The save opportunities haven't been there

[Frobby]

i remember some said that JJ wasn't that good as a closer, just got lucky with lots of opportunities.

Not true in 2012 (51 saves in 54 tries)

True in 2013 (50 saves in 59 tries)

Lots of opportunities in both years, but 94% is an outstanding save rate, while 85% is a bit below average (not awful).

[Redskins Rick]

I didn't say anything about changing the rule. I said they should change usage patterns for the closer. But if changed the rule you certainly could go back and re-figure all of the old save totals retroactively. But I don't know how you'd award a save to a pitcher who comes into a tie game, because as it stands now he'd be ineligible since he'd get the win. Might as well leave the win/save rules alone since mostly they're ignored anyway.

Okay, I am with you now.

[Can_of_corn]

Not true in 2012 (51 saves in 54 tries)

True in 2013 (50 saves in 59 tries)

Lots of opportunities in both years, but 94% is an outstanding save rate, while 85% is a bit below average (not awful).

Not awful /=/ that good.

JJ wasn't that good as a closer in 2013, as you stated he was a bit below average. It is pretty clear cut that he got to 50 saves because he had 59 chances.

[Frobby]

Not awful /=/ that good.

JJ wasn't that good as a closer in 2013, as you stated he was a bit below average. It is pretty clear cut that he got to 50 saves because he had 59 chances.

Did I suggest or imply something different than that? This is obviously correct. He just wasn't as awful as some made him out to be.

[Can_of_corn]

Did I suggest or imply something different than that? This is obviously correct. He just wasn't as awful as some made him out to be.

Well the one statement was "wasn't that good" and you replied with "is a bit below average (not awful)".

There is a significant gap in my mind between "that good" and "awful". Outside of the game thread those that were talking about save chances were not the ones calling Johnson awful. We were mostly saying he looked pretty average and got a lot of save due to the saves chances.

Obviously this applies more to 2013 then 2012. In 2012 we were mostly saying "Look at his peripherals he can't maintain this level of success."

[Frobby]

Well the one statement was "wasn't that good" and you replied with "is a bit below average (not awful)".

There is a significant gap in my mind between "that good" and "awful". Outside of the game thread those that were talking about save chances were not the ones calling Johnson awful. We were mostly saying he looked pretty average and got a lot of save due to the saves chances.

Obviously this applies more to 2013 then 2012. In 2012 we were mostly saying "Look at his peripherals he can't maintain this level of success."

Well, I think that the point about 2013 was extremely self-evident. Only four pitchers in baseball had 50 save opportunities that year -- Johnson (50/59), Kimbrel (50/54), Rivera (44/51), and Holland (47/50). Nobody else even had a chance to save 50.

As to the peripherals, I just don't think JJ pitched as consistently in 2013. There were too many games where he got his pitches up. He did have some lengthy streaks of dominance in 2013 but he also had several streaks where his command went walkabout.

Anyway, back to the OP, I am glad JJ has had some success this season, after looking like he might be finished in 2014.

[Can_of_corn]

Anyway, back to the OP, I am glad JJ has had some success this season, after looking like he might be finished in 2014.

Of course. No reason for anyone to wish him ill-will after he was nice enough to decline the alleged extension offer.