Does Cliff Floyd get in?

[Jason Moyer]

How many middle relievers are in the hall of fame?

0.

Then again, in real life, someone like Kent Tekulve's career path was based on respective talent and not because he was forced into a "role" regardless of how good he was.

I think the entire role system is one of the biggest weaknesses of OOTP and the one area where I actually feel a game like High Heat does a better job of representing reality.

Jason

[taffarel]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Jason Moyer:
How many middle relievers are in the hall of fame?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That's not what mean. There is no MR's in the HoF because, previously, pitchers used to regularly go to the 7th/8th inning, then in came the closer. MR's weren't needed as much. Previous to that the pitchers would regularly throw complete games.

I think MR's are beoming a bigger and bigger part of the game, and their role will become more important, and demand more talent.

The best example of this is the Mariners. Would the M's have won so many games last year if they did not have the talent they had in the pen? Rhodes and Nelson just dominated and held so many close games for the M's and without them they would have been second to the A's in the Division.

[Jason Moyer]

If any middle reliever in the history of baseball deserves to be in the hall of fame it's this man right here:

<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/t/tekulke01.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.baseball-reference.com/t/tekulke01.shtml</a>

I seriously believe if Tekulve isn't in the HOF then there will never be a MR in there. I can't imagine any other MR putting up those kind of numbers for that many games.

[MrWorkrate]

Middle relievers won't be in any time soon, mainly because there is no "glamor stat" to base them on. Currently, they measure "holds", but I've never been overly crazy about that, especially when a pitcher can come into the game, give up a two run homer, get no one out, then give way to the closer, who shuts the door, giving the middle reliever a hold.

Add on top of that the difficulty that closers themselves are facing getting into the Hall Of Fame. Bruce Sutter is still waiting. There's no guarantee that John Franco will get in. Goose Gossage was the most dominating closer for 10+ years, and he's not in. If these players can't get in, then the players who set them up won't get in.

On top of that, most pitchers who pitch in middle relief do so because it is believed that they aren't good enough to start or close. Once they reach that level, they are generally placed into the role. Jeff Nelson is a great middle reliever, but apparently two managers (Joe Torre and Lou Pinella) felt that he wasn't the man to get the ball in the ninth inning.

[Jason Moyer]

Lee Smith may not even get in.

My feeling will always be that the best pitchers are given the ball at the beginning of a game. A solid bullpen is essential to a winning team but not nearly as essential as starting pitching. I can even live with closers not getting in. If someone is that great why use them for just 60-80 innings a year?

Jason

[taffarel]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Jason Moyer:
<strong>Lee Smith may not even get in.

My feeling will always be that the best pitchers are given the ball at the beginning of a game. A solid bullpen is essential to a winning team but not nearly as essential as starting pitching. I can even live with closers not getting in. If someone is that great why use them for just 60-80 innings a year?

Jason</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">So from that can I take it that you don't rate closers either? They rarely go further than 60-80 innings a year, but they get a lot of praise. If what you're saying is true then closers can't be good enough either.

My point is that if you took say......Robb Nen, and gave him the endurance to throw 7 to 9 innings of the stuff that he closes with, he'd be fairly dominating. Just because someone maybe doesn't have the endurance to throw 9 innings does not mean he does not have talent, or that he should be excluded from consideration from the HoF.

How about measuring them on stats like runners per 9 innings, inherited runners scored, that kind of thing? I know I'm defending a lost cause, but I like the underdogs. (Just look at the exploits of the Scottish National soccer team to understand why!)

Also, why give Nelson the ball in the 9th when you've got Sasaki? (Unless you're playing the Indians with a big lead!)

[DavidPuddy]

What about John Franco?? Does he get in? He's the all time leader in saves for a LHP, but is now just a MR. I myself am not too big on putting closers in the HOF as saves are really a overrated stat.

[Jason Moyer]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by taffarel:
<strong>[QUOTE]My point is that if you took say......Robb Nen, and gave him the endurance to throw 7 to 9 innings of the stuff that he closes with, he'd be fairly dominating. Just because someone maybe doesn't have the endurance to throw 9 innings does not mean he does not have talent, or that he should be excluded from consideration from the HoF.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Robb Nen could probably pitch 7 to 9 innings, but in the process of pacing himself to do that he would likely not pitch as effectively.

Think of this way. Game 7 of the World Series of a league you're managing. You've got Mariano Riviera in your bullpen. However, you also have Randy Johnson who pitched 3 days earlier and is rested. Who do you go with in a save situation? I'd stick Johnson in there. If he can put together the numbers he does while not being able to reach back for something extra on every pitch, imagine what he'd be like if he came into a game knowing he'd probably only throw 10-20 pitches?

A lot has been written about the differences between starters and relievers. Good starting pitchers don't give 100% every single pitch they throw. They put as much into each pitch as they need to based on that situation. If Roger Clemens or Randy Johnson or Curt Schilling or Pedro Martinez started each game as if they were a closer and reached back for that extra oomph on every pitch they'd never last more than an inning or two.

John Smoltz is another good example. Or Dennis Eckersley. Both were successful starting pitchers whose skills diminished. Did they have any less stamina later in their careers? I doubt it. However, instead of having to parlay their talent into 9 innings every 5 days, they get to go out and give it their all for 3 batters a night. John Smoltz can and I think will be as dominating as Eck was, and he doesn't have nearly the stuff he did 5 years ago.

I can't think of many pitchers who were drafted and groomed to be closers and succeeded at it. Most pitchers are drafted as starters and move to the bullpen if things aren't working out. If someone is putting up good numbers, they can move to the rotation. If it weren't for an impressive middle relief stint after completely messing up his first attempt at being a major league starter (his ERA in his first 5 big league starts was over 9.00, which is *awful* by pre-1990 standards), Curt Schilling may have never become an established starting pitcher. The Phillies saw how dominating he was throwing 1-2 innings and realized that he could be an exceptional starting pitcher. However, he wasn't exceptional right away. His 2.35 ERA out of the pen translated into a 4.00 ERA his first 2 years as an everyday starter. It wasn't until he was 30, in 1997, that he really established himself as a legitimate star pitcher.

Jason

[taffarel]

I'm not sure about Johnson over Rivera. Although some people say there is no such thing as a closers mentality, I believe that there is such a thing. A closer is a specialist at what he does, and he's keyed-up coming into the game to do a job. The only reason that I'd go with Randy is if I didn't trust my closer to do the job. The top closers in the league wil always outperform a starter in a 'save' situation.

It's like special teams players (not the kicker/punter) in the NFL. They might not get a game in the normal offensive/defensive patterns, but when you put them into a specialist situation and they shine. Kick/Punt returners are the biggest example of this. A good returner gives you good field position to start your drive and that's invaluable. It does not mean that because a player is not used in the main patterns that he does not have the talent. He's simply a specialst at what he does.

Starting pitchers generally do not do very well out of the pen, because it's not their job. (Although there will always be exceptions.) Just as a closer never seems to pitch well in non-save situations.

Jason, as you said earlier great starting pitching will win games, which I completely agree with, but a bad pen can just as easily blow it.

I play cricket for team in Scotland, and (hesitating to draw any parallels, 'cos I know how Americans feel about Cricket. ) we have what you might call MR bowlers. They're there to stop the other team scoring runs, so that the batsmen get frustrated and start swinging at bad balls, then you bring in your 1 and 2 bowlers and get the batsmen out. The 'MR Bowlers' are where they are because of what they do, it's not that they are any less talented than the opening (or Starting) bowlers. I'm a wicket-keeper (the idiot who stands behind the stumps and cathes the ball, or the bat if he's unlucky!) and like baseball catchers they're a specialised breed (some form of mental instability helps ). I just think that some people excel at certain roles and some MR's can be extremely talented and should be rated more highly than they are.

Heh, looks like Jason and I will probably never agree on this. Agree to disagree? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[lschaef]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Jason Moyer:
<strong>If any middle reliever in the history of baseball deserves to be in the hall of fame it's this man right here:

<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/t/tekulke01.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.baseball-reference.com/t/tekulke01.shtml</a>

I seriously believe if Tekulve isn't in the HOF then there will never be a MR in there. I can't imagine any other MR putting up those kind of numbers for that many games.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Growing up in the Pittsburgh area in the 70's, I've always liked Tekulve...It was neat to look at his fielding numbers on that site and see the OF numbers that one year.

[Jason Moyer]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by lschaef:
<strong>Growing up in the Pittsburgh area in the 70's, I've always liked Tekulve...It was neat to look at his fielding numbers on that site and see the OF numbers that one year. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Strangely I've only lived here 5 years. I grew up near Philly and he played out there for a bit in the 80's. He quickly became one of my favorites, and I even started working some sidearm pitches into my reportoire much to the chagrin of my little league coaches. =)

Jason