Mariano

[Touch'EmAll]

doug, I don't know what % of his games he came in with 1, 2, or 3 run leads - didn't find that stat to compare 2 & 3 run games. I just assumed all 1 run games to keep it simple. How would you figure it?

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

doug, I don't know what % of his games he came in with 1, 2, or 3 run leads - didn't find that stat to compare 2 & 3 run games. I just assumed all 1 run games to keep it simple. How would you figure it?

Shoeless_Moe posted a link to an ESPN story in the other Mo thread :

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/9...oved-respected

The numbers used there, attributed to David Smith (Retrosheet founder) are :
210 saves when he came in with an 85.7% chance of winning (1 run lead)
216 saves when he came in with a 93.7% chance of winning (2 run lead)
180 saves when he came in with a 97.5% chance of winning (3 run lead)
46 saves when he came in with better than a 97.5% chance of winning (4 runs or more)

David Smith posted a research paper on the retrosheet website :

https://www.retrosheet.org/Research/...fTheCloser.pdf

With the following conclusions :
1. The entry of a new pitcher to start the 9th inning has increased dramatically since 1980.
2. The presence of this new pitcher has had almost no effect on a team’s chances to win.
3. Ace closers bring slightly more wins than other 9th inning pitchers (92% vs 88%)
4. Performance of 9th inning pitchers is almost indistinguishable between closers and others.
5. Increased use 9th inning pitchers correlates with overall increase of relief pitchers.
6. Pitchers have had progressively shorter stints for over 100 years.
7. Current pattern of closer usage is not justified by their contributions to team wins.