On Sunday, the Chicago White Sox were leading the Toronto Blue Jays, 7-5, heading into the ninth inning. You are White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen: Whom do you put on the mound to give the Sox a chance to avoid losing three out of four? Middle relievers Matt Thornton and Tony Pena threw only 27 pitches combined in the seventh and eighth combined and gave up only one hit.
But then there’s closer Bobby Jenks, the man who makes about twice as much as Thornton and Pena combined, and he is paid that much to pitch the ninth inning, even with an ERA hovering above six.
I posed that question to my good friend and die-hard Sox fan Danny, who then went on a rant about the save in baseball. Usually we disagree on sports-related arguments, but Danny was spot-on. Not only did he make me realize that the save is one of the worst statistics in all of sports, but right on cue, Jenks made the point crystal clear. The Sox closer allowed the first two men on and then gave up a three-run jack to Fred Lewis as the Sox lost, 9-7.
As a baseball fan, I have always loved closers, and as a kid who enjoyed pitching, I wanted to be a closer. I love the pressure of the ninth inning, the personalized songs as the closers run to the mound with one objective: send the opposing team packing. But as a baseball purist (I still don’t get the DH), I have realized how the save is unfairly manipulating managerial decisions that are costing baseball games.
It’s not like Pena or Thornton couldn’t have done the job or their arms were too tired, but a middle reliever concluding a game? That’s not what the fans or media want. If Ozzie left Tony Pena in the game on Sunday and he blew it, everyone would blast the Sox manager for not having faith in his closer, and his bosses would wonder why he wasn’t making use of their $7.5 million man.
Jim Caple of ESPN.com called the closer the “most overrated position in sports” in 2008, shortly after the passing of Jerome Holtzman, one of the greatest sportswriters of all time, and a baseball historian who invented the save statistic. Caple looked at the Atlanta Braves, an NL East dynasty in the 1990s that had 10 different closers in their stretch of 14 straight division crowns. The lack of a solidified guy to shut the door didn’t have a negative effect on the Braves.
I understand this is a part of baseball that will not change. Fantasy owners love closers to get them saves, and fans go crazy for Mariano Rivera’s entrance or Jonathan Paplebon’s celebrations. Even I’m a culprit-my one White Sox shirt says “Jenks” on the back, as I love watching him mow down the other team in the ninth inning. But the importance of guys getting “saves” has made the “blown save” statistic a common one.
What could be the solution? Danny’s idea was this: Your closer tends to be your best reliever, so put him in the most crucial relief situation. That could be the seventh inning when the other team has loaded the bases in a tie game, or maybe it is in the ninth inning when you are trying to protect a one-run lead. Maybe let the middle relievers throw two innings to close games. Like a closer-by-committee, just none of them are actually “closers.”
But until a manager has the guts to go against the grain and focus on winning games instead of collecting his closers these silly “saves,” these multi-million dollar fireballers who need to throw only 20 pitches a few nights a week will continue to wow fans one night and make us miserable the next.
Sports Columnist Kevin Fishbain is a Medill senior. He can be reached at [email protected].
