AS the Washington Nationals have been struggling with the closer spot lately, I find myself wondering, what is the specialization that makes a pitcher a good closer? As I understand it, the closer’s job is typically to get through the last inning without blowing a lead; i.e., to get three batters out without giving up too many runs. But isn’t that every pitcher’s job? What makes a closer different? Why is it that only certain guys can do it consistently?
Lots and lots of guys do the job pretty well. If it seems like a team has trouble filling the role, it’s just bad luck, the way some teams seem to go ages without a good second baseman or something.
Basically, if you’re a good pitcher, you can close. The only real disqualification would be if you’re the sort of pitcher who can’t warm up quickly, I guess, but such pitchers are rare.
People will tell you all kinds of things closers allegedly need, and all th claims are easily disproven. Experience? Successful closers have filled the role pretty much from the moment they started in MLB. What they need is to be good pitchers. If someone can get MLB hitters out, he can close.
The conventional wisdom about closers is that they’re intended to strike out a very limited number of batters by specializing in one or two great pitches - not enough to win a game, especially once the batters know what’s coming, but just enough to finish the game. A starter, by contrast, is supposed to have a deeper repertoire of pitches at their disposal.
100 mph.
(I was once sitting on the wall of the SF bullpen, about twenty feet from the catcher, when Robb Nen was warming up. Jesus H.)
Only thing I’d add to RickJay’s response is a reputation as a good closer for the psychological effect. And even that is something that develops out of good pitching skills in the first place.
A detailed study has been made of the mentalities of closing pitchers, and has identified eight of them:
The ability to strike out batters seems like a good qualification to me…
My favorite closer picture.
By this reasoning, Flounder in Animal House could have been a two-tool closer, being both drunk and stupid.
He was also fat, but that seems to be more of a qualifier for being a starting pitcher (see: David Wells, C.C. Sabathia, Bartolo Colon).
I’d go with the Mad Hungarian.
Like Mariano. One pitch. You always knew which pitch he was going to throw. It didn’t matter. He became the greatest closer of all time throwing one pitch.
I remember his self meditation sessions off the mound. He was intense.
A good closer needs the right mental attitude and especially the ability to shrug off a blown save and to not get flustered.
The perfect example of a pitcher who cannot be a closer is John Niese because (among other factors), if someone makes an error behind him, he gets pissed and starts pitching badly.
A closer would shrug and concentrate on the next batter.
But that would reduce Niese’s skills as a starter, too. Or a middle reliever. There is nothing about that weakness that is particularly disadvantageous to being a closer. It’d be just as bad if he was the setup guy. We don’t know how Niese would fare as a closer as compared to how he’s fared as a starter because he’s never been used that way.
Niese probably wouldn’t be a great closer because he just isn’t a great pitcher.