Karma, among other reasons, is why you don’t dare do this.

Making roster decisions based on perceptions of karma isn't exactly the way to break a championship drought.

In any case, Wood as closer isn't really a bad idea; he seems to be a solid reliever, and should be better than Dempster. And it will probably result in Marmol pitching more high leverage innings anyway.

Marmol pitching more high leverage innings anyway.

On what planet does a typical setup guy pitch higher leverage than a typical closer.... not earth.

On what planet does a typical setup guy pitch higher leverage than a typical closer.... not earth.

My guess: whatever planet Marmol was on in the last two months of 2007.

On what planet does a typical setup guy pitch higher leverage than a typical closer.... not earth.

Good thing I said more high leverage innings and not higher leverage innings then, huh?

As a setup guy, Marmol figures to have more 4+ out stints, and more appearances in tie games, extra innings, etc. than a pitcher shoehorned into a typical "closer's role." I guarantee you that if Wood stays closer all year, he'll end up with fewer innings than Marmol will get as a setup guy. And the vast majority of the innings that either will pitch easily qualify as high leverage.

On what planet does a typical setup guy pitch higher leverage than a typical closer

The average leverage for a closer is normally higher than the average leverage for a typical setup guy, true. But the range of leverage can be much difference. Closers are often used in relatively low-leverage situations to finish out a game in a nn-save situation when the team is leading.

-- MWE

On what planet does a typical setup guy pitch higher leverage than a typical closer.... not earth.

I think he means MORE (pause) "high leverage innings", emphasis on more.

So, if they're going to use the closer as a 9th inning only guy, he pitches 60-70 innings, many with a 2-3 run lead and no one on. So, maybe 40 of those IP are "high-leverage".

If Marmol is used for 80-85 IP, and brought in in the 6-8th innings w/men on, 60-70 of his IP could be "high-leverage".

Marmol : Wood :: Perez / Betancourt : Borowski, with the added advantage of Wood being 100000x better than JoeBo.

Not to say that there isn't a case to be made for making Marmol the 9th inning guy, but Mariotti's the last guy I want to see offer a defense.

except for you know those time when rivera was setting up wetteland....and rodriguez setting up percival....and betancourt setting up borowski...and all thoes other times it happened.

As usual, I don't get Jay's point here. Is he worried that Wood will get hurt and not be able to close? Wouldn't you just give the job to Marmol then? They're not choosing between Wood and Marmol in the sense that one is leaving the roster. Seems like much ado about nothing. Which, is pretty much what every bleating Mariotti column is.

I don't know if I trust Calvin Schiraldi's thoughts on who should pitch the high-leverage bullpen innings.

But with the Kid K days in the distant past and Marmol ready and waiting as the possible next Frankie Rodriguez, the Wood project might be characterized as high-risk, questionable-reward

When I hear "Frankie Rodriguez" I still think of the non-K-Rod one, so I did a double-take here.

amen to #10


also, if this wasnt mariotti, people would be following over each other to agree that Marmol should be the closer.

except for you know those time when rivera was setting up wetteland....and rodriguez setting up percival....and betancourt setting up borowski...and all thoes other times it happened.

so anytime a set-up guy is better than the closer, his innings are automatically higher leverage?

Letting Wood close and then leave as a Type A would be brilliant. And it'd keep Marmol's salary down in 2010, to boot. Could the Cubs be evil geniuses?

Letting Wood close and then leave as a Type A would be brilliant. And it'd keep Marmol's salary down in 2010, to boot. Could the Cubs be evil geniuses?

depends if it costs them any wins this year

I'd think that Howry would be the best option to close. He has a long track record of being an excellent reliever. Marmol just has 2007, which was spectacular. Whether he's the next Rivera or not remains to be seen.

Leaving aside all the good points already made here about the likelihood of Marmol's throwing more high-leverage innings as a setup guy (which is probably a good thing), the "Cubs will regret it" bit is kind of stupid; it suggests they can't/won't change course if Wood doesn't pan out as closer. Piniella's not exactly the type to stick with a plan that's not working.

As usual, I don't get Jay's point here. Is he worried that Wood will get hurt and not be able to close? Wouldn't you just give the job to Marmol then?

Right; this entire issue -- however uninteresting it may be -- should be moot by about April 20th.

Wood has averaged 35 innings over the last three years, and 22 over the last two.

However, he has averaged 12 innings a month during the period of his career when he was used as a full-time reliever, that being the last two months of his career. I extrapolate that out to 72 innings this season.

so anytime a set-up guy is better than the closer, his innings are automatically higher leverage?

obviously not....and I did no research whatsoever to support the following, but I would be very suprised if my gut reaction in those specific cases wasn't accurate and those guys didn't pitch more in higher leverage situations....just sheer innings totals alone would probably give them the edge in terms of sheer value - i believe rivera threw something like 105 IP in '96....wetteland was probably closer to 70...

I think that the more structured role of "closer" is probably better for Wood. Given his history of arm problems, you probably want to try to limit Wood to one-inning outings, make sure that he only warms up when you're actually going to use him and that he has adequate warm-up time when he is used, and try to limit the number of times he pitches on back-to-back days.

All of which argues for using him strictly as a ninth-inning guy who starts to warm up in the 8th inning of any game that the Cubs are leading when he hasn't pitched two days in a row and never pitches more than just the 9th inning.

Wood's not the guy you want to have get up when the other team starts threatening in the 7th inning who you have to then throw out there two batters later before the whole thing blows up. As such, he's not really a good choice as your top setup man. Plus, even if Wood doesn't get hurt (and let's be honest, that's pretty unlikely), I'd guess that Marmol will see 5-10 save situations where he's the closer du jour because Wood's not available because he pitched too often too recently.

I hope Wood is the closer. Let somebody else bid $20 for him and his saves, I'll spend a buck or two on the Marmol and start racking up the saves once Kerry hits the DL. Can't take too long, can it?

I don't see how making Wood the closer would work out really badly for the Cubs. He's going to be on a short leash, and with Marmol waiting in the wings, Wood won't have a chance to blow the season, just a few April/May games. Worst case, the Cubs need a decent set-up man for Marmol.

Piniella's not exactly the type to stick with a plan that's not working.

This may seem an obvious thing for a manager to do but most managers lurch between the extremes. They either jerk guys in and out of roles with minimal data points or stick to their "plan" until the situation erupts in a ball of flame.

Lou takes the measured approach. I think this is due to his ability to tell a ballplayer from a cabbage. That's a rare gift among a good many managers.