Joe Nathan likely out for the season

[iamshack]

And just to add to that point, Tex, Joe Nathan is an absolute professional. Tough to wish ill-will on a guy that competes as hard and as well as he does.

[whitesoxfan101]

It's hard to quantify how much not having Nathan this year would hurt the Twins IMO simply due to the chain reaction it causes. You have the setup guy that would replace Nathan in his spot, and the guy that would replace the setup guy in the setup spot, etc etc. It's a chain reaction effect in the bullpen, so how much it hurts depends on several guys. It certainly can't help them though.

[Milkman delivers]

One of, one of. Mo has held the crown for quite some time and still does.

 

I agree that he and Rivera are at the very top, but to say Rivera is simply still the best is arguable.

[Milkman delivers]

Here's a interesting tidbit.

 

Matt Thornton was a 2.5, right after Broxton.

 

I'd say that seems right since Matt was probably the best reliever in baseball last year who was not a full-time closer.

 

Really makes you wonder if we should have traded Bobby this off-season while he still had some value.

 

He really didn't have much value, though.

 

I actually like Nathan when he's not pitching against the Sox, but I won't miss him.

 

Suddenly, the AL Central became a wee bit more interesting.

 

Same here.

[Kalapse]

I agree that he and Rivera are at the very top, but to say Rivera is simply still the best is arguable.

I'd love to hear an argument for anyone other than Rivera. His closest competition is Joe Nathan and he trumps him in all the important closer-related stats doesn't matter if it's a 1, 2 or 3 year scale. I mean just as basic as you can get; Rivera's WHIP over the past 2 seasons is 0.78 and he's blown a total of 7 saves over the past 3 years. That's crazy. Over the past 3 seasons his K/BB is nearly 2.5 points higher than his closest competitor.

 

You say Nathan's been the best closer in baseball for a while but even as I try now I can not build a case for that theory.

[Milkman delivers]

I'd love to hear an argument for anyone other than Rivera. His closest competition is Joe Nathan and he trumps him in all the important closer-related stats doesn't matter if it's a 1, 2 or 3 year scale. I mean just as basic as you can get; Rivera's WHIP over the past 2 seasons is 0.78 and he's blown a total of 7 saves over the past 3 years. That's crazy. Over the past 3 seasons his K/BB is nearly 2.5 points higher than his closest competitor.

 

You say Nathan's been the best closer in baseball for a while but even as I try now I can not build a case for that theory.

 

And you say that Rivera's the best, but as LittleHurt mentioned on the first page over the past six years:

 

Nathan Rivera

Saves 246 243

Save % 90.8 93.1

ERA 1.87 1.90

K/9 11.1 8.7

Opp. BA .182 .206

WHIP .093 .094

 

Those are some incredibly similar stats. I said best, and then changed it to say it's arguable that either of them has been the best.

[iamshack]

I'd be interested to see their saves broken down by what their team's run lead was when they came into the game. My guess is Nathan's opportunities have been tighter than Rivera's.

 

Just a guess though.

[sircaffey]

Who you going with in game 7, 2-1 lead? Rivera or Nathan? I'm going with Rivera.

[chw42]

And just to add to that point, Tex, Joe Nathan is an absolute professional. Tough to wish ill-will on a guy that competes as hard and as well as he does.

 

Yeah the same guy who cried about the coin toss after the Twins lost the game.

 

He is definitely a great professional. After all, being a sore loser is what it's all about.

Edited March 10, 2010 by chw42

[chw42]

I'd be interested to see their saves broken down by what their team's run lead was when they came into the game. My guess is Nathan's opportunities have been tighter than Rivera's.

 

Just a guess though.

 

Just go look at their leverages when they enter games.

 

Nathan: 1.64

Rivera: 1.72

 

All from last season. Rivera has had a higher leverage in his career by about .3.

[Kalapse]

I'll come up with something more comprehensive tomorrow but for now I throw out 2 things one of which could be considered breaking the ever so important sample size rule:

 

Multi-inning saves since 2004:

Nathan: 11

Rivera: 45

Nathan has struggled mightily in the playoffs as a closer to the tune of a 4.70 ERA, 1.83 WHIP and .830 OPS against in 7.2 IP. I know, s*** sample size but the fact remains. Meanwhile Rivera has put up a 0.70 ERA, 0.84 WHIP and .432 OPS against in the playoffs since '04.

[Kalapse]

Just go look at their leverages when they enter games.

 

Nathan: 1.64

Rivera: 1.72

 

All from last season. Rivera has had a higher leverage in his career by about .3.

Rivera's gmLI from last season was actually 1.84 compared to Nathan's 1.64.

[chw42]

Rivera's gmLI from last season was actually 1.84 compared to Nathan's 1.64.

 

I think I looked at the wrong column. Doh.

[Benchwarmerjim]

I dont think its an argument. Rivera is the best closer in baseball. hands down. Nathan would probably lead the pack for second best

[SoxFan1]

This is the Minnesota Twins. Every time someone goes down, they bring someone up who does just as well. Is this a huge loss, sure? Is some no-name AAA reliever going to come in and play well? Probably.

[iamshack]

Yeah the same guy who cried about the coin toss after the Twins lost the game.

 

He is definitely a great professional. After all, being a sore loser is what it's all about.

Right, because a f***ing coin toss is a great solution to determine which team gets home field advantage in the event of a tie.

 

I can't imagine that has anything to do with why they changed that as the solution though.

[Kyyle23]

MLBTraderumors said the Twins are talking to the Jays about Jason Frasor(as are the Cubs)

[chw42]

Right, because a f***ing coin toss is a great solution to determine which team gets home field advantage in the event of a tie.

 

I can't imagine that has anything to do with why they changed that as the solution though.

 

If the Twins would have won, I doubt he would have said anything.

[iamshack]

If the Twins would have won, I doubt he would have said anything.

Of course not, there would have been no need.

 

They play 162 games. Home field advantage is a huge factor in a ballgame. That factor, for the deciding game, is determined by flipping a freaking coin.

 

Finding that such a ridiculous manner in which to determine such a vital factor leaves a bit to be desired hardly makes him unprofessional.

 

But hey, whatever floats your boat.

[chw42]

Of course not, there would have been no need.

 

They play 162 games. Home field advantage is a huge factor in a ballgame. That factor, for the deciding game, is determined by flipping a freaking coin.

 

Finding that such a ridiculous manner in which to determine such a vital factor leaves a bit to be desired hardly makes him unprofessional.

 

But hey, whatever floats your boat.

 

If he was professional, he would have done the same thing regardless of the Twins winning or losing the game. But as you admitted, he probably wouldn't have had they won.

Edited March 10, 2010 by chw42

[iamshack]

If he was professional, he would have done the same thing regardless of the Twins winning or losing the game. But as you admitted, he probably wouldn't have had they won.

Had we had to play in Minnesota that final game, I have a hard time believing we wouldn't have heard some complaining done from our side.

[chw42]

Had we had to play in Minnesota that final game, I have a hard time believing we wouldn't have heard some complaining done from our side.

 

Hardly, we lost the season series. We shouldn't have gotten home field for that game in that perspective.

 

However, since it was based on luck, and we had luck on our side, what can you do?

 

A coin toss decides who gets the ball in the NFL for overtime. There's no NFL players complaining about that rule out loud.

[iamshack]

Hardly, we lost the season series. We shouldn't have gotten home field for that game in that perspective.

 

However, since it was based on luck, and we had luck on our side, what can you do?

 

A coin toss decides who gets the ball in the NFL for overtime. There's no NFL players complaining about that rule out loud.

Umm....yeah

[southsider2k5]

Hardly, we lost the season series. We shouldn't have gotten home field for that game in that perspective.

 

However, since it was based on luck, and we had luck on our side, what can you do?

 

A coin toss decides who gets the ball in the NFL for overtime. There's no NFL players complaining about that rule out loud.

 

What?

[NorthSideSox72]

This is the Minnesota Twins. Every time someone goes down, they bring someone up who does just as well. Is this a huge loss, sure? Is some no-name AAA reliever going to come in and play well? Probably.

As good as Nathan? Come on now. The chances of some nobody coming in and being as good as Nathan are exceedingly slim. The Twins aren't some magical beast that blows unicorns capable of closing games out of its ass. They are a baseball team.