Poll: is Mariano Rivera one of the top 10 pitchers of all time?

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think the majority will vote no but let's see.

[AGuinness]

With almost no thought, I can name 4 pitchers in his own era that were better by leaps and bounds (if not more): Pedro, Clemens, Big Unit and Maddux....

[Cmount76]

With almost no thought, I can name 4 pitchers in his own era that were better by leaps and bounds (if not more): Pedro, Clemens, Big Unit and Maddux....

+1 - Add to that Young, Matty, WaJo, Gibson, and Ryan and without even thinking about it, he's off the list.

[Peter_Spaeth]

To make a more immediate comparison, I would take Halladay over Rivera and probably Mussina if I thought about it. To me a HOF caliber starter is more valuable than the best one inning relief pitcher.

[AGuinness]

And for the record, and as a Red Sox fan, Rivera was the greatest reliever of all-time, no doubt and a slam-dunk Hall of Fame player. His body of work speaks for itself and I don't want to take anything away from his brilliant career.
Perhaps an interesting follow-up question, though, would be if Rivera's cutter was one of the top-10 pitches of all time...

[sfh24]

Not in the top 40.

****as a side note, Mussina getting in is nearly as much of a disgrace as Baines/Trammel/Morris. Very disheartening trend for the sanctity of the HOF.

[Ricky]

+1 - Add to that Young, Matty, WaJo, Gibson, and Ryan and without even thinking about it, he's off the list.

Add Koufax, Grove, Seaver, Carlton, Randy Johnson...

[frankbmd]

Not in the top 40.

****as a side note, Mussina getting in is nearly as much of a disgrace as Baines/Trammel/Morris. Very disheartening trend for the sanctity of the HOF.

Never dis an inductee who wore a Yankee uniform on this forum.

Too many objective Yankee fans lurking here.:eek:

[sfh24]

Never dis an inductee who wore a Yankee uniform on this forum.

Too many objective Yankee fans lurking here.:eek:

You make a good point. I may have made a catastrophic mistake of diminishing (2) Yankees in one post!

[oldjudge]

People keep saying that batters only saw Mariano once a game. That is true, but they often saw him multiple times a series and he basically threw one pitch. They knew what was coming—they just couldn’t hit it.

[doug.goodman]

People keep saying that batters only saw Mariano once a game. That is true, but they often saw him multiple times a series and he basically threw one pitch. They knew what was coming—they just couldn’t hit it.

So what.

Are you telling me that if you had one of the 10 best pitchers of all time on your team you would only let him pitch 70 innings a season, most (if not all) coming in when you had a lead?

Seriously?

He was really really good, probably the best, at the job he was asked to do, I'll acknowledge that, but top 10 of all pitchers all time?

Come on.

Doug "Roy Gleason has a lifetime batting average of 1.000, slugging percentage of 2.000 and OPS of 3.000" Goodman

[ullmandds]

So what.

Are you telling me that if you had one of the 10 best pitchers of all time on your team you would only let him pitch 70 innings a season, most (if not all) coming in when you had a lead?

Seriously?

He was really really good, probably the best, at the job he was asked to do, I'll acknowledge that, but top 10 of all pitchers all time?

Come on.

Doug "Roy Gleason has a lifetime batting average of 1.000, slugging percentage of 2.000 and OPS of 3.000" Goodman

agree with this!

[alywa]

Off the top of my head...

Johnson, Mathewson, Alexander, Grove, Koufax, Gibson, Ryan, Carlton, Seaver, Clemens, Maddux, Johnson, Martinez, Kershaw

Best reliever of all time though

[clydepepper]

People keep saying that batters only saw Mariano once a game. That is true, but they often saw him multiple times a series and he basically threw one pitch. They knew what was coming—they just couldn’t hit it.

…for a few years, Sutter had that effect, but he was never considered the GOAT or even in the pasture.


Rivera added longevity, but he was still just a one-inning master, perhaps the best one-inning pitcher ever.

================================================== ================================================== ====

Some of the best starters could be just as dominant the first time through the lineup...even so-so pitchers could even be that dominant early in the game on in a while.


True that Rivera did it time and time again, but...

How many times did any one hitter get to face Rivera more than once in the same game?

I'll bet the answer is very few.

Hitting at the big league level requires one to adjust from at-bat to at-bat.

Starting pitchers also have to adjust from at-bat to at-bat.

One-Inning pitchers, even their GOAT, never have to make that adjustment.

=

[doug.goodman]

How many times did any one hitter get to face Rivera more than once in the same game? =

According to Baseball Reference, as a reliever he faced 68 batters a second time in a game and 2 batters a third time.

[oldjudge]

So what.

Are you telling me that if you had one of the 10 best pitchers of all time on your team you would only let him pitch 70 innings a season, most (if not all) coming in when you had a lead?

Seriously?

He was really really good, probably the best, at the job he was asked to do, I'll acknowledge that, but top 10 of all pitchers all time?

Come on.

Doug "Roy Gleason has a lifetime batting average of 1.000, slugging percentage of 2.000 and OPS of 3.000" Goodman

What I am telling you is that if I had one batter to get out and I could choose any pitcher to do it I would choose Mariano.

[alywa]

What I am telling you is that if I had one batter to get out and I could choose any pitcher to do it I would choose Mariano.

So long as it wasn't Edgar Martinez

Martinez vs. Rivera (includes postseason): .579 / .652 / .1.053 in 23 plate appearances

[doug.goodman]

So long as it wasn't Edgar Martinez

Martinez vs. Rivera (includes postseason): .579 / .652 / .1.053 in 23 plate appearances

You beat me to that one...

Nolan was the "Edgar killer", he was 1-19, with a walk

[oldjudge]

There was a great article in the WSJ sports section yesterday about Rivera and his matchups with Martinez. Edgar owned him early on till Mariano developed a sinker that broke in to righties. After that Edgar hit .200 against him in limited plate appearances. BTW, every pitcher has someone who owned him: Pujols hit .452 against Randy Johnson, Marquis Grissom hit .565 against Pedro, Shawn Green hit .543 against Smoltz. Ty Cobb hit .366 against Walter Johnson which was essentially his career average against all pitchers. Does that mean that Johnson was no better than an average pitcher? Well, against Cobb that was true, but obviously not true for most other batters.

[doug.goodman]

What I am telling you is that if I had one batter to get out and I could choose any pitcher to do it I would choose Mariano.

What I am telling you is that if YOU had a GAME you needed to win, and you could choose any pitcher, you WOULD NOT choose Mariano to be anywhere near the mound until after your team had played 8 innings AND given him a lead.

[Ricky]

"Edgar owned him early on till Mariano developed a sinker that broke in to righties."

Wait - I thought Mariano supporters are saying he only had one pitch and although everyone knew that one pitch was coming, they couldn't hit it?

[Shoeless Moe]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/9718373/mariano-rivera-overrated-well-beloved-respected

[packs]

What I am telling you is that if YOU had a GAME you needed to win, and you could choose any pitcher, you WOULD NOT choose Mariano to be anywhere near the mound until after your team had played 8 innings AND given him a lead.

Let me ask you something: do you win the game in the 9th inning or not?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Let me ask you something: do you win the game in the 9th inning or not?

No more so than in any other inning.

3 in the first count the same as 3 in the ninth. Etc.

[doug.goodman]

Let me ask you something: do you win the game in the 9th inning or not?

Not if you allow 112 runs in the third inning...

[packs]

No more so than in any other inning.

3 in the first count the same as 3 in the ninth. Etc.

Is that right? I don't remember a game ending after someone got 3 outs in the first inning.

[doug.goodman]

Is that right? I don't remember a game ending after someone got 3 outs in the first inning.

But it could end in the 6th, and Mariano wouldn't be warmed up...

So I guess your point is that the 9th inning is more important than the 1st inning?

Ok.

I respectfully disagree.

[packs]

My point is the 9th inning wins you the game. You can talk about the 6th inning all you want. You aren't going to win the game because someone pitched well 3 innings ago. You only win after the 9th.

[Ricky]

packs, how do you think Rivera would have fared as a starting pitcher? How long would he have been able to maintain a peak performance as a starter? Would he have been as effective going 7 or 8 innings?

And, if you're all about the 9th inning, what if Rivera had pitched for a team that had the lead to protect much less frequently than the Yankees?

[packs]

packs, how do you think Rivera would have fared as a starting pitcher? How long would he have been able to maintain a peak performance as a starter? Would he have been as effective going 7 or 8 innings?

And, if you're all about the 9th inning, what if Rivera had pitched for a team that had the lead to protect much less frequently than the Yankees?

None of that matters. You don't win the game without closing out the 9th inning. The question is who is the pitcher you want on the mound for the most important inning of the game. The answer is Mariano Rivera.

[oldjudge]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/9718373/mariano-rivera-overrated-well-beloved-respected


2013 article by a writer who was later fired by ESPN. I think he is now blogging about golf and will probably soon be left to bashing high school cheerleader competitors.

[Ricky]

Yes, Rivera is the greatest one inning closer ever. We all agree on that. What we don't agree on is that he is the greatest pitcher of all time... or in the Top 10.

[packs]

Yes, Rivera is the greatest one inning closer ever. We all agree on that. What we don't agree on is that he is the greatest pitcher of all time... or in the Top 10.

Define pitcher. Because if its the pitcher who wins you the game, Mariano is the best hands down.

[Ricky]

Cy Young and his 511 wins say hello.

[rats60]

I would have these guys ahead of Rivera
Grover Alexander
Steve Carlton
Dizzy Dean
Bob Feller
Whitey Ford
Bob Gibson
Lefty Grove
Carl Hubbell
Randy Johnson
Walter Johnson
Sandy Koufax
Greg Maddux
Juan Marichal
Pedro Martinez
Christy Mathewson
Jim Palmer
Eddie Plank
Nolan Ryan
Tom Seaver
Warren Spahn
Cy Young

So #22 on my list.

[packs]

I think we can agree on this point: getting the win and winning the game are not the same thing.

[doug.goodman]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/9718373/mariano-rivera-overrated-well-beloved-respected

Nailed it.

[doug.goodman]

Define pitcher. Because if its the pitcher who wins you the game, Mariano is the best hands down.

Your hands may be down, I'm thinking that Cy Young (and others) have a different hand position...

[Ricky]

I think we can agree on this point: getting the win and winning the game are not the same thing.

You can't win the game if the pitcher(s) before you don't put you in that position. I think you are in a deep minority in considering Mariano the greatest pitcher of all time, but as you are obviously a diehard Yankees fan, I do understand it. As much as I appreciate what he accomplished over a long time in his role, I can't consider a one inning pitcher who probably would have failed miserably and not lasted anywhere near as long had he been asked to throw 250 innings a year, the greatest pitcher of all time. Not up against starting pitchers who, in many cases, were as dominant or moreso in their roles as he was.

[MichelaiTorres83]

My point is the 9th inning wins you the game. You can talk about the 6th inning all you want. You aren't going to win the game because someone pitched well 3 innings ago. You only win after the 9th.

You blew right past his point riding on top of a rocket ship. A game can be called after the 5th inning if the ump calls the game. Or the 6th, 7th, 8th and yes also 9th inning before the bottom of the inning.

https://goo.gl/images/HoUPbW

[doug.goodman]

Define pitcher. Because if its the pitcher who wins you the game, Mariano is the best hands down.

Stealing from the ESPN story from 2013 that Paul posted a link to below :

Let me again cite the work of Project Retrosheet founder Dave Smith:


Teams leading by one run after eight innings have gone on to win 85.7 percent of the time. That number goes up to 93.7 percent when leading by two runs, and 97.5 percent when leading by three runs.

Mull that over, and then please tell me why Rivera is so amazing for having an 89.1 percent career save rate (which, by the way, is lower than Joe Nathan's). Because, basically, Rivera was not used except in games the Yankees were going to win 88 percent of the time anyway. Actually, the percentages were usually higher than that. According to Elias, of Rivera's 652 career saves, just under a third (210) were with a one-run lead when he took the mound while 216 were with a two-run lead, 180 with a three-run lead and 46 with a lead of at least four runs.


To paraphrase, Mariano has :
210 saves when he came in with an 85.7% chance of winning
216 saves when he came in with a 93.7% chance of winning
180 saves when he came in with a 97.5% chance of winning
46 saves when he came in with better than a 97.5% chance of winning

The save is a stupid stat.

As I said before, he was really really good, probably the best, at the job he was asked to do.

Doug

[doug.goodman]

https://goo.gl/images/HoUPbW

Hahahaha, amazing.

[doug.goodman]

I think we can agree on this point: getting the win and winning the game are not the same thing.

I will grant you the point that they are different things, and Mariano wasn't good at either of them.

"Saving" the win (when bolstered by a 90% chance of winning due to the game situation when he pitched) is something that Mariano was good at.

"Getting the win" or "winning the game" not so much.

[packs]

I will grant you the point that they are different things, and Mariano wasn't good at either of them.

"Saving" the win (when bolstered by a 90% chance of winning due to the game situation when he pitched) is something that Mariano was good at.

"Getting the win" or "winning the game" not so much.


I see those numbers listed in the article but I still don't understand where they come from. I posted this the other day. The highest save percentage for a team in 2018 was only 75 %. So where does that 90% chance of winning come from? The league average for all of MLB was only 66%.

http://proxy.espn.com/mlb/stats/team?stat=pitching&sort=savePct&type=expanded&order=true

[doug.goodman]

I see those numbers listed in the article but I still don't understand where they come from. I posted this the other day. The highest save percentage for a team in 2018 was only 75 %. So where does that 90% chance of winning come from? The league average for all of MLB was only 66%.

http://proxy.espn.com/mlb/stats/team?stat=pitching&sort=savePct&type=expanded&order=true

It comes in your beloved 9th inning, when a team goes in while leading.

[BearBailey]

No, not even close.

[doug.goodman]

No, not even close.

Quoting what you are responding to keeps the rest of us from reading your response and thinking "huh?"

[packs]

It comes in your beloved 9th inning, when a team goes in while leading.

Then why is there such a disparity between what the article says and what actual yearly stats show from one season re: save percentage? Are you saying that the majority of those save percentage opportunities came with something other than a lead?

[Bigdaddy]

Trying to compare a starting pitcher and a relief pitcher is like trying to compare a first baseman with a shortstop. They are both infielders, but are asked to do two very different things.

Would you vote Lou Gehrig as the best infielder ever? Over Wags, Ripken, Brooks, Schmitty, etc?? Why, he didn't even have to throw the ball.

Of course not, they are two different positions, but both infielders. Just like relievers and starters are both pitchers, but different positions.

This is a baited question. It should be: Was Mo the greatest reliever ever?

The game changes. Roles change. Relief pitchers are now not just failed starters, designated hitters are a thing. And we are seeing even more changes with more defensive shifts, hitters swinging for the fence, higher strikeout numbers, managers handling pitchers differently, off-season conditioning, etc.

Mo was the greatest at what he did. He shortened the game to 8 innings for the Yankees on defense. He wasn't a starter any more than he was a shortstop. So don't try to compare him to one.

BTW, I voted 'no' on this question, but I think it was the wrong question.

[doug.goodman]

Then why is there such a disparity between what the article says and what actual yearly stats show from one season re: save percentage? Are you saying that the majority of those save percentage opportunities came with something other than a lead?

Not every win has a save attached to it.

[packs]

Not every win has a save attached to it.

But when it does, the average for all teams saving the game is only 66%. So I don't really know what you're talking about when you try to diminish Rivera's ability to save the game.

[BearBailey]

When posting to the original question of is Mariano a top 10 pitcher and not to a quote, there will be no quote attached.

[doug.goodman]

...but I think it was the wrong question.

I agree with everything you said accept the last part. Based on conversations taking place since his unanimous induction it was a valid question, posed not so much to elicit a response but to make a point.

And I agree with your vote.

[doug.goodman]

When posting to the original question of is Mariano a top 10 pitcher and not to a quote, there will be no quote attached.

Ahha! Good point.

Doug

[bnorth]

I would have these guys ahead of Rivera
Grover Alexander
Steve Carlton
Dizzy Dean
Bob Feller
Whitey Ford
Bob Gibson
Lefty Grove
Carl Hubbell
Randy Johnson
Walter Johnson
Sandy Koufax
Greg Maddux
Juan Marichal
Pedro Martinez
Christy Mathewson
Jim Palmer
Eddie Plank
Nolan Ryan
Tom Seaver
Warren Spahn
Cy Young

So #22 on my list.

Strange that that list doesn't even contain the best pitcher of all time Roger Clemens.

I agree that Rivera is not a top 20 pitcher of all time but he is by far the best reliever of all time.

[frankbmd]

My point is the 9th inning wins you the game. You can talk about the 6th inning all you want. You aren't going to win the game because someone pitched well 3 innings ago. You only win after the 9th.

This argument leads to the conclusion that Mariano was over-utilized. He should have entered the game with the lead and two outs in the ninth. Instead of a one inning pitcher he could be immortalized as the 27th out pitcher. You can't win the game without the 27th out, right?

[Peter_Spaeth]

I would have these guys ahead of Rivera
Grover Alexander
Steve Carlton
Dizzy Dean
Bob Feller
Whitey Ford
Bob Gibson
Lefty Grove
Carl Hubbell
Randy Johnson
Walter Johnson
Sandy Koufax
Greg Maddux
Juan Marichal
Pedro Martinez
Christy Mathewson
Jim Palmer
Eddie Plank
Nolan Ryan
Tom Seaver
Warren Spahn
Cy Young

So #22 on my list.

I would go another 20 starters at least before I got to my first reliever/closer. Who would be Rivera.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This argument leads to the conclusion that Mariano was over-utilized. He should have entered the game with the lead and two outs in the ninth. Instead of a one inning pitcher he could be immortalized as the 27th out pitcher. You can't win the game without the 27th out, right?

Or you could have saved him for the last strike. Lights out!!

[rats60]

Strange that that list doesn't even contain the best pitcher of all time Roger Clemens.

I agree that Rivera is not a top 20 pitcher of all time but he is by far the best reliever of all time.

Best pitcher at cheating. Gaylord Perry isn't on my list either because with cheaters you will never know how much of their success was skill and how much was because of their cheating.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Best pitcher at cheating. Gaylord Perry isn't on my list either because with cheaters you will never know how much of their success was skill and how much was because of their cheating.

Whitey Ford was allegedly masterful at scuffing up the ball, speaking of which.

[doug.goodman]

This argument leads to the conclusion that Mariano was over-utilized. He should have entered the game with the lead and two outs in the ninth. Instead of a one inning pitcher he could be immortalized as the 27th out pitcher. You can't win the game without the 27th out, right?

Laughing out loud. Fantastic.

That's kind of where your twilight zone post was heading, I think.

Retrosheet founder (and my vote for unanimous induction to the HOF) David Smith found that the 9th may not be the most important inning :

https://www.retrosheet.org/Research/SmithD/7th%20Inning%20is%20the%20Key.pdf

[frankbmd]

Or you could have saved him for the last strike. Lights out!!

Good point, but if a pitcher is replaced while facing a batter due to injury or whatever, the count determines which pitcher gets the credit for the batter. If the batter has two strikes when the new pitcher enters the game, I believe the first pitcher gets credit for a strikeout.

So using this strategy Rivera could have saved 1500 games, with no strike outs and no innings pitched. Assuming a foul ball here and there his average pitch count would be 1.083.

Reductio ad absurdum arguments can lead to insight clarifying slightly less absurd premises.;)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Apologies if Smith's "The Myth of the Closer" has already been posted. The guy is a genius, makes Bill James look like a high school geek.

https://www.retrosheet.org/Research/SmithD/MythOfTheCloser.pdf

[glchen]

I did not pick Mariano as one of the top 10 pitchers of all time. However, I'll add this. If I were playing something like an All Time All Star game, where me and someone else can pick any player from history for our teams to face each other in a best of 7 series, Mariano Rivera would be one of the top 5 pitchers that I would pick for my team. The reason is that most of the top pitchers on the list are starting pitchers, and wouldn't necessarily have the same success as a relief pitcher. Sure, some pitchers like Randy Johnson have worked well as closers, but others haven't. I'd still use Rivera to close out the last 2 innings over any pitcher if I had a choice.

[bnorth]

Whitey Ford was allegedly masterful at scuffing up the ball, speaking of which.

Plus there are 2 guys on that list that if there was any way of really proving if and how many PEDs they done. I would bet the farm they done more PEDs than Roger Clemens.

I do completely understand his list and his right to pick who is on it and why. I know I am very bias when I make lists and talk a lot of smack about a few all-time greats as being PED users. Then other PED users I am a big fan of.:eek:

[doug.goodman]

Apologies if Smith's "The Myth of the Closer" has already been posted. The guy is a genius, makes Bill James look like a high school geek.

https://www.retrosheet.org/Research/SmithD/MythOfTheCloser.pdf

Thank you

[Peter_Spaeth]

I did not pick Mariano as one of the top 10 pitchers of all time. However, I'll add this. If I were playing something like an All Time All Star game, where me and someone else can pick any player from history for our teams to face each other in a best of 7 series, Mariano Rivera would be one of the top 5 pitchers that I would pick for my team. The reason is that most of the top pitchers on the list are starting pitchers, and wouldn't necessarily have the same success as a relief pitcher. Sure, some pitchers like Randy Johnson have worked well as closers, but others haven't. I'd still use Rivera to close out the last 2 innings over any pitcher if I had a choice.

Gary what starters other than Eck and Smoltz, both of whom were great closers, have enough of a track record that you can say they weren't effective as closers? A few games doesn't mean much at all due to sample size.

[oldjudge]

Stealing from the ESPN story from 2013 that Paul posted a link to below :

Let me again cite the work of Project Retrosheet founder Dave Smith:


Teams leading by one run after eight innings have gone on to win 85.7 percent of the time. That number goes up to 93.7 percent when leading by two runs, and 97.5 percent when leading by three runs.

Mull that over, and then please tell me why Rivera is so amazing for having an 89.1 percent career save rate (which, by the way, is lower than Joe Nathan's). Because, basically, Rivera was not used except in games the Yankees were going to win 88 percent of the time anyway. Actually, the percentages were usually higher than that. According to Elias, of Rivera's 652 career saves, just under a third (210) were with a one-run lead when he took the mound while 216 were with a two-run lead, 180 with a three-run lead and 46 with a lead of at least four runs.


To paraphrase, Mariano has :
210 saves when he came in with an 85.7% chance of winning
216 saves when he came in with a 93.7% chance of winning
180 saves when he came in with a 97.5% chance of winning
46 saves when he came in with better than a 97.5% chance of winning

The save is a stupid stat.

As I said before, he was really really good, probably the best, at the job he was asked to do.

Doug
You are comparing apples and oranges. Save rate is not win rate. You can blow the save and still win the game so save rate is the more restrictive of the two. I think we can all agree that starter and closer are two different pitching positions. We can also agree that Mariano was by far the greatest closer ever. Mariano was superior to any other closer ever by more than the best starting pitcher ever (you fill in your choice)has been to the second best starting pitcher ever. I’ll stop there. If I had to get one hitter out and could pick one pitcher to do it it would be Mariano. If I needed a starting pitcher for game 7 of the World Series, and I would be hoping he could go deep into the game, it would not be Mariano.

[jhs5120]

Best pitcher at cheating. Gaylord Perry isn't on my list either because with cheaters you will never know how much of their success was skill and how much was because of their cheating.

Ahem.. Nolan Ryan

On a side note, I said yes. The ERA+ leader by a country mile, top 5 in WHIP and WPA. The guy was a beast.

[doug.goodman]

You are comparing apples and oranges. Save rate is not win rate. You can blow the save and still win the game so save rate is the more restrictive of the two. I think we can all agree that starter and closer are two different pitching positions. We can also agree that Mariano was by far the greatest closer ever. Mariano was superior to any other closer ever by more than the best starting pitcher ever (you fill in your choice)has been to the second best starting pitcher ever. I’ll stop there. If I had to get one hitter out and could pick one pitcher to do it it would be Mariano. If I needed a starting pitcher for game 7 of the World Series, and I would be hoping he could go deep into the game, it would not be Mariano.

I'm not comparing anything, I'm saying that while he was really really good at what he was asked to do, he was still very one dimensional and the difference between him and any other "closer" is best argued by the David Smith research paper that Peter posted below.

He was a really really good 1 inning pitcher when staked to a lead.

We never really got to see him pitch much in other situations.

Doug

[Hankphenom]

Apologies if Smith's "The Myth of the Closer" has already been posted. The guy is a genius, makes Bill James look like a high school geek.

https://www.retrosheet.org/Research/SmithD/MythOfTheCloser.pdf

Terrific stuff there! I wonder if anyone has taken this further by analyzing whether relief pitching itself is actually effective other than in situations where the starting pitcher has been hurt or isn't feeling well. In other words, when pitchers are getting bombed and are relieved, are the results any better than when they stay in and finish the game? You can't tell me that on the rare occasions when Walter Johnson was taken out of a game, every batter in the other dugout didn't say a little "thank you" under their breaths. Also, there must be a corollary analysis somewhere of how much or even whether starting pitchers do worse as the game goes into the last few innings. Ironically, Johnson himself appears to be the beneficiary of the first great example of relief specialization in 1924-25 when the big rookie Fred Marberry would come in to spell him in the 8th or 9th innings of close games. Of course, age as a reason for taking a starting pitcher out might be more accurately lumped in with the categories of injury or illness. In his latter days as a pitcher and then especially in his 7-year stint as a manager, Johnson got to witness the early days of the phenomenon of the relief specialist, and he didn't think much of it. "If pitchers aren't allowed to go deep into games, they will lose the ability to go deep into games," is a reasonable paraphrase of his attitude and quotes on the subject. To get back to Rivera, he was a dominating pitcher, there's no question about that. But if it turns out on close analysis that closing--or relief pitching itself--is an ineffective strategy even for the best of them, just how great can his career or that of any other relief pitcher be considered?

[doug.goodman]

To get back to Rivera, he was a dominating pitcher, there's no question about that. But if it turns out on close analysis that closing--or relief pitching itself--is an ineffective strategy even for the best of them, just how great can his career or that of any other relief pitcher be considered?

Yes.

Doug "That's all I have been saying" Goodman



PS - "He was really really good at what he was asked to do"

[Peter_Spaeth]

You are comparing apples and oranges. Save rate is not win rate. You can blow the save and still win the game so save rate is the more restrictive of the two. I think we can all agree that starter and closer are two different pitching positions. We can also agree that Mariano was by far the greatest closer ever. Mariano was superior to any other closer ever by more than the best starting pitcher ever (you fill in your choice)has been to the second best starting pitcher ever. I’ll stop there. If I had to get one hitter out and could pick one pitcher to do it it would be Mariano. If I needed a starting pitcher for game 7 of the World Series, and I would be hoping he could go deep into the game, it would not be Mariano.

You have to wonder at his remarkably low inherited runner total. If he was indeed the best ever at getting that one batter out, why wasn't he used more in emergency situations, as opposed to starting the ninth with a lead? 8th inning, two men on, none out, down by a run, don't you want your best pitcher in there to keep the game in check? But I think Rivera was rarely the guy who got that call.

[Throttlesteer]

I'm really dreading the discussion that comes about when Jeter goes in. I'm sure he'll be considered the greatest ever by someone.

[doug.goodman]

I'm really dreading the discussion that comes about when Jeter goes in. I'm sure he'll be considered the greatest ever by someone.

At least he played entire games...

[Peter_Spaeth]

I'm really dreading the discussion that comes about when Jeter goes in. I'm sure he'll be considered the greatest ever by someone.

It will be very hard to argue he was better than Wagner or Ripken or (assuming you count him as a SS) ARod. For Jeter I think much of your rating depends on how much you count defense for a SS -- if you count it a lot, that's going to take away from him because he was pretty average all told.

[bnorth]

I'm really dreading the discussion that comes about when Jeter goes in. I'm sure he'll be considered the greatest ever by someone.

I would not say he is the greatest ever or even the best shortstop but I doubt you can name a singe player that tried harder while playing.:)

[doug.goodman]

It will be very hard to argue he was better than Wagner or Ripken or (assuming you count him as a SS) ARod. For Jeter I think much of your rating depends on how much you count defense for a SS -- if you count it a lot, that's going to take away from him because he was pretty average all told.

If you take Jeter out of the Yankees lineup, does Mariano have nearly as many save opportunities?

[Tabe]

Ahem.. Nolan Ryan

On a side note, I said yes. The ERA+ leader by a country mile, top 5 in WHIP and WPA. The guy was a beast.

Depends on where you put the cutoff for IP. Craig Kimbrel has a 211 ERA+ (admittedly in 750 fewer innings).

Billy Wagner had a career 187 ERA+ that would be a fair bit higher without his injury-riddled 2000 season. Career 2.31 ERA. Career WHIP of 0.998 (better than Mariano). 86% save %.

Mariano was better. He wasn't MILES better.

[doug.goodman]

An interesting read :

http://www.baseballgreatness.com/2019/01/how-valuable-was-mariano-rivera.html

[frankbmd]

If Jeter had played for the Rangers or the Twins, he would be less highly regarded. New York matters.

Just read this thread from the top.

[Peter_Spaeth]

All this Rivera talk reminds me of the John Sterling bleat. Yankees win. The e e e e e e e Yankees win. Oy. LOL. I'll give him credit, it was innovative.

[Shoeless Moe]

2013 article by a writer who was later fired by ESPN. I think he is now blogging about golf and will probably soon be left to bashing high school cheerleader competitors.

"Rivera had a 5.94 ERA as a starter before the Yankees decided he was better suited to the bullpen."

Among the top 10 pitchers of all time, laughable!

[tschock]

.

[doug.goodman]

"Rivera had a 5.94 ERA as a starter before the Yankees decided he was better suited to the bullpen."

Among the top 10 pitchers of all time, laughable!

Yeah, but Koufax was a 54-53 pitcher with an ERA well over 3.50 thru his first 7 seasons (1955-1961), so things could have changed for Mariano...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yeah, but Koufax was a 54-53 pitcher with an ERA well over 3.50 thru his first 7 seasons (1955-1961), so things could have changed for Mariano...

Dwight Gooden in reverse.

[doug.goodman]

Dwight Gooden in reverse.

Sadly, yes.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Put Doc's first half and Koufax's second half together and you're right up there on a very short list.

[doug.goodman]

Put Doc's first half and Koufax's second half together and you're right up there on a very short list.

Hahahaha, Doc first 7 plus Koufax last 5 is 230 wins and 80 losses. with 2935 strikeouts

[ullmandds]

All this Rivera talk reminds me of the John Sterling bleat. Yankees win. The e e e e e e e Yankees win. Oy. LOL. I'll give him credit, it was innovative.

haha! I don't mind it...sometimes!

[Bigdaddy]

If you take Jeter out of the Yankees lineup, does Mariano have nearly as many save opportunities?

And if you take Mo out of the Yankees lineup, are there as many post season victories?

[the 'stache]

Off the top of my head, I'd take:

Walter Johnson
Lefty Grove
Pedro Martinez
Sandy Koufax
Greg Maddux
Randy Johnson
Clayton Kershaw
Cy Young
Tom Seaver
Roger Clemens

In a heartbeat over Rivera. Then there are guys I'd probably take. Pete Alexander, Bob Gibson, probably Christy Mathewson. I'd need to think for a bit more, as it's 3 am, but Rivera doesn't crack my top ten. Again, only one pitch. Great at a very specialized job, but give me a dominant starter over a closer every day of the week. If that starter is on his game, I don't need a closer.

[jchcollins]

+1 - Add to that Young, Matty, WaJo, Gibson, and Ryan and without even thinking about it, he's off the list.

Several in that list I would include before Ryan - among them Spahn and Seaver - but yeah your point holds regardless.

I have no problem calling Mo the greatest reliever of all time, but would agree with many others that it is hard to put great relievers into the same category as all-time great starters.

[jchcollins]

Off the top of my head, I'd take:

Walter Johnson
Lefty Grove
Pedro Martinez
Sandy Koufax
Greg Maddux
Randy Johnson
Clayton Kershaw
Cy Young
Tom Seaver
Roger Clemens

In a heartbeat over Rivera. Then there are guys I'd probably take. Pete Alexander, Bob Gibson, probably Christy Mathewson. I'd need to think for a bit more, as it's 3 am, but Rivera doesn't crack my top ten. Again, only one pitch. Great at a very specialized job, but give me a dominant starter over a closer every day of the week. If that starter is on his game, I don't need a closer.

Bob Feller probably belongs in there somewhere as well.

[darwinbulldog]

Hard to place him, but I'm fairly confident in keeping him out of the top 10 but putting him somewhere in the top 50. I'd have him ranked higher than most here would.

I judge a player, regardless of position, and of sport for that matter, primarily by the extent to which he contributes to his team's win total. Obviously the more innings you have, the more opportunities you have to help or hurt your team. So where does that leave us?

On the one hand, nobody, Ruth included, did more per inning to help his team win than Mo did. On the other hand, several dozen pitchers did more per game, per season, and in their career totals.

I'll concede that if he had been forced to be a starter and pitch an average of 7 innings once every five days throughout his career that he likely wouldn't have made the Hall. Maybe he would have had a Koufax career arc, but I doubt it. On the other hand, I don't believe that WaJo or Grove or Seaver or Clemens would have done any better (or even as well) as a closer as Mo did, so while technically playing the same position I see discounting Mariano's greatness on the grounds that he wasn't and would not have been a commanding starting pitcher as akin to saying that Jim Brown wasn't such a great football player because he couldn't pass particularly well and only touched the ball about 20 times a game while other players (i.e., QBs) might touch the ball 70 times a game).

I'm not going to penalize a player for having been born into an era when managers realized their teams could win more games by using a platoon approach than by expecting starters to finish their games. If everyone in the 1990s was using PEDS and no one in the 1940s was it's not because the players of the 1940s were more ethical or more talented. It's just a cohort effect. By the same token, it may be that all of the great pitchers of the deadball era were pitching hundreds of innings per year, but that doesn't give us grounds to conclude that a 21st century pitcher who throws fewer than 100 innings per season isn't a great pitcher. If Rivera and Mussina switched roles, the Yankees would certainly have won fewer games, and indeed fewer World Series, not only because Rivera wouldn't have been as good a starter as Mussina, but perhaps even more so because Mussina would not have been as good a closer as Rivera.

[packs]

It just blows my mind that a guy who was as elite as Rivera was in the modern game, one in which people on this very board who say things like Mathewson, Walter Johnson, Grover Alexander, etc are all unquestionably ahead of Rivera, are the same people who argue all the time about who would have been a star today.

Rivera was elite in today's game. The most multifaceted, specialized version of baseball there has ever been. He also competed against all comers, not only those MLB allowed to play in their time. And yet, despite all that you still doubt his abilities and put others ahead of him from a time and game whose merits are constantly debated.

[h2oya311]

Not only are we trying to compare players across eras, but we are essentially comparing marathoners to sprinters. Who's the greatest "runner" of all time, Haile Gebrselassie (marathoner from Ethiopia) or Usain Bolt (Jamaican sprinter)? Asking whether a certain pitcher is better than another across disciplines (and eras) is essentially asking the same thing. It's a silly and futile exercise, regardless of the metrics and WAR and other advanced stats that people can pull from their arses.

Relievers are sprinters, starters are long distance runners. There's room for both on today's squad. Don't try to compare them.

[bobbyw8469]

Yea...when I voted I wasn't thinking clearly. I think Mariano is without a doubt, one of the greatest RELIEVING pitchers of all time. But all time pitchers?!?! Not hardly. Can I change my vote?

[tothrk]

No one is doubting his abilities. Everyone seems to agree that Rivera was outstanding at what he was asked to do. Someone suggested that Rivera was the greatest/best pitcher ever which opened up a debate involving every other person to ever pitch in a Major League Baseball game. Some people simply seem to think other pitchers were better. Wait until this conversation starts with another over rated Yankee, Jeter. :eek:

[Ricky]

There have been other closers who were as good as Rivera at their peak. They just weren't able to remain at their peak for as long as Rivera. That makes Rivera the best closer ever. But not the best pitcher ever.

[SteveMitchell]

Relievers are sprinters, starters are long distance runners. There's room for both on today's squad. Don't try to compare them.

Agreed. This statement reminds me of the title of one of our game's greatest books: The Glory of Their Times by Lawrence Ritter.

[egri]

If he was really one of the top 10 pitchers of all time, he would have been a starter, something much more important than pitching one inning with the bases empty and no outs.

[CMIZ5290]

I think the majority will vote no but let's see.

not even close....Hell no. Still dont know how he got 100% vote....Please

[rgpete]

No Not a Starting Pitcher

[Vintageclout]

Define pitcher. Because if its the pitcher who wins you the game, Mariano is the best hands down.

Mariano is NOT winning the game....he is SAVING the game by getting 3 outs of the 27 needed to complete a 9 inning game. That’s why he gets a SAVE and NOT a WIN! Very simple reasoning here. If you are trying to say a pitcher who closes out a game by getting 3 outs with no men on base when he enters the game is more important than the pitcher who recorded 24 outs over 8 innings to put his team in a win situation, then I really don’t what to say???? Your stance makes absolutely ZERO sense. Plus, add the fact that the great pre-1980 starting pitchers completed all 9 innings for many of their wins, Mariano cannot even be mentioned in the SAME BREATH as these great starters. The pre-1980 starting pitchers were closing out their own games after throwing 100+ pitches. Mariano closed out games throwing 15-20’pitches at 100% capacity. No need to pace himself, no need to make batter adjustments because this is the 2nd/3rd/4th time you are facing the same hitter, etc. FYI, for the record I am a HUGE Yankee fan and worshiped Rivera. However, him being the greatest closer ever will never cloud my judgement regarding Rivera’s all-time stature vs. a great starting pitcher. No contest whatsoever. He cannot even be mentioned in the same breath with baseball’s great starting pitchers. Case closed.

[Vintageclout]

Not only are we trying to compare players across eras, but we are essentially comparing marathoners to sprinters. Who's the greatest "runner" of all time, Haile Gebrselassie (marathoner from Ethiopia) or Usain Bolt (Jamaican sprinter)? Asking whether a certain pitcher is better than another across disciplines (and eras) is essentially asking the same thing. It's a silly and futile exercise, regardless of the metrics and WAR and other advanced stats that people can pull from their arses.

Relievers are sprinters, starters are long distance runners. There's room for both on today's squad. Don't try to compare them.

OK - based on your point, the great post WWII starters that pitched pre-1980 were BOTH sprinters & long distance runners (like the greatest racehorse ever Secretariat...LOL). Gibson, Seaver, Marichal, Koufax, Palmer, Hunter, Ryan, Carlton, etc. ran their 8 inning long distance races and then, for the most part, sprinted to the finish line in the 9th inning by finishing their own games. This is why Mariano cannot be mentioned in the same breath with these great starting pitchers. It really borders on insanity to think that Mariano can be compared to these starting pitcher studs.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's madness. But so far 40 votes for top 10 pitchers ever.

[frankbmd]

It's madness. But so far 40 votes for top 10 pitchers ever.

The 40 votes all live less than 40 miles from the Bronx.;)

[Fred]

The 40 votes all live less than 40 miles from the Bronx.;)

Ha! Great observation Watson.... no shit Sherlock......!

[chalupacollects]

There was a great article in the WSJ sports section yesterday about Rivera and his matchups with Martinez. Edgar owned him early on till Mariano developed a sinker that broke in to righties. After that Edgar hit .200 against him in limited plate appearances. BTW, every pitcher has someone who owned him: Pujols hit .452 against Randy Johnson, Marquis Grissom hit .565 against Pedro, Shawn Green hit .543 against Smoltz. Ty Cobb hit .366 against Walter Johnson which was essentially his career average against all pitchers. Does that mean that Johnson was no better than an average pitcher? Well, against Cobb that was true, but obviously not true for most other batters.

And Mike Piazza owned Roger Clemens who eventually showed his appreciation for that...:eek:

[Peter_Spaeth]

The 40 votes all live less than 40 miles from the Bronx.;)

..

[MVSNYC]

Peter- I’ve always loved that New Yorker cover, especially being a New Yorker born and bred.

BTW, I currently just fall under the 40 mile radius (38)... :)

[frankbmd]

Peter- I’ve always loved that New Yorker cover, especially being a New Yorker born and bred.

BTW, I currently just fall under the 40 mile radius (38)... :)

I knew it.:D

If I’m right about 38 out of 40, will I be on the Hall of Fame ballot.;)

[frankbmd]

......or will I need 39

[Al C.risafulli]

Opinion:

The save is a stupid stat. But so is the win. Both depend on your team creating a circumstance that has nothing to do with you.

I also think comparing Rivera to a starting pitcher and saying the starting pitcher is better because he has to pitch longer is irrelevant.

Point being: starting pitchers aren't asked to appear in 60 or 70 games in a season like closers are. Starting pitchers aren't asked to repeatedly pitch with the game on the line, in "close and late" situations. Starting pitchers aren't asked to appear in NINETY-SIX postseason games over the course of their career. But you won't catch me using any of those facts to denigrate a starting pitcher.

What's great is that we have statistics that can measure all pitchers and level the playing field. Stuff like ERA, WHIP, SO/W, etc. And in all those fields, Mariano Rivera has numbers that stack up with the greats of the game. A postseason ERA of 0.70 in 141 innings, with a WHIP of 0.759, against the top competition is a world-class achievement. It's greatness under extreme pressure, over 16 years. No other player has even come close.

Saying "If you had to win one game, who would you pitch: Sandy Koufax, or Mariano Rivera" is no different that saying "If you had to win one game, who would you pitch: Sandy Koufax, or Ted Williams?" Mariano Rivera was not a starting pitcher. He also was not a shortstop, a left fielder, or a manager. So why compare him to something he wasn't?

If you changed the question to "If you had to choose a single pitcher to get all the important outs for his team, for an entire season, who would it be?" change your answer? Because I don't see Sandy Koufax excelling in that situation. Nobody dominated like Koufax, but no way he could pitch at that level two or three days in a row, no way he could pitch on one day's rest. His arm would fall off by June.

If I had to win one game, I might have a handful of pitchers I'd chose. If I had to get a big stolen base in a tough situation, I might bring in Jackie Robinson, Rickey Henderson, Vince Coleman. If I needed a three-run home run, I might bring up Barry Bonds, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays. If I needed a single to drive in the game-winning run, maybe I'd pick Rose, Cobb, Boggs, Gwynn, Keeler, or some other contact hitter.

But if I needed to close out a game, there's only one guy I'd pick. One guy. And I'd pick him every time, under every circumstance, and I think most would agree. And that makes him the greatest ever.

When we're answering the question "who was the greatest hitter ever?" we don't factor Ty Cobb out of the equation because he didn't hit home runs. We don't factor Ted Williams out of the equation because his defense was suspect. We're just asking who was the greatest HITTER.

Similarly, we're asking here, "who was the greatest pitcher?" And if Mo's career numbers: 2.21 ERA, 1.00 WHIP, plus the aforementioned postseason numbers - don't clearly position him among the greatest pitchers of all-time, I'm not sure what does.

-Al

[shelly]

Off the top of my head, I'd take:

Walter Johnson
Lefty Grove
Pedro Martinez
Sandy Koufax
Greg Maddux
Randy Johnson
Clayton Kershaw
Cy Young
Tom Seaver
Roger Clemens

In a heartbeat over Rivera. Then there are guys I'd probably take. Pete Alexander, Bob Gibson, probably Christy Mathewson. I'd need to think for a bit more, as it's 3 am, but Rivera doesn't crack my top ten. Again, only one pitch. Great at a very specialized job, but give me a dominant starter over a closer every day of the week. If that starter is on his game, I don't need a closer.
No one has mentioned Feller 3 no hitters 13 one hitters and out of baseball for three years for the navy

[Paul S]

The 40 votes all live less than 40 miles from the Bronx.;)
I live less than 40 miles from the Bronx, but voted that way just to tick people off:D

[conor912]

The save is a stupid stat. But so is the win. Both depend on your team creating a circumstance that has nothing to do with you.

This.

Does he belong in the Hall? Probably. But what I'm still scratching my head at is that he's the first unanimous guy ever, in the history of the game. How the f*** did that happen?

[icollectDCsports]

No one has mentioned Feller 3 no hitters 13 one hitters and out of baseball for three years for the navy

Absolutely -- and don't sleep on Warren Spahn, who is one of the most underappreciated pitchers in MLB history.

[Peter_Spaeth]

No one has mentioned Feller 3 no hitters 13 one hitters and out of baseball for three years for the navy

Post 94.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Opinion:

The save is a stupid stat. But so is the win. Both depend on your team creating a circumstance that has nothing to do with you.

I also think comparing Rivera to a starting pitcher and saying the starting pitcher is better because he has to pitch longer is irrelevant.

Point being: starting pitchers aren't asked to appear in 60 or 70 games in a season like closers are. Starting pitchers aren't asked to repeatedly pitch with the game on the line, in "close and late" situations. Starting pitchers aren't asked to appear in NINETY-SIX postseason games over the course of their career. But you won't catch me using any of those facts to denigrate a starting pitcher.

What's great is that we have statistics that can measure all pitchers and level the playing field. Stuff like ERA, WHIP, SO/W, etc. And in all those fields, Mariano Rivera has numbers that stack up with the greats of the game. A postseason ERA of 0.70 in 141 innings, with a WHIP of 0.759, against the top competition is a world-class achievement. It's greatness under extreme pressure, over 16 years. No other player has even come close.

Saying "If you had to win one game, who would you pitch: Sandy Koufax, or Mariano Rivera" is no different that saying "If you had to win one game, who would you pitch: Sandy Koufax, or Ted Williams?" Mariano Rivera was not a starting pitcher. He also was not a shortstop, a left fielder, or a manager. So why compare him to something he wasn't?

If you changed the question to "If you had to choose a single pitcher to get all the important outs for his team, for an entire season, who would it be?" change your answer? Because I don't see Sandy Koufax excelling in that situation. Nobody dominated like Koufax, but no way he could pitch at that level two or three days in a row, no way he could pitch on one day's rest. His arm would fall off by June.

If I had to win one game, I might have a handful of pitchers I'd chose. If I had to get a big stolen base in a tough situation, I might bring in Jackie Robinson, Rickey Henderson, Vince Coleman. If I needed a three-run home run, I might bring up Barry Bonds, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays. If I needed a single to drive in the game-winning run, maybe I'd pick Rose, Cobb, Boggs, Gwynn, Keeler, or some other contact hitter.

But if I needed to close out a game, there's only one guy I'd pick. One guy. And I'd pick him every time, under every circumstance, and I think most would agree. And that makes him the greatest ever.

When we're answering the question "who was the greatest hitter ever?" we don't factor Ty Cobb out of the equation because he didn't hit home runs. We don't factor Ted Williams out of the equation because his defense was suspect. We're just asking who was the greatest HITTER.

Similarly, we're asking here, "who was the greatest pitcher?" And if Mo's career numbers: 2.21 ERA, 1.00 WHIP, plus the aforementioned postseason numbers - don't clearly position him among the greatest pitchers of all-time, I'm not sure what does.

-Al

If picking the greatest hitter ever, would you include someone who exclusively pinch hit but had a .400 lifetime average in 25 percent as many at bats as an everyday player? That's the better analogy, and I am guessing the answer is no.

[frankbmd]

If picking the greatest hitter ever, would you include someone who exclusively pinch hit but had a .400 lifetime average in 25 percent as many at bats as an everyday player? That's the better analogy, and I am guessing the answer is no.

I just can’t understand why Manny Mota is not in the HOF, Seriously.....:eek::rolleyes:

[Al C.risafulli]

If picking the greatest hitter ever, would you include someone who exclusively pinch hit but had a .400 lifetime average in 25 percent as many at bats as an everyday player? That's the better analogy, and I am guessing the answer is no.

You're right, the answer is no. But I don't like the analogy.

Mariano Rivera was not a pinch hitter. He wasn't a defensive replacement. He wasn't a pinch runner. He was not asked to come into the game and get one out, every once in a while, or keep the infield tight. He pitched in pressure situations, several days a week, for nearly 20 years.

BTW, I'm about 70 miles from the Bronx.

-Al

[Huysmans]

If picking the greatest hitter ever, would you include someone who exclusively pinch hit but had a .400 lifetime average in 25 percent as many at bats as an everyday player? That's the better analogy, and I am guessing the answer is no.

+1

[Peter_Spaeth]

You're right, the answer is no. But I don't like the analogy.

Mariano Rivera was not a pinch hitter. He wasn't a defensive replacement. He wasn't a pinch runner. He was not asked to come into the game and get one out, every once in a while, or keep the infield tight. He pitched in pressure situations, several days a week, for nearly 20 years.

BTW, I'm about 70 miles from the Bronx.

-Al

To me the analogy is reasonable based on number of innings pitched vs. a top line starter, coupled with my belief that all innings are equally important even if some seem to be more dramatic than others. In any case this has generated some great discussion that is only possible in the context of baseball; no other sport comes close.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

You're right, the answer is no. But I don't like the analogy.

Mariano Rivera was not a pinch hitter. He wasn't a defensive replacement. He wasn't a pinch runner. He was not asked to come into the game and get one out, every once in a while, or keep the infield tight. He pitched in pressure situations, several days a week, for nearly 20 years.

BTW, I'm about 70 miles from the Bronx.

-Al

I don't agree that 9th inning, bases empty, with a lead is a pressure situation.

[Al C.risafulli]

I don't agree that 9th inning, bases empty, with a lead is a pressure situation.

Up 3-0 in the 9th against the 2000 Devil Rays, I agree.

Up 1-0 in the 9th against the 2000 Red Sox, I disagree.

Similarly, Koufax starting and winning against the 1963 Mets is no big deal. Starting and winning two against Whitey Ford in the World Series is.

I also dispute the idea that all innings are equal. I understand the concept, but I disagree with it. Giving up three runs in the first inning, you've still got eight innings to get those back. Giving up three in the ninth is a different story. Watching the Red Sox with Byung Hyun Kim in 2003 vs. Keith Foulke in 2004 was all the convincing I needed about the importance of a closer.

-Al

[Peter_Spaeth]

Up 3-0 in the 9th against the 2000 Devil Rays, I agree.

Up 1-0 in the 9th against the 2000 Red Sox, I disagree.

Similarly, Koufax starting and winning against the 1963 Mets is no big deal. Starting and winning two against Whitey Ford in the World Series is.

I also dispute the idea that all innings are equal. I understand the concept, but I disagree with it. Giving up three runs in the first inning, you've still got eight innings to get those back. Giving up three in the ninth is a different story. Watching the Red Sox with Byung Hyun Kim in 2003 vs. Keith Foulke in 2004 was all the convincing I needed about the importance of a closer.

-Al

And the other team has eight innings to score more. I'd be interested to see the odds of winning a game down 3-0 after 1.

[BicycleSpokes]

Closers are like goal line backs in the NFL. Their value is greatly exaggerated, Rivera included.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

[oldjudge]

Absolutely one of the ten greatest pitchers ever.

[Vintageclout]

Opinion:

The save is a stupid stat. But so is the win. Both depend on your team creating a circumstance that has nothing to do with you.

I also think comparing Rivera to a starting pitcher and saying the starting pitcher is better because he has to pitch longer is irrelevant.

Point being: starting pitchers aren't asked to appear in 60 or 70 games in a season like closers are. Starting pitchers aren't asked to repeatedly pitch with the game on the line, in "close and late" situations. Starting pitchers aren't asked to appear in NINETY-SIX postseason games over the course of their career. But you won't catch me using any of those facts to denigrate a starting pitcher.

What's great is that we have statistics that can measure all pitchers and level the playing field. Stuff like ERA, WHIP, SO/W, etc. And in all those fields, Mariano Rivera has numbers that stack up with the greats of the game. A postseason ERA of 0.70 in 141 innings, with a WHIP of 0.759, against the top competition is a world-class achievement. It's greatness under extreme pressure, over 16 years. No other player has even come close.

Saying "If you had to win one game, who would you pitch: Sandy Koufax, or Mariano Rivera" is no different that saying "If you had to win one game, who would you pitch: Sandy Koufax, or Ted Williams?" Mariano Rivera was not a starting pitcher. He also was not a shortstop, a left fielder, or a manager. So why compare him to something he wasn't?

If you changed the question to "If you had to choose a single pitcher to get all the important outs for his team, for an entire season, who would it be?" change your answer? Because I don't see Sandy Koufax excelling in that situation. Nobody dominated like Koufax, but no way he could pitch at that level two or three days in a row, no way he could pitch on one day's rest. His arm would fall off by June.

If I had to win one game, I might have a handful of pitchers I'd chose. If I had to get a big stolen base in a tough situation, I might bring in Jackie Robinson, Rickey Henderson, Vince Coleman. If I needed a three-run home run, I might bring up Barry Bonds, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays. If I needed a single to drive in the game-winning run, maybe I'd pick Rose, Cobb, Boggs, Gwynn, Keeler, or some other contact hitter.

But if I needed to close out a game, there's only one guy I'd pick. One guy. And I'd pick him every time, under every circumstance, and I think most would agree. And that makes him the greatest ever.

When we're answering the question "who was the greatest hitter ever?" we don't factor Ty Cobb out of the equation because he didn't hit home runs. We don't factor Ted Williams out of the equation because his defense was suspect. We're just asking who was the greatest HITTER.

Similarly, we're asking here, "who was the greatest pitcher?" And if Mo's career numbers: 2.21 ERA, 1.00 WHIP, plus the aforementioned postseason numbers - don't clearly position him among the greatest pitchers of all-time, I'm not sure what does.

-Al

Al - hi it’s JoeT and I hope all is well. I am going to try and simplify this for everyone the best I can. More than not, without a fine performance from a starting pitcher, there is typically no game to save. Rivera’s capabilities would be rendered useless because there is no lead to protect. That’s the MAJOR disparity between a starter and a closer. A closer is typically dependent on his team’s prior pitchers making a game of it. A good starting pitcher sets the tempo for the game, with superb performances typically dictating the results. A closer has ZERO control over that. And, like I’ve said in other posts, the pre-1980 great pitchers didn’t need a closer for the most part because they finished their games. Honestly Al, I can barely remember games that pitchers like Gibson, Koufax, Seaver, Carlton, Palmer, Marichal, Hunter, etc. blew leads in the 9th inning. They went out for the 9th innings and closed out their own games. Based on that notion, how anyone can possibly compare a 1-inning pitcher to these incredible starters that went the distance is beyond reason. Makes zero sense. Closers are totally dependent on their teams putting them in a position to save a game, and the starting pitcher usually bears a large portion of that burden.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Absolutely one of the ten greatest pitchers ever.

Change "pitchers" to "closers" and we agree. I get that it's just a matter of opinion, but I don't see how any knowledgeable baseball fan can have this opinion.:D

A guy who pitched 2-3 innings a week and only with a lead is just NOT a top ten of all time pitcher.

[CurtisFlood]

And for the record, and as a Red Sox fan, Rivera was the greatest reliever of all-time, no doubt and a slam-dunk Hall of Fame player. His body of work speaks for itself and I don't want to take anything away from his brilliant career.
Perhaps an interesting follow-up question, though, would be if Rivera's cutter was one of the top-10 pitches of all time...

That is a fair assessment.

[aconte]

Great pitcher but like many have said not one of the best all time.
Great entrance music though so maybe that came into play with
the voters.

[the 'stache]

No one has mentioned Feller 3 no hitters 13 one hitters and out of baseball for three years for the navy

I thought of Feller. Just forgot to add him. It was 3 am.

[darwinbulldog]

Now that I've had more time to reflect on it, if I had to be more specific, I'd rank Rivera in the 15th-20th range, along with Blyleven, Niekro, and Mussina, excellent pitchers with excellent careers and definitely worthy of the Hall in my book, but clearly a step down from Seaver, Grove, et al. in the top 10.

There's no reason in principle that a closer couldn't be considered the greatest pitcher of all time, but he'd just have to put up even better numbers than Mariano did. If a hypothetical closer converted 95% of 800 save opportunities over 20 years with an ERA+ of 250 and a 0.8 WHIP, I'd declare him a greater pitcher than Walter Johnson. It's possible we'll see that someday, but that's significantly better than Mariano, and I think I'm more likely to see someone put together a 57 game hitting streak this year than I am to see a closer that good in the next 40 years or however long I may live.

[Mark17]

Closers are like goal line backs in the NFL. Their value is greatly exaggerated, Rivera included.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

Exactly. A run is a run, whether it is scored in the third inning, the fifth inning, or the ninth inning. There is nothing that makes the ninth inning more difficult or challenging to pitch than any other inning. So pitching a scoreless ninth to close out a 3-2 win is no different than pitching a clean third inning in a 3-2 win.

A guy who can pitch well here and there, get a few batters out, is no doubt valuable, but you would need 5 or 6 such pitchers just to win one game. A guy like Koufax or Gibson could come out and give you that every 4 days all by himself.

[packs]

Exactly. A run is a run, whether it is scored in the third inning, the fifth inning, or the ninth inning. There is nothing that makes the ninth inning more difficult or challenging to pitch than any other inning. So pitching a scoreless ninth to close out a 3-2 win is no different than pitching a clean third inning in a 3-2 win.

A guy who can pitch well here and there, get a few batters out, is no doubt valuable, but you would need 5 or 6 such pitchers just to win one game. A guy like Koufax or Gibson could come out and give you that every 4 days all by himself.

When has anyone ever won the game in the third inning? When has anyone ever won a football game after only getting to the goal line? Neither analogy makes sense.

[Mark17]

When has anyone ever won the game in the third inning? When has anyone ever won a football game after only getting to the goal line? Neither analogy makes sense.


A game ends 1-0. What difference does it make if the losing pitcher gave up that run in the third or ninth inning?

[packs]

A game ends 1-0. What difference does it make if the losing pitcher gave up that run in the third or ninth inning?

I guess the difference is you only win the game after the 9th inning.

[Mark17]

I guess the difference is you only win the game after the 9th inning.

Right. And that is arbitrary. It doesn't mean it is easier or more difficult to get 'em out in the ninth as opposed to any other inning. And runs yielded in the ninth, or fourth, or seventh innings hurt you just as much; not more, not less.

[frankbmd]

The terms “closer” and “save” are both narrowly defined constructs of analytical baseball and create some arbitrary management decisions based on their definitions.

The “closer” has evolved to be the ninth inning pitcher who only enters the game with a lead of 1-3 runs.

The “save” has a slightly broader definition, allowing for up to three innings pitched at the end of the game.

What about the guy who enters the game in the ninth with the score tied or with his team behind by a run or two. The valuable “closer” is infrequently seen in this situation except perhaps in the post season. But is the alternate who preserves the status quo in games that his team eventually wins any less valuable.

Take the way back machine back to 1959 in Pittsburgh. Roy Face pitched in 57 games finishing 47. There were no saves in 1959, but retrospectively he was awarded 10 saves by applying arbitrary rules that were introduced later after 1959.

If the Bucs were close in the late innings, Roy was the “finisher”. He wasn’t used by Murtaugh only when the Bucs had the lead. Actually they didn’t have the lead that often and when they did, they had a few starters who could actually pitch a complete game.

So how did Roy fair in this undefined relief role. Pretty well as he recorded 18 wins out of the bullpen. He lost 1 game.

Granted he didn’t have a 20 year career with comparable results. You could also say 1959 was a fluke. But has any modern closer come close to helping his team win 18 games that they otherwise would have lost. Obviously not because the definitions create the pattern in which they are used.

It has been shown previously in this thread, that the difference between the best closer and a very good closer is perhaps 2 to 3 games per year for his team.

In Roy’s case it was 18 games, if only for one year.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Right. And that is arbitrary. It doesn't mean it is easier or more difficult to get 'em out in the ninth as opposed to any other inning. And runs yielded in the ninth, or fourth, or seventh innings hurt you just as much; not more, not less.

The only difference is that the ninth feels more dramatic. Just like every frame in bowling counts equally, but the last one may be more exciting. The analogy to getting the ball only to the goal line is wholly misplaced.

[Mark17]

The only difference is that the ninth feels more dramatic. Just like every frame in bowling counts equally, but the last one may be more exciting. The analogy to getting the ball only to the goal line is wholly misplaced.

Well said. The ninth inning "feels" more important. But that is all.

Also agree the football analogy is not valid. Players are more compressed when the offense has the ball near the goal line, so it is much more difficult to get that last yard then it is to get one yard at, say, the 47 yard line (holding the offense to a one yard gain at midfield would in fact be a victory for the defense.)