Is it Time to Revive the Closer by Committee?

Yes.

Look at that. Two posts in a row that should really only be one word long. But, two posts in a row where I'm going to keep expanding. Really milking this blogging thing.

But, of course the answer is yes. There's no need to have one guy assigned as “closer” and have him always pitch in save situations. When you do that, all you're really doing is allowing him to collect this made up “save” stat so that he will cost you more moeny later. Why would you do that?

The argument for the closer by committee is pretty simple, and multi-pronged.

First of all, there's been some growing sentiment that the ninth inning isn't always when you want your “best” pitcher. How many times did the Sox have a one (or three) run lead in the eighth or ninth inning, have Kimbrel start warming, and then see the Sox score three runs in the inning? Then the Sox would bring him into a five run game because he was already warm. What if he had pitched the eighth inning, instead, when he was needed more? Let him hold the lead in the eighth, and let anyone you want pitch the ninth with a five run cushion?

Not having a true closer also lets you use your bullpen without worrying about roles or egos. I've talked many times about the idea that a team without stars can be easier to win with. It was the theory tossed out to explain why Tampa Bay was able to perform well without all-stars everywhere. The theory is that the Red Sox have to start Mookie every day, and lead him off. Even if the numbers might suggest he's not the best option. Maybe he hits poorly against a pitcher, or in a certain park, or after two games in a row. Maybe Brock Holt happens to hit the pitcher well, or hits well in that park. The Red Sox would never sit Mookie and say Holt is the better option. But, the Rays could. They start whichever nine guys happen to give the best options on a given day. The Dodgers did a similar thing. The Patriots do it too. They don't worry about getting Gronk the ball. If the team they're facing is poor agains the run, or slot receivers, Gronk’s not getting the ball that day. It seems to work for them.

So, imagine giving Cora that freedom to run his bullpen. We really got a good glimpse of how that might work from this last postseason. Imagine if he simply warmed up whichever pitcher happened to be the best option against the next few guys in the order? Maybe Barnes has really good numbers against them, so he gets the ninth. Or, the next game he gets one key out in the seventh against a guy he has owned for his career? Maybe Brasier is dominant in night games in New York. He's closing that day.

We know Cora is willing to manage like this, at least to an extent. He's said that he's left pitchers in who appeared to be struggling because he was still their best matchup for the next couple guys in the batting order. I bet he'd love to use three guys in the ninth inning if he felt that gave him the best chance to win the game.

So, by not using the traditional closer role, the Red Sox can save money AND give Cora the flexibility to win games however he can. That seems like a no-brainer to me.

What's the downside?