Blown Saves: The Effect on Closers, and Your Team

Sat down to enjoy a mid-afternoon game yesterday. While I enjoyed the game I was baffled by the managerial decisions of the manager. Furthermore, I was even more baffled by the defense of the decision from local beat writers and local fans. Texas' Ron Washington failed to use his All-Star Closer in the bottom of the Ninth inning in a tie-game. Hell, he didn't even use his solid set-up man. Instead he used a pitcher who will for an intents and purposes will be back at AAA Round Rock later this month. Three pitches into the ninth inning, walk-off home-run for Oakland's Brandon Hicks.


So the outcry began, many fans wanted to know why Nathan wasn't used? Why Adams wasn't used? But then the foolish statements began. A sampling (twitter feeds redacted):

• "a blown save would have been more devastating than the walkoff we suffered, adams was the right move"
• "For us to win today, we needed a pitcher to get 3 outs with a lead, that is the situation for Nathan"
• "why wouldn't he use Adams to get to the 10th? Oh yea, he gave up a walk off not to long ago also."
• "Nathan wouldn't pitch on road in tie."

Before I even get into the statistical part of the study, let me ask you this hypothetical. 


Tie-Game Top 9, two on, no outs. You have a Triple-A level hitter up, but on the bench is your star player who also happens to be the best defensive player in the league. You don't bring the star player in, because you only want to use him when you have a lead on the road for defensive purposes. Your team fails to score, and loses in the bottom half of the ninth.


Think of the outrage, you would be seeing comments like "Fire Manager So-So for not playing star in the top of the ninth" Yet when a team doesn't bring its best bullpen arm into a tied game in the ninth inning, people come up with excuses. "Closer wouldn't pitch on the road in a tie" "Gotta save him for the save", give me a break, use your best available pitcher in the situation. The risk, you won't have him for the save in extra innings... Yeah exactly, you gotta get the lead first, and having the lead is pretty important...at least if you want to win the game.


Well I hate to break it to you, the save is merely a stat. No different than a win, it quantifies something sure, but in the end the value to a team of a win is much greater than the value of saving the closer in case there is a save.


So now to the fun part, debunking the myth that closers perform poorly after a blown save.


QUESTION: Do Closers Perform Worse In The Game After a Blown-Save?


For this study I took the 19 closer who have spent nearly the entire season as the teams closer (as such Washington and the Dodgers for example were not included, but Milwaukee, who just replaced Axford and the Giants, who appear to be close to replacing Casilla, were). I went through and compiled every blown save for these pitchers this season. In this case there were 53 Blown-Saves by the 19 pitchers in the study. I also compiled how many innings they lasted in the blown save, how many earned runs were allowed, and how many controllable base-runners reached during the outing (via hit, walk, intentional BB, and HBP). After that I looked at the game they pitched immediately following the blown-save and compiled the same statistics. If it wasn't a save opportunity I also looked if they converted the next save.


So the question is, does a blown-save have a negative effect on the "closers" next appearance?


Here is the data first for blown saves, followed by the outing immediately after a blown save:


Game in which blown-save occurred

• 53 Blown-Saves
• 47 IP
• 87 ER
• 164 BR (base-runners)
• 16.65 ERA
• 3.49 BRIP (base-runners per inning pitched)

Post-Blown Save

• 51 Games Pitched (2 pitchers have yet to pitch since the last BSv)
• 47.33 IP
• 14 ER
• 47 BR
• 2.66 ERA
• 0.99 BRIP

Overall Statistics For Sample Closers Regardless of Saves

• 353 Saves
• 53 Blown Saves
• 86.9% Conversion Rate
• 670.33 IP
• 227 ER
• 809 BR
• 3.05 ERA
• 1.21 BRIP

Let's take this a little deeper,


In those outings immediately post-blown save how many were save opportunities?

• 31 Post-BSv Save Opportunities
• 29 Saves
• 93.5% Conversion Rate

Meaning 20 of the appearances were not in save situations. But the 31 that were resulted in a conversion rate of 93.5% which is higher than the closers overall save percentage which was 86.9% (353 saves, 53 blown saves).


Furthermore in those 51 outings, 22 of them were clean outings (meaning no one reached base). 43.1% clean outings.


Lastly, how many saves were converted in the next save opportunity regardless of when in came for the closer? 

• 50 Save Opportunities (3 pitchers have yet to have a save op since the last BSv)
• 47 Saves
• 94% Conversion Rate

Almost directly in line with the statistic above. In other words, the next save opportunity you should expect a bump in performance from your everyday closer.


CONCLUSION:


A closer blowing a save does not have an overall negative effect on his next performance. In fact, statistically he performs at a higher level after a blown-save. Therefore, the cost of a blown-save to a team should not be considered when making game-based decisions.


If you are a fantasy owner and see your closer got a blown-save, don't sit him for the next game, chances are he'll get the save and chances are he'll perform at a higher level than before.


For comparison sake, the 19 closers in this study as a whole have put up the following "averages" throughout the season.

• ERA: 3.05
• BRIP: 1.21

Whereas immediately post-blown save

• ERA: 2.66
• BRIP: .99

So after a blown-save we have statistical evidence that the next outing they will actually outperform the average they could be expected to produce.