Twins Going Closer By Committee
So sayeth Ron Gardenhire.
This isn't so much news or a surprise as much as it's a confirmation. While Jon Rauch served as a closer while with the Nationals in the first part of 2008, that's about as deep as experience takes our in-house options, so this option simply makes the most sense. The Twins will base their closer off "matchups and performance", at least when the season opens.
"If we decide to go with one guy as we go along, we'll go with one guy," Gardenhire said before the Twins played the Boston Red Sox on Sunday. "But we're going to start out and we're going to look at a lot of different people and we'll see what happens. We've got about three or four different guys we can go to."
Of course the Francisco Liriano closer speculation keeps hanging around, kind of like that Jarrod Washburn shadow that had followed us for a while. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, but it keeps coming up. While Gardy did say this morning that Liriano will be a starter, not the closer, La Velle does list the possibility in his two caveats to the Closer-By-Committee decision:
Twins manager Ron Gardenhire said before today's game that he will begin the season with a closer-by-committee plan until further notice.
---- But that could change if the front office trades for a closer.
--- And it could change if they decide to approach Francisco Liriano one more time about closing
While people will continue to focus and ask questions about Liriano closing, the real closer-of-the-future dark horse candidate people need to familiarize themselves with is Anthony Slama. Slama has already been optioned to Rochester for the start of the season, which isn't a surprise, but if he can work a bit on his control the man spits bullets. He's 26 this season, and he's pretty much ready: 271 strikeouts, 74 walks and just 117 hits in 183.2 innings.
Slama's success has been attributed largely to two things, and it's kept him largely under-the-radar in spite of his stellar minor league numbers. One, he's always been old for his level of competition. Two, he supposedly has a deceptive delivery. I've seen him pitch this spring, and over at Josh's Thoughts Josh has a great video and prospect breakdown, but I'm not sure what's deceptive about how he throws. If anything it looks like his throwing motion and mechanics allow him to hide the ball pretty well.
For now, our options are exactly who we thought they'd be: Matt Guerrier, Jose Mijares, Jesse Crain and the aforementioned Rauch will be the front runners. This week the Twins will be throwing Pat Neshek on back-to-back days to see how he handles the stress, and if he feels and looks good it sounds like Nehsek will make the trip north and could be in the discussion as well. Hopefully one of these guys can take control of the situation, prove they have the mental dexterity to deal with the pressure of the role and keep the front office from being forced to make a trade.
Barring something unforeseen, this public decision on how to handle the closer role narrows the spring competition list down pretty far. All that's left is the backup catcher job (it sounds like Drew Butera has the edge), and the final bullpen spot (which, if Neshek goes north, means it probably goes to Brian Duensing; if Neshek doesn't go north, it may be Ron Mahay or Glen Perkins who benefits).
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good news.
Formerly known as "Andersklasen."
Check out the best Twins' blog on the web: TwinsTarget.com.
Ugh
I’m not a fan of the whole closer by committee deal
I think it helps the whole team to know who’s going to be shutting down the ninth
From the only TRUE North division
by thewild_viking_twins on Mar 28, 2010 7:48 PM EDT reply actions
"Unless there's an acquisition"
Translation: Expect an acquisition. My prediction: We send Toronto either Joe Benson or Angel Morales, they send us Frasor.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
Heath Bell
What would it take to get Heath Bell? The Padres have another guy with closer potential named Adams, I think, so they would probably be amenable to a trade. I’ve seen him a couple of times this spring, and he reminds me of kind of a portly Nathan. Fastball 92 to 94 with a hard curve with decent control. And there may have been some, but when was the last time a team went very far in the playoffs with a closer-by-committee?
The rumors all circle around Frasor
They inquired about Bell, but the asking price is enormous: Two of Revere, Hicks or Morales.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
On paper I don't think it matters much, but its going to be hard for us fans
Nathan blew 5 saves last year (47 for 52). When he blew a save, it sucked, there a sort of “it happens” type of acceptance.
With the committee system, blown saves will be second guessed much more.
not that big of deal
Nathan closed out about 90% of his saves… the average closer 85%… This isn’t nearly the big deal people make of it. Personally, I think Neshek will eventually move in and take it.
That said, a slight nit to pick. Slama was not optioned to Rochester, he was assigned. I do not believe he is on the 40 man roster, and that does make a big difference. Technically, a spot does open up with Nathan going on the 60 day DL, but I’m guessing part of the reason slama is in AAA is that he has to go on the 40… now if next year is the official year he has to be on the 40 or be lost to rule 5, then moving him to the 40 earlier makes more sense.
by diehardtwinsfan on Mar 28, 2010 8:28 PM EDT reply actions
I hope it's Neshek.
TOTINO-GRACE 2009 STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS
by TGPackersTwins19 on Mar 28, 2010 8:56 PM EDT reply actions
Yes, but still important
For two reasons:
1. Losing when ahead in the ninth is demoralizing. If it happens repeatedly, it can bring down a team
2. The revolving door at closer can eat up a bullpen.
It doesn’t have to be a dominant guy or anything. But they should designate a closer. If they haven’t yet, that’s fine. But they should.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
We should probably look at teams that have recently tried this
Both the pros and cons have good points.
I too think the closer is overrated and “maximizing saves” is not always the smartest way to use the best reliever. That said, there will more teeth-gnashing when blown saves do occur.
Since we’re at least saying that’s what we are doing, I’d be interested in seeing what has happened to other specific teams that have tried this. Does a “de facto” closer emerge after a couple of months?
Demoralizing
I agree that one of the big plusses of a shutdown closer is that it can be very demoralizing to the starting pitchers when there is even a short string of blown saves. On the other hand, it can demoralize the opposition when a closer comes into to three straight games in a series and shuts them down every time. They won’t be so eager to face him the next time around. It is not only the stuff that makes pitchers like Nathan effective, it is the doubt in the hitters’ minds as they come to the plate.
"I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. See, my mule don't like people laughing. He gets the crazy idea you're laughing at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it . . ."
by Skippy tastes better than Jiff on Mar 29, 2010 1:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Tom Kelly in AAA
Complete tangent here… I was roaming around bb-ref’s minor league stats and came across those of Tom Kelly:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=kelly-001jay
He spent 7 years in AAA (which is a feat in an of itself) and I was surprised to see that he was a walking machine! 582 BB in just 782 games. That’s 111 BB per 162G. He was the Mike Hargrove of Tacoma. I was not expecting that at all. 15 years of managing and his teams ranked better than 9th in the league in walks just once (1988 (6th)).
Any chance they bring in someone like Frasor
but still go by committee? I’d like that. I’m not really married to the closer role, but I do think the bullpen’s a little weak as is.
I doubt it. They would bring him in to settly the matter
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
I'm
I’m shocked, but pleasantly surprised. I’d expect this means whichever healthy righty and Mijares, which is good. I still expect Rauch to be the default option, but flexibility is good…
"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all."
~ Earl Weaver
"In God we trust. All others must provide evidence."
~ Billy Beane
Rauch sounds like the right guy
He did the job for Washington, why not let him have the role now? Guerrier and Neshek are too pivotal as middle relievers, and I wouldn’t be comfortable with Crain as closer.
by MarshalltheIrish on Mar 29, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know how I feel about this
Logically, it makes sense. In reality, it was really a nice feeling to know Nathan was coming in for the 9th because he was almost always good for it. In that situation, guys always knew what their roles were going to be. Closer-by-committee shakes things up a bit. For example, sometimes Guerrier is going to be 8th inning and Rauch 9th. Sometimes it will be the opposite. Not sure how our guys will handle that mentally.
That said, I think Gardy has always been pretty effective with how he utilizes his bullpen. I hope he can handle this closer-by-committee thing.
Going by matchup
My guess is Guerrier and Mijares are the top of the pecking order, however Gardy wants to make sure the meat of the order is retired, whether they’re batting in the 8th or the 9th. He’ll pitch Guerrier/Mijares in the 8th and Rauch in the 9th if the 9th inning is the 6,7,8 batters in the lineup.
Span was awesome last year
And he probably never knew where he was playing in the field on a day to day basis.
I wish this works out
I’m a Mets fan but I really wish this works out very well for the Twins. The “closer” concept is a fraud as all statistical analysis on the study has shown. It only came into being when the “save” started being used. If my team is up by one run and the other team has loaded up the bases with no outs and the heart of the lineup coming up I want my manager to put in the best pitcher available at THAT time.
The “save” is the only time a useless stat has changed the way entire teams use their players because they have an ego-driven closer who wants as many saves as possible to pad up his stats. The modern closer concept produces the exact opposite effect of a “team” effect. If I was a closer I would want the manager to put me in to face the most challenging part of the lineup and/or in the most difficult situation, regardless of the inning.
I remember in 86 Davey would choose between McDowell and Orosco based on matchups and the Lefty/Righty situation and would use them interchangeably for any role. That was probably the last year we saw a manager properly use the multiple closer concept. It’s time that some teams go back to the concept as it was used in the 70’s to mid-80s.
Not just the stat
The save statistic has been around since the 60s, but it wasn’t really until the 80s that closers became just ninth-inning guys. I think once guys started piling up 30 or more saves a year through ninth-only usage, there started being a lot of pressure put on managers to go for the gaudy numbers. For some reason I think of Tony LaRussa as being often held responsible for that for how he managed with the A’s, but I’m pretty sure Dan Quisenberry was putting up 30+ saves in the early-to-mid-80s, before LaRussa moved to Oakland.
I love the username, by the way.
"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by 

























