How do yah feel about Issy and his closing out games?

Wiecker · Post by **Wiecker** » June 5 06, 9:38 pm

It's a good sign when we can complain about our closer blowing his 3rd game out of 21 attempts*.

Why is there so much contempt for Izzy? Is it because he likes to put some runners on, almost every time he pitches? Would there be any debate if he was a 1-2-3 guy except for those 3 games and was still 18/21?

Granted that him being a 1-2-3 guy would be less stressful in the 9th, but he gets the job done as is.

*IIRC

G. Keenan · Post by **G. Keenan** » June 5 06, 9:39 pm

bronx_bird wrote:It's time to think about some ch-ch-ch-changes. It really is.

I don't know about that. Yeah, this is frustrating. But he still gets it done enough to justify being the closer for a contending team. He would really have to implode to justify moving him out of the role.

Post by **Michael** » June 5 06, 9:39 pm

Nah, we atleast have to give Izzy more time. I don't want AW to be a closer in his rookie season.

cardsfansince82 · Post by **cardsfansince82** » June 5 06, 9:39 pm

FYI:

23 walks in 23 innings this season

signed through 2007 with an option for 08 at 8 mil plus both years

Transmogrified Tiger · Post by **Transmogrified Tiger** » June 5 06, 9:41 pm

G. Keenan wrote:
bronx_bird wrote:It's time to think about some ch-ch-ch-changes. It really is.
I don't know about that. Yeah, this is frustrating. But he still gets it done enough to justify being the closer for a contending team. He would really have to implode to justify moving him out of the role.

What do you consider 'getting it done'? With the number of baserunners he's given up, his success in save situations could be construed as being a matter of time before he implodes, rather than a display of an ability to finish the game.

Wow, that was worded terribly, I hope my point got across.

G. Keenan · Post by **G. Keenan** » June 5 06, 9:47 pm

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
bronx_bird wrote:It's time to think about some ch-ch-ch-changes. It really is.
I don't know about that. Yeah, this is frustrating. But he still gets it done enough to justify being the closer for a contending team. He would really have to implode to justify moving him out of the role.
What do you consider 'getting it done'? With the number of baserunners he's given up, his success in save situations could be construed as being a matter of time before he implodes, rather than a display of an ability to finish the game.

Wow, that was worded terribly, I hope my point got across.

I mean that, as someone posted above, he has converted 18 of 21 attempts (I'm assuming that figure is right). I admit that he is pitching terribly in the process, just getting the saves by the skin of his teeth, but he is still getting the saves at a satisfactory, though not ideal, rate.

Based on the current situation replacing him would be both premature, and unnecessarily complicated. Does Wainwright close? Where does Izzy go, the 8th? Who replaces Wainwright for the 6th and 7th. What about Izzy's contract, he's signed through next year with a lot of money left on it.

etc..

cardsfansince82 · Post by **cardsfansince82** » June 5 06, 9:48 pm

Wiecker wrote:It's a good sign when we can complain about our closer blowing his 3rd game out of 21 attempts*.

Why is there so much contempt for Izzy? Is it because he likes to put some runners on, almost every time he pitches? Would there be any debate if he was a 1-2-3 guy except for those 3 games and was still 18/21?

Granted that him being a 1-2-3 guy would be less stressful in the 9th, but he gets the job done as is.

*IIRC

Fourth I believe. I think his save numbers are misleading, more a product of playing on a good team and getting a lot of opportunities more than him being effective. Look at his WHIP and he's terrible with inherited runners as well. I'm not ready to run him out of town but you can't expect to keep getting lucky when he makes things "interesting" every time out.

Transmogrified Tiger · Post by **Transmogrified Tiger** » June 5 06, 9:49 pm

G. Keenan wrote:
Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
bronx_bird wrote:It's time to think about some ch-ch-ch-changes. It really is.
I don't know about that. Yeah, this is frustrating. But he still gets it done enough to justify being the closer for a contending team. He would really have to implode to justify moving him out of the role.
What do you consider 'getting it done'? With the number of baserunners he's given up, his success in save situations could be construed as being a matter of time before he implodes, rather than a display of an ability to finish the game.

Wow, that was worded terribly, I hope my point got across.
I mean that, as someone posted above, he has converted 18 of 21 attempts (I'm assuming that figure is right). I admit that he is pitching terribly in the process, just getting the saves by the skin of his teeth, but he is still getting the saves at a satisfactory, though not ideal, rate.

So then I guess my question is that do you see that as Izzy's ability to get out of jams/close the door/etc., or a streak of good fortune that won't continue at his current peripheral performance?

Wiecker · Post by **Wiecker** » June 5 06, 9:53 pm

Just to put some numbers out there regarding AW:

MAY 14, 2 ER....That's a blown save in the 9th.
MAY 24, 2 ER....That's a blown save in the 9th.

AW is amazing, but if he was a closer, he would probably have the same Save/Save Opp stats as Izzy does, if not worse.

bronx_bird · Post by **bronx_bird** » June 5 06, 9:53 pm

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a the-sky-is-falling type guy at all. I just have never considered Izzy a championship team-caliber closer...and I felt like the last couple of years, we could have won in spite of this. I'm not feeling like that this year. He's a quality pitcher and racks up good numbers, but I do not think he's the proper late-game anchor for winning deep in the playoffs. I'm also not suggesting any of the younger guys out there are obvious candidates to step up into this role, either...but I wouldn't get bent out of shape if the deck were shuffled a bit in the coming games/weeks.