If you’re going to invest draft picks on closers this year, good luck. For me, there’s far too much volatility in the number of guarantees right now. Obviously, some closers falter every year, just as new go-to guys emerge. However, closers have an average failure rate of 36% over the last 10 years. The “failure rate” I’m using is Ron Shandler’s definition, which is returning less than half the average draft value. When you also include injured players (like J.J. Putz, Billy Wagner, and Matt Capps in 2008), the reliability of the position is even lower. However, I feel there’s a new twist this year.
As of the posting of this article, there are far too many unresolved closer roles. Take a look at these statistics. (My reference list is at the end of the article.) By my calculations:
Only 6 AL teams and 11 NL teams have decided for certain on their closer, which is only 56% of the MLB teams. (I’m being lenient with Heath Bell, as he blew all seven save opportunities he had last year, but he’ll be the best option San Diego has, with Cla Meredith second in line.)
There are 2 AL teams and 4 NL teams that probably have their go-to guy, but there’s a pretty high risk of injury, or there’s doubt as to whether the player’s the final answer. That’s 20% of the teams. For example, Atlanta seems ready to rely on Mike Gonzalez, who struggled some last year and is still returning to form after Tommy John surgery. He’s obviously an injury risk, and the next best option, Rafael Soriano, is an injury problem as well.
What’s worse, 5 AL teams and 1 NL team have absolutely no clue who will be their closer. That means that you’re better off not drafting a closer on 20% of all MLB teams. Want an example? Detroit loves the potential of Fernando Rodney and Joel Zumaya, but both have dealt with injuries of the last two years: Rodney spent 134 days on the DL, and Zumaya spent 237. As good as these guys are, you can’t rely on them for saves, and the time bomb known as Todd Jones is gone as well. Need another example? Seattle doesn’t even have a go-to guy. Heilman and Morrow are touted as possibilities (Morrow even seems like his best fit is as a closer), but there are also reports that both will get a shot at starting, so you’ll likely have to wait until spring training is almost over before a decision is made. If they both make it in the rotation, who will close? Regarding save opportunities in 2008, after Putz (23) and Morrow (12), there’s a tie for third with 5 chances, Roy Corcoran and Mark Lowe, neither of which project very well for 2009.
Closers (and therefore reliable save machines in fantasy baseball) are going to be difficult to draft this year. Some people will automatically believe that because there is so much uncertainty, the value of closers will drop, and the average ranking will come down. However, I see the price of the “reliable” options (for now, that includes players like K-Rod, Papelbon, Nathan, and Lidge) skyrocketing. If a fifthof all teams aren’t worth drafting a closer from, you’re down to 80% of the teams to choose from. Then you have to take into account the 23% that are high-risk options, which I generally avoid if at all possible anyway. After that, when you factor in the failure rate and the injury bug, you’re looking at a small pool to pick from. There’s going to be a large stratification in closer options: a few high-priced locks, and tons of gambles. So in order to get that guarantee, you’re going to have go the extra mile—or rather, an extra round, drafting them earlier than advised.
Waiting to pick up your closers until the late rounds is a common strategy. Normally, I like to grab a sure thing in the middle rounds, then fill in the holes. This year, however, I’d have to take those middle round guys earlier, perhaps in the first third of rounds. In other words, I’d have to choose between Papelbon and a strong offensive contributor, or perhaps my ace starter. Thanks but no thanks; I’ll take the offense or the ace before I’ll take even the best closer.
Note that I’m only against drafting closers early. By no means should you give up and punt the category before the season even starts. My point is that the only way to lock in saves is to weaken your offense and starting pitching due to the early-round picks that guys like Lidge and K-Rod require. Instead, I’ll be taking most of my closers in the later rounds, probably no earlier than two thirds of the way through the draft. If I need to boost saves during the season, I will wait until teams start to punt the category, then trade for one of the sure guys that becomes available at that time.
Locked-In Role
NYY – Rivera
BOS – Papelbon
CWS – Jenks
KC – Soria
MIN – Nathan
LAA – Fuentes
NYM – K-Rod, Putz
PHI – Lidge
WAS – Hanrahan
HOU – Valverde
MIL - Hoffman
CIN – Cordero
CHI – Marmol
PIT – Capps
LAD – Broxton
SF – Wilson
SD – Bell (closing XP: career 2-for-14 in SVO, and 0-for-7 in 2008)
Probable
TOR – Ryan (injury risk)
CLE – Wood (injury risk)
ATL – Gonzalez (injury risk), Soriano (injury risk)
FLA – Lindstrom (XP)
COL – Street (injury risk), Corpas (62% SVO, blew it in 2008)
STL – Perez (XP)
Unknown
TB – Percival (injury), Wheeler (66% SVO), closer by committee possible
BAL – Sherrill or Ray, but which one?
DET – Zumaya, Rodney (both injury risks)
OAK – Ziegler (XP), Devine (XP), closer by committee possible
SEA – Heilman (role unknown), Morrow (likely SP)
TEX – Francisco (XP), Wilson (injury, ineffective), Benoit (injury, ineffective)
ARI – Qualls (44% SVO), Rauch (ineffective after trade), Pena (43% SVO)
AL totals: 6 Sure, 2 Prob, 5 N/A
NL totals: 11 Sure, 4 Prob, 1 N/A
MLB totals: 17 Sure, 7 Prob, 6 N/A
56% 23% 20%
Ron Shandler’s average fail rate (less than half value returned): about 36% over last 10 years
A couple points I would be interested to hear your thoughts on. I will try to be brief, but I rarely am.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I understand the concerns behind picking up an injury-risk. It's especially disconcerting to be making a decision between two capable closers who BOTH have experience or talent (Gonzalez and Soriano in Atlanta, Zumaya and Rodney in Detroit), where there is no defined closer. There's also nothing more frustrating than to watch your entire closing staff or rotation succumb to that red DL sign. It's happened to me plenty. However, if you check daily and keep an ear or eye out for daily baseball news, you can usually pick up any replacements for said injured closer(s). There are a few teams who have setup men or future closers in the bullpen that shine, or at least don't fizzle and burn out, when the team has to fall back on them. On top of that, though they obviously won't get you the Saves required, some talented bullpen arms can improve the rest of your stats throughout the season, without a large bump in IP. Getting pairs such as Saito/Broxton or Rodriguez/Shields on the LA teams has been one of those "simple pleasures" for me in the past.
Then, you could argue that a player with huge injury risks has so much talent that you can't ignore it. Some of the biggest injury risks have proven to have the biggest payoffs (obviously I'm a Cubs fan, but Rich Harden and Kerry Wood come immediately to mind). With Kerry Wood specifically, here's a man that nearly everyone had given up on. Excluding about a 20-30 day period of injury, he ended up being the backbone of the bullpen. Now, I believe Ron Shandler has him listed at around a $20 value. Anyone who gambled won out, at least in part, because I doubt many bothered to draft him that high last season. Of course, now he will be overvalued on a questionable Cleveland team, but that's how it goes!
I guess then my question to you is as follows: would you argue that, if a known talented bullpen arm is capable of replacing an injured or slumping closer, and you think they are worth drafting (or at the least, will be available in the FA pool), would you be more apt to take that closer? Or does that really factor in, considering that trying to evaluate one closer on the abilities of 2 or 3 people involves way too many variables?
The question again comes down to where you draft them. No matter how good they are they don't effect the outcome enough to draft early as an elite player does.
ReplyDeleteNow drafting Wood last year was the type of closer you want to look for. Injured, weak team, young, etc.
These players are going to get 20-30 saves and if replaced you can make a quick change.
Interesting take.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair to Bell, he didn't have seven save ops last year. He had none. He did blow seven saves, but he was never put in the game in a save situation.
Paragraph by paragraph response to Mark's post:
ReplyDelete1) Drafting duos is fine when you do have dominant setup men, but there are three problems. First, the closer goes higher in the draft (and as I said, this year I'm avoiding and early picks on closers), so you're still going to run the risk of grabbing a guy who could lose value(as Saito did in 2008) ahead of established offense or a good SP. Second, you're now drafting two people just to improve the POSSIBILITY of you gaining saves for one team. So now you're "wasting" two roster spots for even less saves than two end-game closers (such as Capps and Sherrill in 2008). Yes, non-closer RP can have value on your team, especially strikeout guys like Broxton. But there aren't many of them. Grabbing two guys from the same team is much better for leagues that count holds.
2) Injury risks can result in big payoffs, you are correct. But you also have to take into account the perceived value. Last year, Wood was a great high-risk, high-reward grab. This year, though, he's "proven" he's mostly healthy and can close, so his perceived value has increased enormously as well. This year, he won't be a waiver-wire grab or an end-game pick; he's going to cost you more. So now you have to draft him in the middle rounds, and as much as I love Wood and want him to be fine, he'll always be an injury risk. So. 2008 = low pick + mostly healthy = high value. 2009 = higher pick = high risk.
3) I kind of answered this question about the closer/setup duo in the first, but I'll emphasize something else here. The problem with "knowing" a backup guy is good is that other people will know it too. If you don't already have the replacement closer on your team, you can't guarantee you'll get him. If you check injury/player updates every 30 minutes, but someone else checks every 20 minutes and gets the replacement before you, you're now left with a closer that was a risk to begin with and that is now accumulating time on the DL or on your bench (due to losing his role).
In response to Ben's comment:
ReplyDeleteI think you're getting something mixed up. Save Opportunities, by definition, is the sum of Saves and Blown Saves. If Bell blew seven saves, he therefore had seven save opportunities (0 S + 7 BS = SVO).
As for not coming into the game during a save opportunity, I don't know where you're getting your information. I looked up the play-by-play of his first BS of 2008 at ESPN:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playbyplay?gameId=280508115
Bell came into the game with his team up by one run. This is a save situation, by the official MLB definition. He then proceeded to let the tying run score, which is how he blew the save.
By definition, save opportunities are not reserved for the 9th inning only. Otherwise the scorers would have to create a "Blown Holds" stat, which would be ridiculous. Referring to that May game when Bell entered in the 7th inning, we all knew he wouldn't finish the game. But his job is to stop the team from scoring, and when his team is up by 3 or less, MLB rules it a save situation, a save opportunity.
Save situation is not the same as save opportunity.
ReplyDeleteIf a guy come in the 7th in a one-run game, it's a save situation, but it's not a save opportunity. For it to be an opportunity he has to have the ..... opportunity to record a save. Which, if he only stays in for the 7th he did not have.