The only time this is real problem is in leagues with severe restrictions on FA movement. If you can’t freely swap closers by raiding the waiver wire, you need to pay for a good one.

Did anyone out there own K-Rod last year and not win saves?

With 62 saves, he was essentially two good closers (32 + 30). Somehow I think it would have been statistically impossible to own K-Rod and not win saves….

@IowaCubs: Guilty as charged. Also, I wear a Homburg.

@Fantasy Ball Junkie: It’s true that Nathan et al. have better job security, which is a point in their favor. Does the justify reaching for him in the 5th round when you can get a closer like Wilson in the 12th? Given the risk/reward ratio, I don’t think so. (Ask Putz owners from last year.)

@willclarkismyhero: Good question. Having never played H2H, I’m not familiar with the strategies. I do favor relievers with very high K/9 ratios, though. In fact, I thought the biggest argument in favor of, say, a Lidge or K-Rod would be the extra Ks (i.e. in counting categories, rather than averages categories) — until I checked the numbers and saw there’s not a huge difference (i.e. 10 to 20 Ks).

That said, three high-K closers can give you 60-70 extra Ks over three low-K closers, which is significant. But then think of what you’ve had to sacrifice to draft three such guys. (i.e. Your offense would suck.)

@Nick J: Actually, that’s exactly what it means. A pitcher who only contributes 70 IP to your total isn’t going to have the same effect as one who pitches 210 IP.

@BigFatHippo: It is true that top “name” closers always have more trade value than guys you grab late, or off the wire, mostly because other owners consider you “lucky” for having landed them. As outlined in my closer strategy, I tend to trade closers early and often, because there’s always a new one to be found for free. (Hello, Jensen Lewis!)

@drl25: He did! (I could go over his whole roster but Yahoo! doesn’t keep all that info from season to season.)

But the point is this: Even the most stellar reliever is only going to contribute 70 IP. That’s about 1/3 of a topline starter. (See above.) People get too entranced by ERA — but 210 IP of 3.25 ERA has a much bigger effect on your team ERA than does 70 IP of the same. In fact, the worse your total team ERA, the less someone like Borowski will skew it — because he becomes less and less of an outlier.

p.s. all the pitching examples in here are just that, examples. The team in question didn’t actually have Nathan, and Papelbon, and Wilson, and Harang, and Snell. I was just using his team ERA as a baseline from which to do comparisons.

@elwood: Good reasoning, but as anyone will tell you, it’s impossible to predict saves. Even harder than wins. The Yankees have a potent — i.e. non-saves-friendly offense (i.e. they should theoretically blow a lot of people out) — yet Mo Rivera does just fine, saves-wise, every year. And no one would have pegged Valverde for the saves lead last year. Or look at F. Cordero year to year. There are too many variables to try and pinpoint how many saves someone is likely to get.

p.s. – i’m positive this team with the 3.25 didnt waste a draft pick on a top rp before being forced to pitch ian snell every week. ian snell was miles away from that stellar era.