Losing Nathan allows them to shift a guy like Rauch or Guerrier into the closers spot, while letting another one of their 5th starter candidates to make the team. Rauch and Guerrier are by no means Nathan-esque, but they are pitchers who can be inserted into the role and trusted to produce at least league-average results out of the closers role. Their obligation will be to usually pitch one inning a performance, my understanding has always been that one inning shouldn't be too much to ask of any pitcher. Since his shift to the bullpen Nathan has averaged 63.375 innings per year, innings that can be assumed by other members of the pen. It’s unlikely the Twins will get equivalent production, but that’s not fatal. Nathan was a great pitcher, but greatness is not a requirement for the closer’s spot. Losing Nathan might cost them a couple solid performances in the 9th, but as a rule: a closer’s job varies in it’s important on a nightly basis, often with the more important innings falling to the set-up-man. The Twins will take a hit here, but that’s not enough to rule them out of the race. I hope that didn’t’ seem like a lecture, I just needed to put the case out their without leaving anything out.

I agree with you for the most part.

 

I think the one thing you are leaving out is the possibility of whomever they initially insert into the role failing.

 

Not saying it should happen, but for whatever reason, some guys seem to handle the responsibility better than others.

If anyone can overcome an injury like this, it's the Twins.

 

I'm sure they'll sign Smoltz and he'll go on to save 40 out of 42.

I agree with you for the most part.

 

I think the one thing you are leaving out is the possibility of whomever they initially insert into the role failing.

 

Not saying it should happen, but for whatever reason, some guys seem to handle the responsibility better than others.

 

If I had to guess, I say Gardy goes with the closer by committee approach. Seems more like his style.

Not saying it should happen, but for whatever reason, some guys seem to handle the responsibility better than others.

I’ve always been inclined to think it’s more of a mental thing. The closers position does carry a certain reputation, and I think depending on the ballclub you play for that reputation can get to you. I think that’s the reason why guys can succeed interchangeably in the role for the A’s, but suffocate under the pressure for a team like the Yankees. Certain games matter more for certain teams. Those expectations can be tough to live up to.

I could also see them trading a few prospects to the Indians for Kerry Wood (if Cleveland agrees to eat some salary).

I’ve always been inclined to think it’s more of a mental thing. The closers position does carry a certain reputation, and I think depending on the ballclub you play for that reputation can get to you. I think that’s the reason why guys can succeed interchangeably in the role for the A’s, but suffocate under the pressure for a team like the Yankees. Certain games matter more for certain teams. Those expectations can be tough to live up to.

That's pretty much the implication I was trying to make.

Moving one person back in the pen is what kills pitching staffs. All of a sudden your weakest guy throws more innings and the pen gets overworked putting more pressure on the starting staff tiring it out as well. Not good.

 

But all I could think when I heard the news was YES!!!!!!!!!

Moving one person back in the pen is what kills pitching staffs. All of a sudden your weakest guy throws more innings and the pen gets overworked putting more pressure on the starting staff tiring it out as well. Not good.

 

But all I could think when I heard the news was YES!!!!!!!!!

Absolutely. There is a cummulative effect that occurs which can increase the strain on a bullpen exponentially with just one guy going down.

Neyer with another note...this could impact their bullpen and rotation setup if they wind up needing to use their only lefty in the pen in the closer's role even on occasion.

My point being that Ron Gardenhire is probably going to choose someone this month, or in April, and stick with him for a while. Which isn't the worst thing in the world. But the best thing would probably be to let the left-handed Mijares get some save opportunities in left-heavy ninths, with one (or more) of the righties getting the others.

 

That would leave Gardenhire short a left-handed setup man; in fact, the only other left-handed candidate to even win a roster spot is Brian Duensing, who's been a starter throughout his professional career. But Duensing is fighting for the No. 5 slot in the rotation, and sliding him into the bullpen would seem a relatively easy move.

All I have to do is look back to two years ago when Jenks was out for a little while to see what that can do to a bullpen. I said that this was the guy that the Twins could least afford to lose, and I am going to stick by that until someone else proves they can close like Nathan for the Twins.

All I have to do is look back to two years ago when Jenks was out for a little while to see what that can do to a bullpen. I said that this was the guy that the Twins could least afford to lose, and I am going to stick by that until someone else proves they can close like Nathan for the Twins.

To further your point, even if, say Mijares steps in and produces anything close to what Nathan has, then who steps in and takes Mijares' role? And on and on and on....

They always seem to be able to plug in some no-namer into a hole and it works out for them.

Neshek will be that guy, I think.

Wow, that's a HUGE blow.

 

Looks like that bullpen might be a bit crazy. This is our opening.

Real tough blow for them. But I'm not about to dismiss them. I thought they were toast after losing Santana and Hunter. They were a Rick Hahn's son coin flip call away from winning the division.

Wow, that's a HUGE blow.

 

Looks like that bullpen might be a bit crazy. This is our opening.

 

 

Where can I find that original pic of Q???

 

That had me LMAO!

Where can I find that original pic of Q???

 

That had me LMAO!

 

I got it off of Dan McNeil's Facebook.

Edited March 9, 201016 yr by chw42

Real tough blow for them. But I'm not about to dismiss them. I thought they were toast after losing Santana and Hunter. They were a Rick Hahn's son coin flip call away from winning the division.

 

They'll find somebody to replace him and he'll do a decent job. But it still thins out their depth, which is very important.

Edited March 9, 201016 yr by chw42

This will likely end up benefiting the Sox but for some crazy reason I'm not getting any pleasure out of a possible career ending injury to one of the best closers in the game.

a few of the names I've seen bandied about on Twins Blogs and message boards is Liriano or Perkins. if they can't make teh 5th starting spot, move them to the closer spot...or the bullpen and let Rauch close because it would leave them multiple LHP options in the pen

Never like seeing guys get injured, especially good people, but I ain't shedding a tear.

 

 

^^^

a few of the names I've seen bandied about on Twins Blogs and message boards is Liriano or Perkins. if they can't make teh 5th starting spot, move them to the closer spot...or the bullpen and let Rauch close because it would leave them multiple LHP options in the pen

I can totally see it being our luck that Liriano steps into that role and finds it easier on his arm than starting and suddenly dominates

a few of the names I've seen bandied about on Twins Blogs and message boards is Liriano or Perkins. if they can't make teh 5th starting spot, move them to the closer spot...or the bullpen and let Rauch close because it would leave them multiple LHP options in the pen

 

Liriano could make a good closer if he finds his control. But he'd be more valuable as a starter.

 

If the Twins had a better rotation, this loss wouldn't be as big. But since the rotation is pretty mediocre and the 6th and 7th inning spots might get more work, this makes the situation a whole lot worse.

This will likely end up benefiting the Sox but for some crazy reason I'm not getting any pleasure out of a possible career ending injury to one of the best closers in the game.

 

That's because you're a baseball fan first, Sox fan second. And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I'm pretty much the same way. And if anything this gives annoying ass Twins fans (save Benchwarmin) a legitimate excuse from the get-go if we or the Tigers win the division.

Losing Nathan allows them to shift a guy like Rauch or Guerrier into the closers spot, while letting another one of their 5th starter candidates to make the team. Rauch and Guerrier are by no means Nathan-esque, but they are pitchers who can be inserted into the role and trusted to produce at least league-average results out of the closers role. Their obligation will be to usually pitch one inning a performance, my understanding has always been that one inning shouldn't be too much to ask of any pitcher. Since his shift to the bullpen Nathan has averaged 63.375 innings per year, innings that can be assumed by other members of the pen. It’s unlikely the Twins will get equivalent production, but that’s not fatal. Nathan was a great pitcher, but greatness is not a requirement for the closer’s spot. Losing Nathan might cost them a couple solid performances in the 9th, but as a rule: a closer’s job varies in it’s important on a nightly basis, often with the more important innings falling to the set-up-man. The Twins will take a hit here, but that’s not enough to rule them out of the race. I hope that didn’t’ seem like a lecture, I just needed to put the case out their without leaving anything out.

 

I understand what you are saying and it's true that it doesn't seem like it should be very difficult. But it is.

 

However, the difference is the room for error. The closer will come in when the game is on the line. If the replacement is just a little worse which is probable because Nathan is one of the best, the Twins will lose that game. That inning which shouldn't be difficult lost them a game because the manager put them in that position. So, if the closer has only 5 more bad innings than Nathan that would 5 more loses.

 

The closers positions as you stated pitches comparatively few innings. However, the pitcher placed in that position puts all of the pressure for the game on themselves and it is self generated pressure. The point could be made that if the team scored two more runs earlier in the game the closer's position would be as pressure filled. The fact is that the team didn't and the closer puts pressure on himself to convert 3 outs in a game where there is no room for error and most pitchers cannot deal with it.

 

This is why the numbers of comparatively few innings that you state do not tell the whole story. Look at boston where Papelbon could be a top of the line starter but they keep him as a closer because he can handle it. Or the opposite end like LaTroy Hawkins who continues to put up good numbers as a set up man but folds as a closer.

 

The pressure while self imposed is very real and makes those comparatively few innings very important. This dilemma is also created by the manager putting them in this position but that is a different discussion.

 

When Gaines Adams died, Bears fans had this thing where they didn't know how to react. Some immediately began talking about draft pick compensation, salary, etc. Others took aim at this kind of talk, saying it was completely inappropriate.

 

My response was that if we're going to care about the human above all else, then we have to take pause every time we hear about a death on the news. But we don't. It's natural not to. You didnt know the person.

 

Similarly here, I dont feel bad about being happy that we have MANY less "8 inning games" this year. I dont wish pain on anyone, but I dont know Joe Nathan and I dont have a vested interest in his ability to earn a living through this career he's chosen. I don't have to feel bad in a way beyond the normal amount(for someone I dont know personally).