Closer or Committee?

[luckymann]

I continually flip-flop about the role of closer in my bullpen.

My first instinct tells me it is a waste of resources, as a closer rarely gets as much usage than he would in other key relief roles.

So I'll run a Bullpen-By-Committee (BBC) for a few years, usually without incident.

But then I'll come across a guy who is perfect for the 9th inning / close game responsibility - groundball pitcher; as small a platoon differential as possible; high ratings across the board; strong personality traits - and use him exclusively in that role until I start thinking he's being paid too much for 40-50 innings per season and revert to BBC.

Which of the two do you prefer and typically implement?

[slugga27]

Ask me this question 15 years ago, I would say closer without a doubt. In today's game, dominant closers are few and far between; as such, I say bullpen by committee. Ride the hot hand regardless of "title".

[Cryomaniac]

I tend to go with one closer, unless I really don't have any obvious choice, in which case I just do it situationally.

[Pelican]

I think of closer as being a combination of nerve and a dominant skill set: lots of stuff, good movement, not necessarily control. If I don’t have a guy like that, then a committee works. I tend to take advantage of lefty/righty matchups (technically, lefty/lefty or righty/righty) in a close game, late innings. (I have disabled the childish and unnecessary three-batter COVID rule.). And yeah, not above going with the hot hand. And I’m on board with the metrics of using a high-leverage guy earlier in the game in crucial situations, to get out of a jam. That guy needs to have good control, since he will be coming into situations with men on base. Control is less important for a classic closer, since he almost always starts a new inning (the ninth) with bases empty.

[jeffw3000]

I normally like to have one defined closer, but I will occasionally go with the committee approach if I find my team does not have someone to step up and be a consistent closer.

[progen]

Sadly, went with closer. You don't think much about it, until your closer gets hurt(in real life), and you see your team put in the setup guy, or some other schlepp, and the guy wilts like a flower. Especially being a Phillies fan.

In OOTP, I don't put as much emphasis on it. Just go with a guy who's done it before. Seems to work out Ok.

[wallewalls]

I don't always use my best reliever as a closer. Rather I set my best reliever to be a stopper (ideally, this player would have at least 45 stamina, which would enable him to go multiple innings), and then I just set another good reliever to be a closer to handle the ninth innings.

[BBGiovanni]

In OOTP, the way fatigue works with relievers means I end up with two closers alternating, more or less. I definitely don't save my best reliever to come in only in the 9th with bases empty regardless of who's batting. I'll often get a 4 or 5 out save and then have to rest the guy. And I try very hard not to use those guys when up or down by 3 or more.

[LunchBox]

Not only do I advocate bullpen by committee, I also advocate rotation by committee.


I used to carry 12 pitchers on the 25-man roster and carry 13 on the 26-man... about 2/3 of them have starter stamina at least 50 or more on the 20-80 scale.


If they have a bad couple of starts and someone else is hot coming out of the pen, I just switch them around.


Of course, this comes from playing as many expansion teams over the many different versions of OOTP.

[tonnage]

I carry two closers / set-up guys. If one is tired, the other gets the job but in most instances, they'll each get an inning if the game warrants it, so BBC to a certain extent.

[r0nster]

whenever i am tight on team money i go the route of committee but if i have some spending money i go closer long term contract.

[Miamikb2001]

Committee usually unless I have an ultra dominant one but even then with stamina you need another to pitch in when he’s tired


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk