Not a Bad Idea? Lopez as closer

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

My problem is I didn't think Lopez was a closer in the first place so I would never have tried him there.  That's my problem.

Fair enough. I felt like they should have tried this last year and then traded him it worked out and he had value at the trading deadline. I think we'll see committee this year, but I Bautista has the stuff to be a closer if he can continue to improve his control.

[tntoriole]

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

Trading Sulser created the hole a closer.   

Lopez just can't command his stuff well enough to close.   And there is a mental thing there.  Last year to be a starter he knew he have to go 5 innings.  But he had mental block in the 5th.   

I agree on Tyler Wells.  I want to give him his chance at starter.  If it doesn't work then maybe he becomes the closer.  He is very good for an inning or two.

The history of ML pitching demonstrates that one of the most important keys to success is finding the right place for your arms to succeed. 
 

Failed starters that became excellent bullpen guys included Rollie Fingers, Goose Gossage  in 1976, Gossage joined the starting rotation, going 9-17 with a 3.94 ERA and 1.36 WHIP over 29 starts. He would never start another major league game., Mariano Rivera (short time in starter role under Buck), Joe Nathan who started in SF early in his career, Eddie Watt started 13 games in 1966 and never started another, Jose Mesa bad starter, good reliever, Jason Isringhausen, … etc 

You also had the guys who were elite starters and then became elite closers like Eck and Smoltz

 

 

[wildcard]

3 hours ago, btdart20 said:

At an org level - I think they want to increase the value of their players as much as possible.  Lopez's stuff has as much upside as anyone's in the pen.  The closer role is a label that still carries value in the marketplace.  So, I think he'll continue with the closer role for a while.  I don't think it's a big stretch to think this has been a discussion between Elias and Hyde.  Not necessarily a top-down dictate, but more of a collaborative "what if" scenario planning.  

At a game level - I'd rather have Lopez enter a clean inning rather than with men on base at this point.  I'm fine with letting the 9th inning/closer role play out for a while.

Successful closers are in demand.  Ones that blown saves and lose games are not.

[btdart20]

6 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Successful closers are in demand.  Ones that blown saves and lose games are not.

I'll grant that there is a psychological difference somehow.  But successful high leverage relievers are in demand.  Ones that give up runs and lose games are not. The closer label adds value.

Edited April 14, 2022 by btdart20

[Il BuonO]

Bad idea? Lopez occupying a spot on the roster.

[wildcard]

1 minute ago, Il BuonO said:

Bad idea? Lopez occupying a spot on the roster.

I think he would be fine in middle relief.

[Il BuonO]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I think he would be fine in middle relief.

Maybe….I tend to agree since he looked fine in that role last year when they moved him to the pen.

[Frobby]

6 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

The Orioles' .091 batting average with runners in scoring position is pretty amazing. Even more amazing , that BA is not last in MLB. The Marlins are hitting .069 with RISP, and the Orioles OBP with runners in scoring position, boosted by Mullins' slam, is .445, way ahead of the Marlins' .291. The Orioles are 30th in runs scored, in a four-way tie for last in home runs, and 24th in OPS.

Yeah, the season's early, it's a small sample size, and those numbers will improve. But take a closer look at the Orioles ' roster. In my opinion, five guys -- the starting outfield, Mountcastle and Mancini -- have shown that they were, and I think they still are, good ML hitters. The rest of the team is composed of guys whose offensive skills appear, again in my opinion, to be borderline or worse for major leaguers. So when the Orioles put their best team out there, there are four spots in the lineup that are likely to be weak. And look what that leaves on the bench: the other weak-hitting infielders, a backup catcher and Ryan McKenna. Lots of versatility, but nothing resembling an offensive threat to pinch hit with men on in a close game. We've had a few of those situations, and the absence of offense on the bench has contributed to the .091.

This roster construction puts a lot of pressure on the five guys who can be considered offensive threats. I'm guessing they'll draw more walks and get stranded on base a lot -- not 90.9 percent of the time, but a lot. (The Orioles are sixth in MLB in walks.) To start the season, three of those five aren't producing much offensively. That sort of thing is likely to recur during the season, at least for a week and maybe for longer. When it does, I don't see how the team as it's now configured is going to score many runs.

I hope I'm wrong. Maybe one of the middle infielders will start producing. Maybe the team just need to see some mediocre pitching. Maybe Rutschman will be promoted and start hitting right away.  But when I look at the current lineup and at the bench, the dismal offensive performance so far becomes a little less surprising.

I can’t disagree much.   I do think Urias can hit, and once Rutschman is up he should upgrade our offense at C.   

But again, in a sample this small, results are going to vary greatly.   I could look at just about any monthly team split and the variation will be far greater than a yearly split.  Here we’re talking about one week.   I think we’ll probably be a bit below average offensively, but nothing drastic when it’s all said and done.
 

[Jammer7]

Ok, maybe Lopez lacks mental toughness, or a closer mentality. The stuff is worthy. He has blown two saves, not that big of a deal really. The last was a change up left up on the outside corner and hit off the end of the bat. I think he deserves an actual shot for a bit longer. Depends on how he adjusts or doesn’t. To move him now does more damage to his mentality, and it would be a move out of desperation. If you believe in him enough to give him a shot, then have the conviction to actually give him a legitimate shot to adjust and grow. 

I think they are buying time for Bautista and Baker to get comfortable. Then, see which one takes to it. If Bautista can stay within himself, he’s my guy. He has two plus plus swing and miss pitches. Not sure about Baker yet. Minor league experience means very little to me, but I see him as a Brad Brach type role. 

And please, please stop telling us how great Sulser was as a closer. He blew more saves than any other Oriole pitcher in the past two seasons. He was a decent set up type, probably a 7th inning guy on a good team. He was traded at his probable top value. Let him go…please.

[linedrive]

10 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Fair enough. I felt like they should have tried this last year and then traded him it worked out and he had value at the trading deadline. I think we'll see committee this year, but I Bautista has the stuff to be a closer if he can continue to improve his control.

I've always been in favor of a closer by committee approach when there's no clear closer on the roster, so it bugs me when they try to force someone into that role for no good reason. I'm not sure if it's Hyde's decision or not, but I think we'd be more successful with a committee, so I hope you're right.

[BRobinsonfan]

I'm just gonna say it... the ball did not look good coming out of his hand last night.  

[InsideCoroner]

I think at the very least, anyone handed the closer role should be able to grow out a big, scruffy beard for the duration. If you come into the clubhouse and there’s an electric razor in your locker, then you know you’ve lost the gig. 

[spiritof66]

16 hours ago, Frobby said:

I can’t disagree much.   I do think Urias can hit, and once Rutschman is up he should upgrade our offense at C.   

But again, in a sample this small, results are going to vary greatly.   I could look at just about any monthly team split and the variation will be far greater than a yearly split.  Here we’re talking about one week.   I think we’ll probably be a bit below average offensively, but nothing drastic when it’s all said and done.
 

I didn't intend to use the Orioles' poor offensive start to project anything. I was looking at it to understand and point out how weak the team, as presently constituted, might be offensively, and especially how, by putting together a roster full of pitchers and infielders to audition, there's no pinch-hitting strength when one of the weak hitters comes up in a key situation. I hadn't fully appreciated the latter until the Brewer series. 

Of course they're going to score more runs and hit more homers, and do better with RISP, than they have so far. But they were 26th in runs scored last year (14th in the AL), and I don't expect a lot of improvement unless and until better hitters are promoted or acquired to play the infield and catch (and DH if Mancini is dealt). "A bit below average offensively" seems very optimistic to me. I hope you're right.

[wildcard]

37 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

I didn't intend to use the Orioles' poor offensive start to project anything. I was looking at it to understand and point out how weak the team, as presently constituted, might be offensively, and especially how, by putting together a roster full of pitchers and infielders to audition, there's no pinch-hitting strength when one of the weak hitters comes up in a key situation. I hadn't fully appreciated the latter until the Brewer series. 

Of course they're going to score more runs and hit more homers, and do better with RISP, than they have so far. But they were 26th in runs scored last year (14th in the AL), and I don't expect a lot of improvement unless and until better hitters are promoted or acquired to play the infield and catch (and DH if Mancini is dealt). "A bit below average offensively" seems very optimistic to me. I hope you're right.

Compared to last year I expect Santander to do between than a .719 OPS.  Urias will get more than 262 at bats and should match his 773 OPS. We may see him stick at 3B.   An healthy Mancini should be better than a 758 OPS.

Your caveat  of unless or until better hitters are promoted is an important caveat because Adley most certainly will be between the Severino.   There should be a competition be Jones, Vavra and Odor that combines for a better than the  608 OPS that Franco had.  (Comparing Franco with  2B because of Urias moving to 3B.)

Mateo replaces a combination of Galvis' 720 OPS and Valaika's 540 OPS which combined is about a 630 OPS.   Mateo should be over 700 OPS is my guess.

So if 6 for the 9 positions have better OPS I would expect the team would do much better than last year offensively.

[BRobinsonfan]

While a quick glance at his history in relief seems to indicate he's better as a reliever, he still gives up more than a hit per inning in that role.  At 29 years of age, with more than 350 major league innings behind him and a 1.558 WHIP I'm not sure what we're waiting for.