|
|
#41
04-19-2006, 11:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why aren\'t setup men paid better?
rwp,
[ 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 ] Just B/C a guy isn't effective as a starter doesn't mean he can't be effective as a reliever. Take a guy like Danys Baez, high draft pick-bonus baby guy...that was a starter all through the minor leagues and struggled as a starter. His classic lines were to throw 2-3 scoreless, unhittable ball and then fall to pieces in the 4th and 5th innings. Some guys are just closers/relievers, but when you are drafted early and an organization has invested the majority of that year's draft money on you, you are going to be a starter regardless of what kind of "stuff" you have, or what type of pitcher you are. Plus, Baez gets hundreds of innings pitched as a starter each year in the minors, this is just experience that he wouldn't get as a closer with only 30-50 innings pitched. 
|
|
#42
04-20-2006, 12:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why aren\'t setup men paid better?
[ QUOTE ]
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. [/ QUOTE ] Arthur Rhodes.
|
|
#43
04-20-2006, 12:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why aren\'t setup men paid better?
Was Arthur Rhodes ever asked to become a closer except in 2004 in Oakland? Looks like he saved 9/14, which sucks, but it's too small to really infer anything
|
|
#44
04-20-2006, 01:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why aren\'t setup men paid better?
[ QUOTE ]
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. [/ QUOTE ] LaTroy Hawkins, but I can't think of any more.
|
|
#46
04-20-2006, 02:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why aren\'t setup men paid better?
[ QUOTE ]
Was Arthur Rhodes ever asked to become a closer except in 2004 in Oakland? Looks like he saved 9/14, which sucks, but it's too small to really infer anything [/ QUOTE ] The only Rhodes memories I have are the 2000 and 2001 playoff games against the Yankees. Those choke jobs were as a setup man though, since they were in the 8th inning.
|
|
#47
04-20-2006, 02:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why aren\'t setup men paid better?
Hawkins was terrible in 01, but pretty decent in 2004 when asked to close again. He was also pretty good the second half of 2000 as a closer. "Inability to close" and "had a bad year for other reasons" are difficult to tell apart just from the statsheet, obviously, but if Hawkins really couldn't handle the pressure in 01 why was he good in 00?
We'll see about Rhodes, but I think his Cleveland year was just a fluke 40 innings. His ERA in 03 was 4.17(as a setup man) and he's getting old. The big problem with this sort of situation is closers who perform badly turn can lose their jobs quickly, so we don't get a lot of large sample sizes of being unable to close.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
