Not a Bad Idea? Lopez as closer

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Do you really think these are Hyde's decisions?

Its a good point. 

[Tony-OH]

10 minutes ago, interloper said:

I actually do tend to think Hyde has a lot of say in how he uses his bullpen/roster. I don't think he has much say in things like "we're stretching out Tyler Wells". But who knows really. 

I honestly don't know one way or the other. While I do think Hyde makes the final call during games (at least I hope so) I'm not sure he's the final arbiter of what roles guys pitch in and the order they will be used. I just get a feeling that is given to him like the lineup. 

He always said it's a collaborative approach and I beleive Sig's computer program spits stuff out, then maybe Hyde has a chance to disagree based on injuries or how a guy is feeling. But honestly, I could be wrong becauee there is no transparency or information on how they do business.

It's all state secrets.

[wildcard]

9 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Its too early to ditch the Lopez for closer idea. He stunk last night, no doubt, and a clean inning for Lopez usually includes at least one base runner, but let's face it, this is what we need to find out this year.

Could Baker or Bautista end up in that role this year, sure, they coud, as could Tate if that splitter ican stay consistent, but I'm not going to stress about the closer on a bad team.

Let's remember, the Orioles went what, 1-for-6 last night with RISP and are somehting like 6-for-54 on the year in theses situations. The Orioles are 1-5 because they were domianted by two of the best pitching staffs in the league, and because they are still not a smart team nor do that have good roster construction.

Sure Lopez, stunk for sure, but he's one for one in save chances.

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.

[sportsfan8703]

Who needs a closer when you’re only going to win 55 games?

[Sports Guy]

1 minute 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.

I don’t get this.  Last year, you kept telling us that he should be a starter.  That he had good stuff, etc…You talked about how good he was the first time though a lineup.

So if you buy into the idea that he has good stuff and that he is good going through the lineup initially, why wouldn’t you want him to be the closer?

[Frobby]

19 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Do you really think these are Hyde's decisions?

I do.   Elias has always said that the front office doesn’t dictate in-game decisions.   

As to whether Lopez should be the closer, we shouldn’t judge it based on 3 appearances.   I agree with SG, it’s not like we’ve got Britton hiding elsewhere in our bullpen.   Lopez probably will be great some nights, very shaky on others.   But let’s let him try to get into a groove over 12-15 appearances; if he hasn’t, we can try changing horses.   Or ponies.   Let’s see who else is pitching consistently well in the pen, if anyone, before making decisions.   

 

[Frobby]

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t get this.  Last year, you kept telling us that he should be a starter.  That he had good stuff, etc…You talked about how good he was the first time though a lineup.

So if you buy into the idea that he has good stuff and that he is good going through the lineup initially, why wouldn’t you want him to be the closer?

If I remember, wildcard said that for a while but changed his mind as the season progressed.  

[vab]

Worrying about the closer on this team is like worrying about the speakers in a car with no engine but I think there are probably better choices than Lopez for closer. He does have quality stuff but he's just too inconsistent for that role. I don't know anything about Bautista but the fastball/slider combo I saw the other night was pretty nasty. If he can keep doing that I'd try him. 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

27 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Who needs a closer when you’re only going to win 55 games?

Maybe not a closer per se, but it would be nice if Hyde can find a couple pitchers that can be trusted in late inning, high leverage situations. 

 

 

[Sports Guy]

27 minutes ago, Frobby said:

If I remember, wildcard said that for a while but changed his mind as the season progressed.  

If he did, that’s fine.  But that’s my actual point.  The hanging on of small sample sizes.  Just let things play our a while and see what happens.  The constant rush to judgement over meaningless sample sizes is over the top.

[Moose Milligan]

Lopez is one of my favorite "bad Orioles."  For some reason, I like him.  

He's got closer stuff at times, IMO.  Upper 90s and I think his breaking stuff can be pretty nasty when he harnesses it.  

He showed last year that he's not a high leverage guy, IIRC, there were quite a few blown save opportunities.  I don't mind trying him some more at closer because I think there's a spot for him somewhere in the bullpen, they just have to try and figure out what it is.  While I think he's probably not a closer, it doesn't hurt to give him a few more cracks at it.  Most likely he's a middle relief guy, someone that can get you through the opponents order once. 

[Aristotelian]

I've been skeptical of this from the beginning. Trying him out in the bullpen is a fine idea while we are in rebuild mode. Closer or even late inning/high leverage seems like something that should be worked up to. We don't have a lot of great options but Lopez would be pretty low on my list until he proves himself more as a 1-2 inning guy. I would be doing a committee approach including Baker, Bautista, Perez, and Baumann. 

[interloper]

It's hard not to be enamored with 99mph. 

I think an interesting comparison at the end of the season is Lopez vs. Tanner Scott. Which guy has the better season in the bullpen?

[btdart20]

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.

Edited April 14, 2022 by btdart20

[spiritof66]

1 hour ago, NCRaven said:

Maybe we lost because we can’t score more than 2 runs.  Maybe this was one bad outing.  One inning, the ultimate SSS.

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.