OT: Mariano Rivera
- Thread starter miker183
- Start date
Wow, keep digging and you will end up back in the US soon! Saves being the only metric that matters for closers is as dumb as only wins for starters. You really sticking to this?
#senile
People as laughing at you.
Only T could lose a baseball argument even when getting a lifeline from Zap!
Saves for closers is the key metric. What else could be? For starters, since winning depends on getting support, ERA becomes a very useful additional indicator. It is clearly far less important for closers, since closers, by definition, do not need run support. They already have it when they enter the game.
What could you possibly not understand about this?
Probably best for you to go back to the CE Board where logic and data are always irrelevant.
To move the discussion on from T's lunacy, it seems to me that coming into the game in the ninth with a three run lead, completing the game for a win, is too liberal a definition for a save.
The average number of runs scored in an inning is about .5. Keeping your opponent under 3 doesn't seem like much of an accomplishment.
The average number of runs scored in an inning is about .5. Keeping your opponent under 3 doesn't seem like much of an accomplishment.
Why are we talking about three run leads?
I’d venture to say the closer rarely enters a game over a 162 game season with a three run lead.
Let’s make it a one run game facing the 3-4 and 5 hitters
Gandalf - Saves for closers and wins for starters. Yeah, stick with that logic. The only reason you are saying this is because its the only metric that supports your asinine claim that Mo and Choke artist Hoffman are "very close".
One more chance, care you correct yourself?
I'm not a big baseball person but I watched a lot of Yankee games 1996-2006. Opposing teams knew they had to get something going before Mariano came in. It was like a game became 7.5-8 innings instead of 9. Other players were visibly nervous about him. Only other NY sport figure I saw do something like that was LT.
We felt the same way in our day about Fingers Eckersley and Smith.
I understand you had to be loosing in order to see them, but the pressure was really on to get it done in 7 innings or you had no real chance to win.
Last edited:
You've lost, T. Give up. You're just embarrassing yourself now.
A starter enters a game with the score 0-0. He needs run support.
A closer enters a game with the lead in hand. He just needs to keep the other team from scoring. The difference could not be clearer.
Again, you've lost. Move on.
I’d argue the starter needs to stop the other team from scoring more than he needs run support.
You lost Bilbo. Time to admit it and move on. You're embarrassing yourself now. And you just admitted how important ERA is for a closer. Oops!
[roll]
I remember Lee Smith and Eckersley, but would you agree that they "reigned" as top closers for no more than 3-4 years?
Really feel that's what set Mo apart from others
fdny.. I have come around on this and I think I can convince you.
No doubt he's the best in the short history of "closers".
But just like writers have made excuses to not vote for people in the past.. certainly stopping worthy players from getting the desired 1st ballot nod getting in in their 1st year eligible...
...maybe a unanimous ballot in a year were so many you can choose from still have asterisks... maybe that will be a kick in the pants to those self-important writers saying it is okay to just vote a guy in because he is worthy.
you cannot make a case that there is a more worthy candidate this year. therefore, there really is no reason to NOT have Rivera at the top of your ballot.. never mind the top 3 or as any of the 10 you could list.
the only reason to not have him on your ballot is.. to choose to prevent him from being unanimous. maybe its time for writers to surrender that power and to be expected to vote based purely on what a candidate did while playing baseball.
Very disappointed in you today. Not your best showing. Try doing Sudoku puzzles at night to keep your mind sharper.
Hoffman being close to Mo! Wow.
Last edited:
Jerome Holtzman, a sportswriter with the Chicago Tribune, is credited with thinking up and urging adoption of the save rule. I met Holtzman in the 1970s in connection with Charlie Finley's law suit to overturn Bowie Kuhn's decision to bar Finley from trading star players for cash. He was a good guy, and he hand-dedicated a copy of his "No Cheering in the Press Box," his interviews with old sportswriters.
Poor baby. Go lick your wounds and come back to fight another day. But please, have some data and some logic to back your claims up. Or else just don't get into arguments with the grown ups.
Poor old man. Go lick you wounds and use your walker to come back and fight another day. But please, bring your spectacles, so you can actually read what you type. Perhaps that is the problem? Or else just don't get into arguments with people that actually grew up watching modern baseball and not the dead ball era like you. No closers back then!
Last edited:
Always happy to go back to the data. On this, Christie, global warming, Trump being a fool...doesn't matter. As always, you are blinded by your biases. It's your huge flaw and it's funny as hell because it's so reliable and so easy to push your buttons. Time and again, you just repeat my lines as if that is some sort of retort.
You are the weak sauce special of this board. Go find some material.
When you start with the personal insults, I know you are fuming that you lost. It's your "Mo" and it's funny as hell to see how easy it is to push your buttons. You love to talk data, yet you still never replied to Mo being the greatest post season pitcher of all time and how closers are all about the big moments. This is also typical Skillet, ignore what proves you wrong.
Sometime you are just as easy as AK with driving crazy. #somuchfun
Some of that I can agree with since for me I always subscribe to the mantra of “if you have to think about it, is he really a HoFer?”
There are some to me who for me who fit that bill. Mariano Rivera is NOT one of them. If you as a sportswriter have to think about this one, maybe @GoodOl'Rutgers is right.
The biggest moment, he failed. The most important game and he didn’t come through.
But that’s okay, because he’s still the best at the position.
Last edited:
We’re not talking about him as that’s not the title nor subject matter of the thread.
Crimes...the real point is that there should have been 20 unanimous HOF players.
It is crazy out of my mind that anyone has ever voted against some of the greatest ever. Just ******* stupid. So as much as Mays, Aaron, Sever, Gibson and many others, who would vote against Mo? Who voted against these other guys?
He shouldn’t be the first but he should be unanimous
It is crazy out of my mind that anyone has ever voted against some of the greatest ever. Just ******* stupid. So as much as Mays, Aaron, Sever, Gibson and many others, who would vote against Mo? Who voted against these other guys?
He shouldn’t be the first but he should be unanimous
When I start with personal insults? The thread is all still here for anyone to read, T. Your very first post was a personal insult followed by at least four others before I responded in kind. Personal insults are you signature move.
But here is something that is puzzling. You used to occasionally have a good retort. Now all you do is parrot what I say. You're like an apprentice -- not a particularly bright one, but an apprentice nonetheless.
As to postseason, I have said at least four times that Rivera was excellent in the postseason. Four times. And the best you can do is now say that I haven't acknowledged that? Very Trumpian. I think you should disconnect from Twitter.
Here's one big difference between the two of us, T. And I fear you will never learn this. I don't contest arguments when the data aren't on my side. I concede those points and focus on other, more important ones. As to closers being all about the big moment, you couldn't be more wrong, as usual. The amazing thing about closers is that they come in and do the job day in and day out (well, 60 times or so a year), whereas starters are only once every five days. They do get a big moment from time to time, and for the umpteenth time, that is where Mo shined. Great in the postseason. It is what made him the best. Regular season? Pretty much indistinguishable from Hoffman. That's been my point all along. You have to ignore it as it completely destroys your argument.
You haven't even yet stumbled upon the best argument for making Mo unanimous. And unless you find it from someone else, you never will.
I've got to bail on this now, T. It's beginning to feel like pulling wings off of flies.
Last edited:
Rationality is not really what this thread is about Colbert. It's more about being a Yankee fan. The idea that Rivera somehow deserves to be a unanimous HOF is ridiculous from the perspective of where he stands in the all time ranking of players.
The only argument for him, and it could have been made for 20 different guys over the past quarter century, is that he undeniably deserves to be a first round HOF selection. Thus, not voting for him in the first round is some sort of sacrilege. I'd vote for him. But I'd probably vote for Pete Rose, too. But not the steroid users.
Most of the guys making arguments here probably don't even remember when the argument was whether a person deserved to be a first ballot pick.
What do Joe DiMaggio, Yogi, Whitey Ford, and Cy Young have in common? Not first ballot picks.
Got it, thank you for admitting you were wrong. I thought you were just ignoring my data. Appreciate you owning up to this!
I'm having trouble following the thread because I can't tell what you are replying to. I think that means that you are replying to someone whom I put on "ignore" a while back, and haven't missed at all. You might consider the same strategy.
Hi Camden,
Yeah, I was replying to the increasingly tiresome T. I then remembered that I said I wasn't going to engage him anymore, but I forgot.
My argument is simple. Rivera was the best closer ever and an exceptionally good baseball player who deserves first ballot HOF. He was exceptionally good in the postseason. But during the regular season, his record is incredibly close to Trevor Hoffman playing in the same era. And, he only led the league in saves three times. So I kind of have him as great, but not one of the greatest. Maybe about the 15-20th best player of his era.
So if some of the alltime greats weren't even first ballot HOFers, and since nobody has ever been a unanimous choice, I don't see the argument for starting with Rivera. I would not however, say that to his face if I were standing in the batter's box!
T mostly wants to make age jokes, repeat my shots at him, and lie what about what has occurred on the thread. In real life, he isn't a bad guy, but he's terrible at board banter.
Glad to know T "in real life, isn't a bad guy." I look forward to meeting him someday; I might like him.
Spot on. Close the thread. And T is as clueless about baseball as he is about everything else, lol...