I wanted to point out an article I saw yesterday in the Wall Street Journal online called The Evolution from Homers to Holds, written by the site’s fantasy baseball guy. The article is more-or-less a har har rundown of some of the more obscure fantasy stats, which for the writer’s purpose includes holds. He’s kind of making fun of holds, which I can be a get a little defensive about.
I love holds, but they don’t get much respect. MLB keeps track of them, but not as an official stat. Maybe due to some old contract with Rolaids. Put crudely, saves for guys who aren’t closers. The unsung heroes of the pitching staff. Scot Sheilds and more recently Heath Bell. The Korean league incorporates holds into its telecasts as often as saves. They get it.
The WSJ author is saying that as far as the obscure stats go, holds is actually ok. If you’re into that sort of thing…ie. a nerd. But in yesterday’s Diamondbacks/Giants game Chad Qualls proved why he is one of the better relievers in the game, regardless of the fact that he’s not a closer.
Fred Lewis at the plate, Dbacks up 3-2, runners on first and second, one out, Qualls is brought in to face Fred Lewis. One pitch, Lewis hits a nice soft ground ball to second, double play inning over.
The Leverage Index of that one play, that one pitch, was 3.73 and was easily the biggest play of the game in terms of weight. For his work Qualls gets a .170 win share, which was the same share that Eric Byrnes, who hit a home run in the fifth, ended with.
I wouldn’t hesitate to call Qualls a better reliever than Brandon Lyon or Tony Pena, both of whom are above Qualls in the pecking order. Qualls has failed in his few opportunities to close games, having blown 13 chances and saved only seven in his career, but his LOB% is usually around 80%, and as the annoucers said, he has a knack for the double play ball. Yesterday was already the fourth double play he’s induced this year.
4 responses so far ↓
1 Ted // Apr 23, 2008 at 3:27 am
And that is why the Bloomington Rosters are currently (what minute is this?) atop the EWC fantasy baseball standings. CQ!
On another note, he really can’t save games, blows saves like they were Bubbleyum (zing!). Which in some sense counters the idea that Saves are a figment of the imagination, rather than a taxing and emotionally demanding subset of IP.
2 simon // Apr 23, 2008 at 11:40 am
Holds are ok. I like them because they recognize middle relievers. But they’re not immune to bizarreness like Wins. A pitcher can earn a hold without recording an out (ie. enter game with a lead, walk batters without recording an out, but as long as the he leaves the game with the lead in tact, he earns a hold).
And it’s really too bad that Saves severely skewer reliever usage patterns, as managers use relievers so the closers can get the most number of saves, instead of the team earning the most wins. But many teams are wisening up and bringing in closers (bullpen aces) in tied games and stuff. (In theory, an average pitcher with a 4.50 ERA should be able to close out 2-3 run lead 9th innings, Borowski proved that last year.)
3 simon // Apr 23, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Anyways, the first reaction when I read this entry was “WSJ has a fantasy baseball writer!?!” I guess the game has really gone mainstream.
Oh, and the article mentions that holds are earned only when a reliever records an out, and that makes sense. But I remember seeing somewhere where a reliever was credited with a hold without recording an out.. there may be few variations on the hold, as it’s not an official statistic.
4 Shinsano // Apr 23, 2008 at 2:28 pm
I agree Simon. A guy can enter a game up by four, give up three runs, get one out and get a hold. Not a perfect stat at all…but like you said, it recognizes guys who don’t usually get credit.
And you point about Borowski is well taken. I’m wondering how many teams have closers that aren’t the best reliever on the team. Arizona, possibly SF, maybe even LA. Cubs.
I don’t have a lot of time so I’ll stop here.
Leave a Comment