It's all up to Gagne now

[Real World]

BTW, he took 10 guys. What about the other 20 or so closers?

 

[Foley]

I guess you missed where I said "some or most" closers. I wasn't saying they were all that way.

Apparently I also missed where I said that. Please show me where I claimed all closers pitch the same way in both situations. Some do, some don't, but there isn't much of a difference for most of them -- read my post again and you'll find thats what I said.

BTW, he took 10 guys. What about the other 20 or so closers?

No clue. If you're that interested I'm sure you could go grab a calculator and some game logs and get the stats yourself. But I'm thinking the 5 most prolific closers in each league should be a decent sample size of the stats.

 

[Real World]

Apparently I also missed where I said that. Please show me where I claimed all closers pitch the same way in both situations. Some do, some don't, but there isn't much of a difference for most of them -- read my post again and you'll find thats what I said. No clue. If you're that interested I'm sure you could go grab a calculator and some game logs and get the stats yourself. But I'm thinking the 5 most prolific closers in each league should be a decent sample size of the stats.

Well I believe BF and I were just talking about how it's different for some players who close, with respect to performing in save, and non save situations. You responded by posting an article that says such a thought is a myth. Taking 10 of the 30 closers and determining that it's a myth is assinine by that writer. I guess I'm supposed to do the work to justify what I think is a pscycological issue for some people. Tell you what, you win, I lose. I'm not calculating something that is a perception of mine. It's not worth my time.

 

[Foley]

Well I believe BF and I were just talking about how it's different for some players who close, with respect to performing in save, and non save situations. You responded by posting an article that says such a thought is a myth. Taking 10 of the 30 closers and determining that it's a myth is assinine by that writer. I guess I'm supposed to do the work to justify what I think is a pscycological issue for some people. Tell you what, you win, I lose. I'm not calculating something that is a perception of mine. It's not worth my time.

I was unaware this was a competition.

Thats the problem with conventional wisdom and perceptions like this. Even though something is formed mostly on a hunch with little evidence to back it up, it makes you believe anything to the contrary is asinine. Sure, the article may not be a huge sample size, but its still bigger than any which show closers struggle in non-save situations. The closest thing to suggest that is a 3.5 year split from 2002 to mid-2005 that showed closers had a 2.51ERA in save situations and a 3.26ERA in non-save situations. That is clearly a difference, but a 3.26ERA is hardly indicative of a closer struggling, and certainly not indicative of a closer being incapable of pitching as a setup man, which was really the issue at hand.

I never disagreed with the notion that some closers pitch better in save situations, but the idea that a majority of closers (or even close to a majority) struggle in non-save situations is baseless.

 

[Real World]

I was unaware this was a competition.

Thats the problem with conventional wisdom and perceptions like this. Even though something is formed mostly on a hunch with little evidence to back it up, it makes you believe anything to the contrary is asinine. Sure, the article may not be a huge sample size, but its still bigger than any which show closers struggle in non-save situations. The closest thing to suggest that is a 3.5 year split from 2002 to mid-2005 that showed closers had a 2.51ERA in save situations and a 3.26ERA in non-save situations. That is clearly a difference, but a 3.26ERA is hardly indicative of a closer struggling, and certainly not indicative of a closer being incapable of pitching as a setup man, which was really the issue at hand.

I never disagreed with the notion that some closers pitch better in save situations, but the idea that a majority of closers (or even close to a majority) struggle in non-save situations is baseless.

That's all we were saying. Some guys can close, some can't (see Mike timlin). Other guys can close, but do worse when it's not a save. That doesn't mean we were saying it was a league wide phenomenom. We were talking in general terms.