby, Ron Mahay, Blake Stein and everyone else he pitched with in Oakland the year before he became a closer? How did they do as closers?</font>
Todd Jones <font color="blue">Who begins their major-league career as a closer? (besides Huston Street)</font>
Danys Baez <font color="blue">See Todd Jones</font>
Joe Nathan <font color="blue">He was a starter too</font>
Chad Cordero <font color="blue">Stars don't come out of college and immediately slide into closer roles -- See: Matt Anderson</font>
Miguel Batista <font color="blue">Starting 89 games the 3 years before he closed doesn't qualify him as 'a setup man'.</font>
Eddie Guardado <font color="blue">Isn't he Rich Garces?</font>

And that's just last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

[rwperu34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If a setup man has the cajones to become a closer, they will get paid better.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a matter of "cajones," it's a matter of opportunity. Many players have gone from setup men to closer, or starter to closer without a hitch.

[/ QUOTE ]

And a for every Duane Ward there's an Octavio Dotel, Tim Worrell, Robert Person, Jeremy Affeldt and a Shawn Chacon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Person? Affeldt? Chacon? Those guys couldn't get people out as starters, so why should they be effective closers? I'm fairly certian they'd be terrible as setup men as well.

[ChuckyB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If a setup man has the cajones to become a closer, they will get paid better.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a matter of "cajones," it's a matter of opportunity. Many players have gone from setup men to closer, or starter to closer without a hitch.

[/ QUOTE ]

And a for every Duane Ward there's an Octavio Dotel, Tim Worrell, Robert Person, Jeremy Affeldt and a Shawn Chacon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Person? Affeldt? Chacon? Those guys couldn't get people out as starters, so why should they be effective closers? I'm fairly certian they'd be terrible as setup men as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Those are a few examples of why I believe closers aren't just like setup men, except closers are given the opportunity to get saves. Closers are better pitchers in clutch situations.

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If a setup man has the cajones to become a closer, they will get paid better.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a matter of "cajones," it's a matter of opportunity. Many players have gone from setup men to closer, or starter to closer without a hitch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sometimes it's better to read a post before you take 10 minutes to respond to it.

[Jack of Arcades]

Re: Shawn Chacon. Shawn Chacon is probably the best counterexample to all the closer nonsense. He was a terrible pitcher, but he was still able to close out plenty of situations (he converted 35/44 saves). Today, a closer's job isn't to post a 0.82 ERA or whatever, but it's to not blow ballgames. Chacon, even with an abysmal ERA, turned in a decent performance on that regard.

That's not to say you don't want Mo out there in the most important situations. You obviously do. But to shell out 9 mil a year to closers is pretty ridiculous, IMO.

[FlyWf]

I really don't get the Dotel example. He was a good setup man, he got turned into a closer, and then he got hurt and the injury has more or less ended his career. Did he get hurt because he wasn't clutch enough?

Is there any pitcher who was a good setup man, a bad closer, and then a good setup man again? That's the example you need.