Wednesday, January 07, 2004
On Braden Looper...
So the Mets went out and got themselves one o' them Proven Closers the folks on TV are always talking about. And not just any closer, the Mets somehow managed to get their hands on Braden Looper, formerly of the World Champion Florida Marlins. Of course, Looper did get shifted to the role of Proven Middle Reliever in favor of Ugueth Urbina in the middle of the season, but still, all that experience coming into the game in the ninth inning with nobody on base and finishing the job has to count for something, right?
Honestly, I don't hate this move. It really is in the best interest of the Mets to have someone on whose forehead they can stamp "CLOSER", thus decreasing the number of decisions Art Howe has to make and potentially screw up during the course of a game. And the fact that Looper's only signed up for two years seems to indicate that the team just sees him as a stopgap solution until one of the numerous minor league relievers Jim Duquette traded for last year is ready to take over the job. And Looper certainly isn't a bad pitcher. But is he really the best option the Mets have for a closer?
Well, first of all, he's pretty clearly not as good as the guy who couldn't hold onto the job last year, Armando Benitez. Last year, Benitez, despite the fact that his performance did continue its recent decline, was significantly better than Looper in terms of strikeout rate (9.25 per 9 innings vs. 6.25) and ERA+ (145 vs. 109) and Benitez was as about as good or better than Looper in terms of strikeout to walk ratio, opponents' batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage, and WHIP. In fact, the only number in which Looper had a significant edge over Benitez was home runs per nine innings, 0.45 to 0.74, and neither of those numbers is particularly awful. But Benitez wore out his welcome with not one but two New York teams last year. Hopefully Looper can keep his breakdowns confined to games other than those nationally televised ones against the Braves and Yankees.
But bringing back Benitez wasn't really an option for the Mets, and I certainly am not arguing that I wanted to see him back. So how does Looper compare to the Mets' internal options at closer? I took a look at David Weathers, Dan Wheeler and the much-criticized Mike Stanton (whose ESPN.com profile almost mockingly still shows him wearing a Yankee cap) in comparison to Looper and didn't find much to make him stand out from the pack. Of the four, Looper's strikeout/9 ratio ranked third, beating out just Wheeler, 6.25 to 6.18, but still trailing the leader, Weathers (7.70) by a decent margin. As for strikeout to walk ratio, Looper's 1.93 did rank second, but the difference among the group was fairly minor between Stanton's 1.79 and Wheeler's 2.06. The most encouraging sign was that Looper's home run rate was the best of the group, and coming to Shea should allow him to keep that up. Weathers' 0.62 was pretty good too, while Wheeler and Stanton both gave up a little over one home run per nine innings. Looper and Weathers tied for the worst opponents' batting average among the four, at .264 and Looper bested Weathers for third place out of four in terms of opponents' on-base percentage, .323 to .346, as walks were more of a problem for Weathers than the other three last year. Looper did manage to put up the best opponents' slugging percentage of the four, .363, but the worst of the four was Wheeler's .392. Again, not a huge edge for Looper. As far as WHIP, Looper came in third, ahead of only Weathers. Interestingly, Mike Stanton actually had the best of the four in that category. His bloated 4.57 ERA last year seems to be largely the result of giving up six home runs in just 45.1 innings. That seems to be largely a function of luck and small sample size to me, and unlikely to be repeated at the friendly confines of Shea Stadium. He did give up four of the six on the road last year, but maybe we're in for a little bounce back from Stanton. In terms of ERA+, only Stanton's 93 was worse than Looper's 109 last year, and in fact Weathers rivaled Benitez with a 138.
So what does all this tell us? Well, Braden Looper doesn't seem to be a significantly better option at closer than the guys the Mets already had under contract, but he doesn't seem significantly worse, either. Weathers seems like perhaps the best option, although his walks (4.11 per 9) are a little scary. I suppose the hope is that Rick Peterson can work his magic and turn Looper into a dominant closer, but couldn't he have worked said magic on, say, the 26-year-old Wheeler, too? ¶ joe | 5:13 PM |
So the Mets went out and got themselves one o' them Proven Closers the folks on TV are always talking about. And not just any closer, the Mets somehow managed to get their hands on Braden Looper, formerly of the World Champion Florida Marlins. Of course, Looper did get shifted to the role of Proven Middle Reliever in favor of Ugueth Urbina in the middle of the season, but still, all that experience coming into the game in the ninth inning with nobody on base and finishing the job has to count for something, right?
Honestly, I don't hate this move. It really is in the best interest of the Mets to have someone on whose forehead they can stamp "CLOSER", thus decreasing the number of decisions Art Howe has to make and potentially screw up during the course of a game. And the fact that Looper's only signed up for two years seems to indicate that the team just sees him as a stopgap solution until one of the numerous minor league relievers Jim Duquette traded for last year is ready to take over the job. And Looper certainly isn't a bad pitcher. But is he really the best option the Mets have for a closer?
Well, first of all, he's pretty clearly not as good as the guy who couldn't hold onto the job last year, Armando Benitez. Last year, Benitez, despite the fact that his performance did continue its recent decline, was significantly better than Looper in terms of strikeout rate (9.25 per 9 innings vs. 6.25) and ERA+ (145 vs. 109) and Benitez was as about as good or better than Looper in terms of strikeout to walk ratio, opponents' batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage, and WHIP. In fact, the only number in which Looper had a significant edge over Benitez was home runs per nine innings, 0.45 to 0.74, and neither of those numbers is particularly awful. But Benitez wore out his welcome with not one but two New York teams last year. Hopefully Looper can keep his breakdowns confined to games other than those nationally televised ones against the Braves and Yankees.
But bringing back Benitez wasn't really an option for the Mets, and I certainly am not arguing that I wanted to see him back. So how does Looper compare to the Mets' internal options at closer? I took a look at David Weathers, Dan Wheeler and the much-criticized Mike Stanton (whose ESPN.com profile almost mockingly still shows him wearing a Yankee cap) in comparison to Looper and didn't find much to make him stand out from the pack. Of the four, Looper's strikeout/9 ratio ranked third, beating out just Wheeler, 6.25 to 6.18, but still trailing the leader, Weathers (7.70) by a decent margin. As for strikeout to walk ratio, Looper's 1.93 did rank second, but the difference among the group was fairly minor between Stanton's 1.79 and Wheeler's 2.06. The most encouraging sign was that Looper's home run rate was the best of the group, and coming to Shea should allow him to keep that up. Weathers' 0.62 was pretty good too, while Wheeler and Stanton both gave up a little over one home run per nine innings. Looper and Weathers tied for the worst opponents' batting average among the four, at .264 and Looper bested Weathers for third place out of four in terms of opponents' on-base percentage, .323 to .346, as walks were more of a problem for Weathers than the other three last year. Looper did manage to put up the best opponents' slugging percentage of the four, .363, but the worst of the four was Wheeler's .392. Again, not a huge edge for Looper. As far as WHIP, Looper came in third, ahead of only Weathers. Interestingly, Mike Stanton actually had the best of the four in that category. His bloated 4.57 ERA last year seems to be largely the result of giving up six home runs in just 45.1 innings. That seems to be largely a function of luck and small sample size to me, and unlikely to be repeated at the friendly confines of Shea Stadium. He did give up four of the six on the road last year, but maybe we're in for a little bounce back from Stanton. In terms of ERA+, only Stanton's 93 was worse than Looper's 109 last year, and in fact Weathers rivaled Benitez with a 138.
So what does all this tell us? Well, Braden Looper doesn't seem to be a significantly better option at closer than the guys the Mets already had under contract, but he doesn't seem significantly worse, either. Weathers seems like perhaps the best option, although his walks (4.11 per 9) are a little scary. I suppose the hope is that Rick Peterson can work his magic and turn Looper into a dominant closer, but couldn't he have worked said magic on, say, the 26-year-old Wheeler, too? ¶ joe | 5:13 PM |
