Bottom line we need a real closer.

[Frobby]

o

(vs. ANGELS, 7/22)

3 up, 3 down,

2 strikeouts, 1 flyout.

12 pitches (9 strikes, 3 balls.)

18 for 21 now. Half his saves have been three up, three down.

[MrOrange82]

18 for 21 now. Half his saves have been three up, three down.

And let's hope the -3 differential continues.

I really don't get the point of (some other, not yours) "gloating"-esque posts every time Britton records a save without incident. It's not like anyone here is rooting for him to fail or for the O's to lose games. I still think the classic "closer" paradigm is stupid, but it's not like I (or any O's fan) will complain if Britton winds up running the table with his remaining save chances.

[O's84]

Because they enjoy reading all of the arguments from the game threads the next day.

:wedge::thumbsup1:

[O's84]

It's probably because the starters are mostly average and the offense is mostly above average. Not excellent in either area, so games are usually close...like if the bats put 5-6 runs on the board, chances are likely that the starter gave up 3-4 runs.

Your probably right, that makes sense. Hopefully Gausman and/or Bundy will develop into TOR and we can have that guy who can just dominate.

[Frobby]

The O's play so many close games compared to most teams. Since 2012 we have had exactly 200 save opportunities (not all by the closer, but by all the pitchers). No other team in baseball has had more than 179. So, we have the most chances to blow a save of any team. That's a lot of times for a fan to sit there biting his nails.

Why do you think that is?

Maybe because of games like last night's, where Gonzo was tiring with a 4-0 lead and Buck let him stay in and Gonzo allows a 2-run homer to turn a non-save situation into a save situation. Our starters keep us in games but don't throw many innings, so Buck pushes them in order to try to lessen the burden on the bullpen, and sometimes that means that we narrow our lead compared to what would happen if we yanked the starter sooner.

[Redskins Rick]

Maybe because of games like last night's, where Gonzo was tiring with a 4-0 lead and Buck let him stay in and Ginzo allows a 2-run homer to turn a non-save situation into a save situation. Our starters keep us in games but don't throw many innings, so Buck pushes them in order to try to lessen the burden on the bullpen, and sometimes that means that we narrow our lead compared to what would happen if we yanked the starter sooner.

In all fairness, on the flip side of this, if Buck pulls him, then everybody says Buck has an early hook and needs to let his pitchers pitch longer.

[Frobby]

In all fairness, on the flip side of this, if Buck pulls him, then everybody says Buck has an early hook and needs to let his pitchers pitch longer.

Right. My post wasn't meant as a criticism of Buck. With a four run lead, it's reasonable to try to wring one more inning from your starter to try to lighten the load on your bullpen.

[weams]

Yeah, but he's a lefty and a sinkerballer!

I know. I wish we had another lefty as good.

[weams]

And let's hope the -3 differential continues.

I really don't get the point of (some other, not yours) "gloating"-esque posts every time Britton records a save without incident. It's not like anyone here is rooting for him to fail or for the O's to lose games. I still think the classic "closer" paradigm is stupid, but it's not like I (or any O's fan) will complain if Britton winds up running the table with his remaining save chances.

I'd be thrilled if he were perfect.

[Redskins Rick]

I'd be thrilled if he were perfect.

Earl used to pray for an easy 1-2-3 inning from his closer, so his ulcer would have a day off.

[Frobby]

And let's hope the -3 differential continues.

I really don't get the point of (some other, not yours) "gloating"-esque posts every time Britton records a save without incident. It's not like anyone here is rooting for him to fail or for the O's to lose games. I still think the classic "closer" paradigm is stupid, but it's not like I (or any O's fan) will complain if Britton winds up running the table with his remaining save chances.

I think the "gloating"-esque posts (I like that phrase!) are not directed at your argument, but at the view expressed in the OP that we need a "real" closer. If you are going to go with the traditional closer role and usage, Britton should be just fine.

The thing about your argument is that it is hard to prove or disprove whether your preferred system would work better, since there is no manager out there doing it. We can look at how splits might affect the matchups in an individual situation, but the effects of having to juggle a bunch of pitchers in short matchup outings day in and day out is not really possible to analyze until someone tries it. One thing I have noted is that the members of our bullpen are extremely complimentary of the fact that Buck rarely has them warm up unless they are coming into the game, and that saves them wear and tear. I'm not sure Buck could do that as well if he used your preferred method. Would that affect the pitchers? I don't know.

[DrungoHazewood]

And let's hope the -3 differential continues.

It's interesting the choices we make in framing our opinions. You could have chosen to say Britton has 18 saves and three blown. Or that he's 18 for 21. Or that he's at 86%. Or that he's at league average. You could have said he's +15.

But you chose to say he's negative-three. It says something about the lens through which you view Britton and the Orioles.

[DrungoHazewood]

The thing about your argument is that it is hard to prove or disprove whether your preferred system would work better, since there is no manager out there doing it. We can look at how splits might affect the matchups in an individual situation, but the effects of having to juggle a bunch of pitchers in short matchup outings day in and day out is not really possible to analyze until someone tries it. One thing I have noted is that the members of our bullpen are extremely complimentary of the fact that Buck rarely has them warm up unless they are coming into the game, and that saves them wear and tear. I'm not sure Buck could do that as well if he used your preferred method. Would that affect the pitchers? I don't know.

I think there is at least anecdotal evidence that managers differ in how, and how often, they warm up pitchers and prepare them to enter games. We heard less than complimentary things about Trembley and Perlozzo in this regard. I don't know that either of those managers had a lot less talent than Buck does in the pen, but they got much worse results.

Managers need a workable method to manage that kind of thing, almost a shorthand, rule-of-thumb, that is some approximation of maximizing efficiency. Much like 100 pitches is a good proxy for when most modern starters begin to tire and lose their mechanics, I think that using a closer with fairly defined order of setup men is a pretty good proxy in the aggregate for optimizing your bullpen. It may be that there are cases that another set of usage patterns would be better in individual games, but that doing so throws off the larger plan in such a way that it no longer works.

[Sanfran327]

I've watched baseball for 35 years and I've never seen a manager maximize a bullpen as well as Showalter. laRussa was really good. I don't like him but Giriardi is good. I think the reduced warm ups and understood roles are factors. I'm not going into any more depth than that, because my experience with these conversations is that few are actually open to change when discussing these types of things.

But I want to be on the record as saying that the bullpen management is a major facet of a manager's influence on actual game results and Buck does it extremely well IMHO.

I think anyone that disagrees with this is either speaking out of frustration, or they don't really understand game management as well as they think they do. Gary and Jim are always talking about how Buck thinks several games ahead while always managing to win the game he's in, and he maintains that balance extraordinarily well.

[srock]

And let's hope the -3 differential continues.

I really don't get the point of (some other, not yours) "gloating"-esque posts every time Britton records a save without incident. It's not like anyone here is rooting for him to fail or for the O's to lose games. I still think the classic "closer" paradigm is stupid, but it's not like I (or any O's fan) will complain if Britton winds up running the table with his remaining save chances.

I think the "gloating"-esque posts (I like that phrase!) are not directed at your argument, but at the view expressed in the OP that we need a "real" closer. If you are going to go with the traditional closer role and usage, Britton should be just fine.

The thing about your argument is that it is hard to prove or disprove whether your preferred system would work better, since there is no manager out there doing it. We can look at how splits might affect the matchups in an individual situation, but the effects of having to juggle a bunch of pitchers in short matchup outings day in and day out is not really possible to analyze until someone tries it. One thing I have noted is that the members of our bullpen are extremely complimentary of the fact that Buck rarely has them warm up unless they are coming into the game, and that saves them wear and tear. I'm not sure Buck could do that as well if he used your preferred method. Would that affect the pitchers? I don't know.

This is the essence of the closer debate for me. Its not about Britton, its about how to properly assign roles and how to use your bullpen most effectively.

There is so much to juggle for a manager and it seems Buck doesn't like to warm guys up and not use them. This might be more important then we think it is which is why if Britton gets warm, he is coming in instead of letting the previous guy keep pitching.

I have to wonder, if the manger had an iPad with custom software figuring out the ramifications of each possible bullpen move (its much like a chess game) would we see bullpen usage change like we are seeing defensive shifts change?

Or is this something they can be monitoring from the clubhouse and phoning into the dugout?