Originally Posted by thatcoolguy_22
Bolded for truth. Marshall stays a set up guy, then he is coming into the the 7th, with 2 outs and 2 on, in a 1 run game against the heart of the order, ending the threat, and touching of the 8th for good measure. Put him in the closers roll and he is facing the 6-7-8 hitters with no one on. I'm firmly entrenched in the best reliever in the pen pitches the big situation bandwagon, and not just because its the 9th.
Cordero: Washed Up.
2012 appears to be the year he jumps the shark. Precipitous fall on all rate stats that have a chance at predicting and coming off a ridiculous season offering daily cigars and rum to Jobu, won't last.
A crazy thought that I'd like the more statistically knowledgeable to weigh in on.
Is it possible for a closer to hang on to declining rate stats for longer than a starter if he is able to a)not walk people and b)not allow home runs.
The reason I ask is, because it's a small sample size, 1 inning per game, maybe 60 or 70 games per year, it seems as though even if Cordero allows more hits, that isn't something as likely to catch up to him because he has less of a window to navigate through in each game.
Because the closer almost always comes in with a clean frame, it is less important for him to strike people out, and more important that he not walk people and avoid giving up home runs. Obviously these two things are important for all pitchers.
But a high leverage reliever often comes in with inherited runners, in that case even one hit can be the difference between wins and losses. A starter obviously benefits from the same three outs per inning, but if he is prone to giving up hits, he's also prone to more of them coming as a string in a big inning.
As a closer, Cordero (or others) are able to give up a few hits in an inning without necessarily giving up a run, and if they get three outs, the slates wiped clean and they pitch another day before anyone gets to see them.