Relief Pitchers

[Rebbiv]

Generally, the great relief pitchers started out as starters and then became closers. The following is the the list of career saves leaders and games started in the minors (not including rookie ball or after first season in MLB).

1. Mariano Rivera 66 of 80 games (82.5%)

2. Trevor Hoffman 12 of 93 games (12.9%)

3. Lee Smith 70 of 117 games (59.8%)

4. John Franco 51 of 75 games (68.0%)

5. Billy Wagner 70 of 70 games (100.0%)

6. Dennis Eckersley 66 of 66 games (100.0%)

7. Jeff Reardon 33 of 44 games (75.0%)

8. Troy Percival 0 of 126 games (0.0%)

9. Randy Myers 94 of 96 games (97.9%)

10. Joe Nathan 46 of 59 games (78.0%)

11. Rollie Fingers 85 of 92 games (92.3%)

12. John Wetteland 74 of 77 games (96.1%)

13. Francisco Cordero 21 of 91 games (23.1%)

14. Roberto Hernandez 106 of 107 games (93.5%)

15. Jose Mesa 163 of 191 games (85.3%)

16. Todd Jones 60 of 126 games (47.6%)

17. Rick Aguilera 50 of 51 games (98.0%)

18. Robb Nen 62 of 66 games (93.9%)

19. Tom Henke 14 of 100 games (14.0%)

20. Rich Gossage 32 of 35 games (91.8%)

21. Francisco Rodriguez (K-Rod) 30 of 34 games (88.2%)

22. Jeff Montgomery 44 of 180 games (24.4%)

23. Doug Jones 101 of 141 games (71.6%)

24. Jason Isringhausen 73 of 74 games (98.6%)

25. Bruce Sutter 2 of 107 games (1.9%)


Aside from Troy Percival and Bruce Sutter, everyone else where converted to reliever/closer after being a starter.


2013 Top 10 in Saves

t1. Craig Kimbrel 0 of 71 games (0.0%)

t1. Jim Johnson 98 of 104 games (94.2%)

3. Greg Holland 7 of 67 games (10.4%)

4. Mariano Rivera 66 of 80 games (82.5%)

t5. Joe Nathan 46 of 59 games (78.0%)

t5. Rafael Soriano 60 of 60 games (100.0%)

7. Addison Reed 0 of 43 games (0.0%)

t8. Grant Balfour 24 of 54 games (44.4%)

t8. Sergio Romo 24 of 97 games (24.7%)

t8. Aroldis Chapman 13 of 39 games (33.3%)


Even I will admit the "trend" is to draft and develop closers as "non-starters". I am not sure it bodes well for long term success.

 

[gotime909]

What makes you think it might not bode well for long term success?

 

[Mitchrapp]

No one wants to be a closer when they start out...no one as a kid says "man I want to be a closer.."

 

[grandy]

No one wants to be a closer when they start out...no one as a kid says "man I want to be a closer.."

Maybe not 30 years ago, but I'm sure it's a lot more common with kids who grew up in this era of baseball (mid-90s or so to now).

I'm sure there are a lot of kids who look up to Mariano Rivera, hoping to be like him one day.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Maybe not 30 years ago, but I'm sure it's a lot more common with kids who grew up in this era of baseball (mid-90s or so to now).

I'm sure there are a lot of kids who look up to Mariano Rivera, hoping to be like him one day.

I was thinking about Rivera. He might have changed that but ball players in HS and College still 'all', imo, strive to be starters.

 

[Mitchrapp]

In-fact Rivera, when he started out, I suspect wanted to start.

 

[tomdalton22]

I don't think any of that means much at all. My guess is every one of the circumstances was different.

 

[grandy]

In-fact Rivera, when he started out, I suspect wanted to start.

He also didn't grow up in an era where closers were common, with several being labeled as "stars".

Think of young players just getting into the majors now, many of them were born in the early 90s. When they start learning and watching baseball (mid-late 90s), closers are on every team with many being portrayed as stars in the league. Guys like Rivera, Hoffman, Wagner, K-Rod, etc.

 

[Mitchrapp]

He also didn't grow up in an era where closers were common, with several being labeled as "stars".

Think of young players just getting into the majors now, many of them were born in the early 90s. When they start learning and watching baseball (mid-late 90s), closers are on every team with many being portrayed as stars in the league. Guys like Rivera, Hoffman, Wagner, K-Rod, etc.

I get that point. But it doesn't change the fact that ballplayers strive to be starters not RP. If they could start they'd be starting..

 

[grandy]

I get that point. But it doesn't change the fact that ballplayers strive to be starters not RP. If they could start they'd be starting..

And I disagree. In this era, the rise of one-inning shut-em-down "closers", I'm sure there are many young players who strive to be that guy.

 

[Rebbiv]

What makes you think it might not bode well for long term success?

First, I describe long term success as 10 years or more. Do you consider Fernando Rodney a success?

For every Percival or Sutter, there are many more that don't make it or make it but don't last the 10 years (i.e. just plain blow their arm out). Matt Anderson comes to mind. Maybe even Bruce Rondon.

I gave a list of "successful" relief pitchers and even in that group, less than 15% made it for a long career without starting out as a starter.

Additionally, I think starting helps pitchers learn to pitch and not throw. Very few "closers" are going to make it on stuff alone. Mariano Rivera made it based on his cut fastball alone. Hitters knew it was coming and they still couldn't hit it.

 

[Rebbiv]

And I disagree. In this era, the rise of one-inning shut-em-down "closers", I'm sure there are many young players who strive to be that guy.

Salary range for a top starter is vastly greater than a closer. Certainly, young kids don't care, but by early to late teens they will.

 

[grandy]

Salary range for a top starter is vastly greater than a closer. Certainly, young kids don't care, but by early to late teens they will.

True, but looking at contract history, top-tier closers seem to be the next highest paid after "aces". Starters really seem to have taken off lately, but back in the mid/late-2000s you had guys like Rivera, K-Rod, Nathan, and Wagner averaging north of 10 million a year (Rivera topped at 15 million). I'm sure that had some type of impact on younger players at the time.

2007 - http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/baseball/mlb/salaries/position/p/2007
Rivera, Wagner in top 15
2008 - http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/baseball/mlb/salaries/position/p/2008
Rivera, Ryan in top 15

Then factor in money per inning pitched and the spotlight of appearing in over a third of your teams games every season. That probably appeals to quite a few people.

 

[Mitchrapp]

True, but looking at contract history, top-tier closers seem to be the next highest paid after "aces". Starters really seem to have taken off lately, but back in the mid/late-2000s you had guys like Rivera, K-Rod, Nathan, and Wagner averaging north of 10 million a year (Rivera topped at 15 million). I'm sure that had some type of impact on younger players at the time.

2007 - http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/baseball/mlb/salaries/position/p/2007
Rivera, Wagner in top 15
2008 - http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/baseball/mlb/salaries/position/p/2008
Rivera, Ryan in top 15

Then factor in money per inning pitched and the spotlight of appearing in over a third of your teams games every season. That probably appeals to quite a few people.

I'm not sure that would appeal more than '200 innings' or 'being in front of crowds for two hours at a time'

As far as money, aces make more than top end closers, 2nd tier starters make more than second tier closers and bottom rotation guys make more than average closers etc. Add in the fact, teams have five starters to one closer.

 

[gotime909]

First, I describe long term success as 10 years or more. Do you consider Fernando Rodney a success?

For every Percival or Sutter, there are many more that don't make it or make it but don't last the 10 years (i.e. just plain blow their arm out). Matt Anderson comes to mind. Maybe even Bruce Rondon.

I gave a list of "successful" relief pitchers and even in that group, less than 15% made it for a long career without starting out as a starter.

Additionally, I think starting helps pitchers learn to pitch and not throw. Very few "closers" are going to make it on stuff alone. Mariano Rivera made it based on his cut fastball alone. Hitters knew it was coming and they still couldn't hit it.

But it's somewhat of a new "trend" to draft a pitcher with idea of him being a closer from the start. So even mentioning the all time saves leaders doesn't really make sense. K-Rod is the youngest guy on that list and he was signed 16 years ago.

You also mention the fact that for every Percival or Sutter there are many more that don't make it...

Neither of those guys were drafted to be a "closer". The reason those two were in the pen were because Percival was drafted as a catcher and didn't start pitching until his second professional season and Sutter had a season ending surgery in his first professional season.

There are thousands of starters turned relievers that flame out also.

 

[grandy]

I'm not sure that would appeal more than '200 innings' and 'being in front of crowds for two hours at a time'

As far as money, aces make more than top end closers, 2nd tier starters make more than second tier closers and bottom rotation guys make more than average closers etc. Add in the fact, teams have five starters to one closer.

Impossible to know for sure, I doubt being a workhorse is for everyone. Maybe pitchers want to pitch more often or come in under guaranteed pressure situations. I doubt that money is the only motivating factor for up and coming players (at least I hope not) when picking a position.

Look all I'm saying is that young pitchers shouldn't be generalized as only wanting to be starters. In this era of high-profile closers, that has to have some impact on young fans. I refuse to believe every kid wants to be Verlander/Kershaw, and becoming a closer is just a consolation prize. While not completely different, starting and closing almost feel like apples and oranges, both have different aspects that appeal to each individual.

 

[Rebbiv]

Even I will admit the "trend" is to draft and develop closers as "non-starters". I am not sure it bodes well for long term success.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trend

It is a current thing, hence why I am not sure.

However, history has so far demonstrated that pitchers drafted as a reliever generally do not make it. So why would this trend change?

Also, you mention Percival being drafted as a catcher. Great. Then why didn't he become a starter?

Joe Nathan was drafted as a Shortstop and even he was converted to a starter in the minors.

For every rule there are exceptions. I am not going to argue exceptions to the rule.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Impossible to know for sure, I doubt being a workhorse is for everyone. Maybe pitchers want to pitch more often or come in under guaranteed pressure situations. I doubt that money is the only motivating factor for up and coming players (at least I hope not) when picking a position.

Look all I'm saying is that young pitchers shouldn't be generalized as only wanting to be starters. In this era of high-profile closers, that has to have some impact on young fans. I refuse to believe every kid wants to be Verlander/Kershaw, and becoming a closer is just a consolation prize. While not completely different, starting and closing almost feel like apples and oranges, both have different aspects that appeal to each individual.

I agree with the kids aspect. But as a player and I don't believe it's a consolation prize. Many closers adapt to it, and take it fully on - i.e. enjoy it. And you're right, it's impossible to know. It's a good discussion.

 

[gotime909]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trend

It is a current thing, hence why I am not sure.

However, history has so far demonstrated that pitchers drafted as a reliever generally do not make it. So why would this trend change?

Also, you mention Percival being drafted as a catcher. Great. Then why didn't he become a starter?

Joe Nathan was drafted as a Shortstop and even he was converted to a starter in the minors.

For every rule there are exceptions. I am not going to argue exceptions to the rule.

So you weren't implying that being a starter first generally means you'll be a more successful closer?

 

[grandy]

I agree with the kids aspect. But as a player and I don't believe it's a consolation prize. Many closers adapt to it, and take it fully on - i.e. enjoy it. And you're right, it's impossible to know. It's a good discussion.

Yes....and for the record, I hate the concept of a singular "closer". It makes much more sense to me for teams to bring in relief pitchers based on match-ups and strengths as opposed to one guy who's expected to pitch the entire inning regardless of who's due up.

But the rise of the position and the marketing of several closers over the last 20 years has me thinking it might have some impact on the next generation of pitchers.

Anyway, I don't want to feel like I'm derailing this thread, so carry on.