As somebody keeps mentioning on the board, using a closer for a closer's sake makes no sense. If you're taking out the starter going into the 8th and you have the heart of the line-up coming up, obviously we should put in our hottest reliever (at present that is Hermanson). Likewise if we're going into the ninth and the batters coming up + the bench are like .330 against righties, but only .178 against lefties, then we should obviously use Marte.

 

"Set-up man", "closer" those are all meaningless monikers that might actually hurt a team's chance to win.

That's interesting.  I wonder what it would take to get Wagner from the Phils...

 

prolly too much

As somebody keeps mentioning on the board, using a closer for a closer's sake makes no sense.  If you're taking out the starter going into the 8th and you have the heart of the line-up coming up, obviously we should put in our hottest reliever (at present that is Hermanson).  Likewise if we're going into the ninth and the batters coming up + the bench are like .330 against righties, but only .178 against lefties, then we should obviously use Marte.

 

"Set-up man", "closer" those are all meaningless monikers that might actually hurt a team's chance to win.

 

I agree with you, but with this caveat. There are pitchers that need to have a defined role or they feel like they are twisting in the wind. The fact that this team does not have that problem tells me that Ozzie and Cooper have sold them on the team mindset, and done a damn good job of it. As Hermanson said, (paraphrasing here) Whether I pitch in the 6th inning or the 9th, I'm the closer because I have close out the inning.