Comments on: Closer? We don’t need no stinkin’ closer… or do we?

By: Jim Crikket

Jim Crikket — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:50:52 +0000

“One person is NEVER the difference between success or failure of the season.”

Really? This coming from a fan of the team who’s had to play a 163rd game each of the past two years?

The difference between having a quality, experienced lock down closer and not having one would likely make no more than 3-4 games difference in the W column during the season. But I don’t know how anyone could say that would never be the difference between success and failure. And given the Twins propensity for coughing up leads once they get to the playoffs, I think it could make a significant difference in their playoff success as well.

Remember… getting a Heath Bell or someone similar doesn’t mean you’re getting the difference between that new closer and, say, Matt Guerrier. It means you’re getting the difference between that new closer and Clay Condrey (who would arguably be the pitcher to lose his spot in the pen). When the rest of the arms shift “down” one role, your bullpen becomes that much stronger.

As for what you do with the guy next year, it’s not really an issue in most cases because most of the pitchers that would be acquisition options would be one-year commitments. But if you DID get a guy locked up for two years, what a bonus that would be! If you think Nathan is going to be his reliable self just 12 months after TJ, you’re being very optimistic. And if he IS… great… you’ve got an extra closer to deal for another needed position player.

Do you trade your system’s top prospect for a one year rental? Probably not. But there are some talented players in the Twins’s system that have no realistic chance to break in to this line up in the next couple of years. There’s a deal out there to be done, I have to believe.

By: CapitalBabs

CapitalBabs — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:05:51 +0000

Forgot to add this part into my original text: What do we do with this supposed front line closer some people want us to grab after this year? You really want to set up the issue when Nathan comes back next year? At what cost? Giving up the a guy from the minors with huge amounts of talent and potential? Really??

That just seems incredibly short-sighted for something that is a temporary situation. One person is NEVER the difference between success or failure of the season. I think our BP pitchers will perform better if there is some solidity at the back end because it just takes away of of the uncertainty in a given situation. But they are good pitchers (for the most part) who will go out and do the best they can with what they are given. Whether there is a single person assigned the closer responsibilities or not.

By: jamar1700

jamar1700 — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 11:14:58 +0000

Kinda amused by the idea that they HAVE to get a “proven” closer. As others mentioned it didn’t used to be this way. IMO it’s media driven and I blame the Yankees. Yes, it’s hard to lose someone like Nathan, but that’s life in baseball. Remember how the Twins were supposed to be toast after Justin went down at the end of last season? The Twins are going to do things in their own time and way and to me that is what, if anything, “…by committee” might be code for. The Twins have a good (better than good really) track record of finding someone to fill the role.

By: frightwig

frightwig — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 05:47:01 +0000

I don’t believe that a team necessarily has to have ONE guy hold down the “closer” position, except that these days, in the post-Herzog/LaRussa world, practically all fans and media expect it. As soon as “the committee” blows two or three 9th inning leads in a short stretch, you know the public pressure to conform to convention will be immense. Either Gardy will have to settle on one guy, or Smith will have to make a trade.

I agree that mental belief is key. A pitcher who is aggressive, not afraid to go after hitters, and THROWS STRIKES should do fine in the closer role (as in any pitching role), even if he doesn’t have Joe Nathan’s stuff. I just hope that Gardy finds that guy in his bullpen before we all have to suffer through too many failed auditions.

This is thinking outside the box–because I know the Twins wouldn’t do this unless he really began to struggle in the rotation–but I think it would be intriguing to see Kevin Slowey and his career 4.90 K/BB ratio in the closer role.

By: TheatreBrian

TheatreBrian — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 04:48:55 +0000

Closers didn’t used to exist.

Saves didn’t used to exist.

There’s nothing magical about the 9th inning. Closers, honestly, are more for the fans than the team.

Give it to the guy who has the best chance of getting the outs. Go with Lefty/Righty splits. Use two guys in the 9th, use three! One thing Gardy does REALLY well is manage the bullpen.

But if you gotta pick someone, go with Neshek.