METS CLOSERS: A RETROSPECTIVE
Just a quick rundown of the Mets closers since 1990.
YEAR PLAYER IP ERA SO BB HR SV 2005 Braden Looper 59.1 3.94 27 22 7 28 2004 Braden Looper 83.1 2.70 60 16 5 29 2003 Armando Benitez 51.0 3.71 35 17 6 21 2002 Armando Benitez 67.1 2.27 79 25 8 33 2001 Armando Benitez 76.1 3.77 93 40 12 43 2000 Armando Benitez 76.0 2.60 106 38 10 41 1999 Armando Benitez 78.0 1.85 128 41 4 22 1999 John Franco 40.2 2.88 41 19 1 19 1998 John Franco 64.2 3.62 59 29 4 38 1997 John Franco 60.0 2.55 53 20 3 36 1996 John Franco 54.0 1.83 48 21 2 28 1995 John Franco 51.2 2.44 41 17 4 29 1994 John Franco 50.0 2.70 42 19 2 30 1993 John Franco 36.1 5.20 29 19 6 10 1992 John Franco 33.0 1.64 20 11 1 15 1991 John Franco 55.1 2.93 45 18 2 30 1990 John Franco 67.2 2.53 56 21 4 33The Mets have featured only three closers in the past 16 seasons. Johnny Franco was a very good pitcher for a very long time. Armando Benitez' 1999 will go down as one of the single greatest reliever seasons in baseball history. His K/9 rate of 14.77 was the best ever until Eric Gagne bested it a few years back. He also only surrendered four homeruns that year in almost 80 innings.
Looking at these numbers I forgot how good Mets closers have been. We have given them a lot of grief, particularly because of certain blown saves in certain big games. On the whole, Franco and Benitez were terrific, and even Looper had a very good 2004 season before falling in a ditch in 2005.
Billy Wagner probably won't approach the numbers 'Mando put up in 1999, but I expect him to be damn good.
27 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Closers
Trivia question: Which Met not named Franco or Benitez had the most saves in the 90's?
the benitez problem
No Question
Benitez
Also just think: how many closers not named Rivera, Wagner, and Hoffman would you rather have had over that same time period (1999-2002)? Automatic closers with a proven postseason track record are extremely rare and practically nonexistant outside of Rivera.
by Alex Nelson on Nov 29, 2005 10:58 PM EST up reply actions
I watched in horror
Fortunately we came back (I was in the huge bathroom line at PacBell for Fonzie's blast in the 10th) and I watched Franco strikeout Bonds on a low and away changeup to win it.
That's an example why having two "closers" is more important than having five good starters in my book: Heilman isn't blocked by Wagner. You need someone to pitch the 7th and 8th and especially a fireman for when the bases are juiced in the 6th. Think Rivera and Wetteland 1996: we should have two aces in the pen, it will take the pressure off the entire staff and team.
3 most saves
AY
Proven Winner
On Hernandez, I don't know that he's "in the bag". If the Mets want to overpay for a catcher they can have anyone they want, but there is no clear stud in the catching crop as their was in the group of closers (Wagner) or available sluggers (Delgado). I'd be perfectly happy with Ramon Castro catching next season. He was solid all-around and he makes very little money. The Mets need some cheaper players at some positions because in a few years David Wright and Jose Reyes will be making big bucks and they won't be able to afford to overpay for a 36-year-old Molina.
idiot,
I leave you idiots alone for a few minutes...
With all due respect to Eric Simon and to the numbers, I have to say that I'm more sympathetic to the knee-jerk Mets fan's reaction on this question than on most others. My (our) memory of Benitez -- which ought to include a fair picture of his at-times absolute dominance -- is, instead, colored by the gradual tail-off into mediocrity, the lost control and the eventually mediocre fastball, and most of all by all those big-game chokes. The guy was a truly godlike great closer in regular-season games against Colorado and Pittsburgh. But I can name so many times in late-season Braves games, Yankees interleague play, and the postseason that he had to be bailed out by the dessicated corpse of Johnny Franco. I could never really say I was happy to see Armando enter a game; and in my book he's a great example of the irrelevancy of the save as a statistic.
All that said, what I'd really like to see for once in my frigging life is a team that produces more than league-average numbers of runs, and so doesn't have to win as many close games. We long-time Mets fans get hung up on the bullpen, and on these late-and-close situations, I think, because we've forgotten what a lineup of real hitters can do. The Mets have been relatively pitching-strong and hitting-weak for so long that I can't remember what it feels like to notch up a series of wins by more than a couple runs each. I'll go out on a limb here and say it even more plainly: I think Delgado is worth more wins to the '06 Mets than Wagner. Maybe many more. (Of course, and I say this with the same shit-eatin' grin we're all bearing this week, who needs to pick just one?)
(Molina? No way. But we've discussed that elsewhere.)
about the hitting
2000?
You can try to make the case for 2000, but I think that 99 was much much better. (I still think that team would have beaten the Yankees, if they had just gotten past the Braves.)
Ever since then an anemic offense and inability to drive in runners on base have been hallmarks of the Mets.
by peteyfan45 @ Amazin' Avenue on Dec 1, 2005 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
yeah 99 is what i meant oops
it's total hearsay, but...
I have to say that I agree with you, though: a Castro/Piazza platoon would still be one of the most productive catcher positions in the National League. Hell, each of them could just catch every other game, or break it up 60/40, and both would remain fresh throughout the season.
If I were Mike, I'd reconsider whatever the Mets might have offered in light of the recent moves the team has made, because I would want one more shot at a ring. Granted, it might be an outside shot, but this team is already much improved from last year.
How much sweeter would Piazza's career be if he retired after winning a World Series with the Mets?
Yes, but...
by 2QYankeehater on Nov 30, 2005 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
thanks for the baseball lesson
Well, since there are 162, I'd say Castro and Piazza should split their time 60 PERCENT and 40 PERCENT, or roughly 97 games for Castro and 65 for Piazza. Give me a break.
OK, enough with the snark...
Yeah, we all know that Piazza ain't what he used to be, but that's irrelevant. The point is (and I think I mentioned it), Piazza last season was still among the most productive catchers on offense in the National League!
Go to MLB.com and look it up. You can sort the stats by NL catchers. Piazza led the NL among catchers in home runs and RBI. He was third in total bases. Tied for second in walks. Tied for fifth in slugging. Granted, his OBP and BA leave something to be desired, but it's not like there are a ton of catchers in the league who are kicking his ass on offense.
And when you add Castro's numbers to Piazza's, which I'm not going to do right now, you get pretty damn good numbers at the position, relative to the rest of the league.
And that was my original point. Yeah, he's not 1999-style Mike. But if he could handle a platoon (and a pay cut), I don't think it could hurt the Mets, and it would be real nice for him to have one more shot at a championship. Fan favorite and all that. Jeez.
by kingcritical on Dec 1, 2005 12:32 AM EST up reply actions
ooooo
agreed
What I don't like is when people crap on Piazza just because he doesn't hit like he used to.
A quick review of the stats proves that even last season, Piazza was among the best hitting catchers.
Once more, in case some people still don't get it: if he would agree to a huge pay cut and less playing time, I think it would be nice to have him on the team. Bat him eighth when he plays.
Yeah...
by 2QYankeehater on Dec 4, 2005 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
No
by 2QYankeehater on Nov 30, 2005 6:03 PM EST reply actions
2B
Durham
Nomar?
its a ground ball...trickling... its a fair ball, its by Buckner, rou


























