If Feliz Starts, Who Closes?

To attempt and offset the loss of Cliff Lee, the Rangers are stretching out Neftali Feliz in spring training, and are keeping an open mind about converting him back into being a starting pitcher. Ron Washington has made it clear that he prefers Feliz in the ninth inning role, but the Rangers are willing to use March to see whether Feliz can impress them enough to crack the rotation.

There has been a lot of talk about whether Feliz can successfully make this transition. Evan Grant did a great piece today on his repertoire and how his secondary pitches may affect the team’s decision on his ultimate role. However, there has been less talk about the guys in line to replace Feliz, and the reality that the Rangers simply don’t have any natural replacements for the closer’s role if Feliz does end up in the rotation.

There are essentially four relievers in the organization who would likely get some consideration for the closing job if Feliz makes the conversion – Alexi Ogando, Darren Oliver, Mark Lowe, and Arthur Rhodes. All of them have value, but none of them are good fits for the closer’s job.

The big difference between being a middle reliever and a closer isn’t the mentality or the preparation, but instead, the distribution of batters faced. Closers, like starting pitchers, don’t get used selectively depending on who is coming to the plate for the opposition. The rigidity of the role calls for the closer to face whoever is coming up to the plate in the ninth inning of close games, and he is charged with getting them out, no matter what side of the plate they hit from.

For all four of the Rangers setup guys, getting out hitters who hit from the opposite side of the plate is a problem. Their one common trait is that they have huge platoon splits. Here are their 2010 numbers (or, in Lowe’s case, 2009) against same-handed and opposite handed hitters:

Vs Same:

Darren Oliver: 0.91 BB/9, 13.04 K/9, 0.61 HR/9, 1.56 FIP, 1.74 xFIP
Arthur Rhodes: 0.38 BB/9, 9.89 K/9, 1.14 HR/9, 2.78 FIP, 2.40 xFIP
Alexi Ogando: 2.20 BB/9, 10.36 K/9, 0.31 HR/9, 2.07 FIP, 2.90 xFIP
Mark Lowe: 2.25 BB/9, 7.16 K/9, 0.00 HR/9, 2.26 FIP, 3.81 xFIP

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed. We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member. 1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other. 2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off. 3. Dark mode and Classic mode! 4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them. 5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects. 6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.) 7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only. 8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO. 9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members. 10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features! We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it. In case you didn't read all that, here's the short version. Membership includes:
✓Ad-free browsing
✓Unlimited FanGraphs & RotoGraphs articles
✓Historical & platoon projections
✓Leaderboard & player-page stat heatmaps
✓One-click data exports
✓Customizable player-page dashboards
✓Dark & Classic site modes
✓Weekly Members-only mailbag
✓FanGraphs Walk-Off, your year in review
✓Optional homepage photo removal
✓Gift articles to non-Members
✓Full postseason coverage

Vs Opposite:

Darren Oliver: 3.38 BB/9, 6.19 K/9, 0.56 HR/9, 3.64 FIP, 3.90 xFIP
Arthur Rhodes: 4.88 BB/9, 6.89 K/9, 0.29 HR/9, 3.59 FIP, 4.92 xFIP
Alexi Ogando: 6.23 BB/9, 4.50 K/9, 0.67 HR/9, 5.23 FIP, 5.91 xFIP
Mark Lowe: 4.50 BB/9, 8.50 K/9, 1.75 HR/9, 5.24 FIP, 4.41 xFIP

These four guys are death to same-handed hitters, which gives Ron Washington a bullpen built to play the match-ups. Rhodes and Oliver give him the depth to make tough LH sluggers face impossible-to-hit setup men twice in the same game, while Lowe and Ogando can mow through right-handed bats with few problems. When giving the platoon advantage, these four are fantastic.

When facing guys who hit from the other side of the box, however, their effectiveness shrivels. Oliver is still decent enough and would probably be the best option for the job, but he’s not nearly the dominating force against right-handed bats that he is against lefties. Rhodes is shaky at best, while Ogando showed no real abilities to get lefties out last year, issuing more walks than strikeouts against LHBs in his rookie season. Lowe’s extreme fly ball nature comes back to bite him against lefties, who have hit 15 of the 17 home runs he’s allowed in his career.

All of these guys are best utilized in setup roles, where they can be used in situations dictated by the type of batters coming up in the following inning. Thrust into the closer’s role, each would likely struggle, and the ninth inning could turn into something of a debacle for the Rangers.

This is one of the main reasons why I don’t think Feliz will end up sticking in the rotation. It’s tough for me to see Washington being comfortable with any of these four options, especially when his alternative is a guy who had no problems with hitters from either side of the plate last year. However, if the Rangers decide to stick with Feliz as a starting pitcher, they should strongly consider going with a closer-by-committee approach.

Ogando, Lowe, Oliver, and Rhodes are all dominating relievers when given the match-up advantage. If Washington was flexible enough to abandon the single-closer model and decide who pitches the ninth inning based on the opponents line-up, the Rangers would be able to exploit the fact that they have a bullpen full of pitchers with extreme platoon splits. Without Feliz in the mix, they actually have the ideal setup for a by-committee ninth inning approach. My guess is that this will prove to be too radical of an idea for Washington, however, and that at the end of the day, Feliz will end up closing and these four will slide into their natural setup roles.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

30 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Mike G.
15 years ago

“The big difference between being a middle reliever and a closer isn’t the mentality or the preparation, but instead, the distribution of batters faced.”

Every mainstream journalist who writes about Major League Baseball should memorize that sentence.

Matt
15 years ago

No Tanner Scheppers mention? Given that the Rangers aren’t opposed to handing late-inning reliever roles to guys with very few innings under their belt, I see Scheppers as a very realistic possibility.

suicide squeezeMember since 2016
15 years ago
Reply to  Matt

As a Scheppers owner in a keeper league, I hope you are right.

d_iMember since 2016
15 years ago

doesn’t Tanner Scheppers at least deserve a mention as a possibility?

t ball
15 years ago
Reply to  d_i

In the long run, sure. But right now? No. I don’t see the Rangers installing Scheppers as a closer right away. Scheppers may reach Arlington this year, but likely in the same role that Feliz had in 2009, pitching 1-2 innings in the 6th-7th and occasionally the 8th.

Oakland Dan
15 years ago

Of course Washington prefers Feliz in the 9th inning role. From a job security standpoint, there is no downside to keeping Feliz where he is, as no one is going to think to blame the Rangers’ lack of open-mindedness if their 5th starter craps the bed.

Jason B
15 years ago
Reply to  Oakland Dan

Precisely. Lots of downside if you try something new and fail (he ruined his arm! Our bullpen is a mess!) but you can (and most managers do, for job security purposes) always play it safe, risk-averse and do what everyone else does (keep the ‘established’ closer and try a mishmash of stuff in the 5th starter slot to see what works).

Scout Finch
15 years ago

FWIW, Ogando looked pretty nasty in the postseason last year.

58 PA is a pretty small sample size, no?

this guy
15 years ago
Reply to  Scout Finch

yes, but then dave’s argument doesn’t work, so we’re pretending the sample is sufficient.

t ball
15 years ago

I would love Washington to do as you suggest, and choose that day’s closer based on the situation, but I’d be shocked as hell to actually see him do it.

adohaj
15 years ago
Reply to  t ball

A lot of teams would fare better if they did that. At least that’s what the numbers tell me.

mister_rob
15 years ago

That idea sounds better in theory than it would play out in reality

Bravesfan
15 years ago

Sir, you did not mention Darren O’ Day, one of the best relief pitchers in baseball!

GiantHusker
15 years ago

Who cares who “closes”? A starter is far more valuable.

Pierre
15 years ago
Reply to  GiantHusker

Alexi Ogando’s fantasy owners, that’s who. Sheesh.

SKob
15 years ago
Reply to  GiantHusker

I’m in an AL only 4X4 12 team keeper league! 2 closers wins you the category, and I have the chance to trade for Scheppers. So I care! Go read up on Nick Blackburn!

Oscar
15 years ago

A Dave Cameron article using single-season splits as definitive evidence of a platoon split? Haven’t you written the exact same article saying that single-season splits for relievers are literally meaningless? The biggest sample among those stats has got to be, what, 35 IP?

Matt
15 years ago
Reply to  Oscar

Not when you’re comparing these 4 relievers in a vacuum, like he is here.

hunterfan
15 years ago
Reply to  Matt

I have no idea how “comparing them in a vacuum” justifies anything at all. Judging things on small sample sizes still results in (nearly) meaningless conclusions.

joe
15 years ago
Reply to  Matt

so sample size doesn’t mater so long as you compare sets of data that have similarly small sample sizes?

Pretty sure that’s not how statistics works.

Or to take it to an extreme… if you compared platoon splits of 4 relievers based on their work in September, it’d be OK so long as each of them had pitched similar innings?

Dave should have regressed this… kind of painful and a chore, but the conclusion may have been different. He could have at least looked at career #’s or a 3 year sample size for the pitchers who had them, unless he felt they had changed their pitching style in the last year.

Career FIP splits (same hand/opposite hand)
Darren Oliver 3.90 / 4.39
Arthur Rhodes: 2.62 / 3.61 (still significant but not as dramatic)
Mark Lowe: 2.90 / 5.52 (though xFIP’s are within a run)
Ogando… is only that one year sample size

And these are non-regressed #’s….

this guy
15 years ago
Reply to  Oscar

Internet Sabermetrics = Sample bias for the sake of generating hits on a blog.

Jesse
15 years ago

Kinda makes trading Frankie Francisco look a lot more questionable.

hunterfan
15 years ago

You neglect to mention one other guy the Rangers have on their staff: Darren O’Day.

Not sure where to find the splits for FIP, xFIP, and the counting stats per nine, but I wouldn’t be suprised if his were just as good if not better than Oliver’s. Anybody know where to find them?

Kevin
15 years ago
Reply to  hunterfan

Too lazy to pull it all, but here’s FIP and xFIP

O’Day vs. Righties 2010: 3.62 FIP, 3.73 xFIP
O’Day vs. Righties Career: 3.14 FIP, 4.02 xFIP

O’Day vs. Lefties 2010: 3.19 FIP, 4.86 xFIP
O’Day vs. Lefties Career: 3.80 FIP 4.12 xFIP

All this data was found on the splits tab of Darren O’Day’s page on this wonderful secret baseball site called fangraphs.com.

Kevin
15 years ago
Reply to  hunterfan

Aww hell, here’s his career rate stats:

Versus lefties: 6.87 K/9 2.72 BB/9 0.80 HR/9
Versus righties: 7.27 K/9 2.26 BB/9 0.42 HR/9

huh?
15 years ago

Radical? Or impractical? Do you want to explain the logistics of how this would work? Do you save all 4 for the ninth, or just 2? And if you’re saving these guys for the ninth, you’ll be exposing other relievers to poor matchups in the 7th and 8th.

johan
15 years ago

Well if Feliz starts, wouldn’t that push Holland out of a rotation spot most likely? He has closer stuff in short stints. Maybe even Kirkman?

Scheppers has the arm to do it.

rotofan
15 years ago

Dave makes a key assumption — that middle relievers with platoon splits are used in a way to minimize the number of opposite-handed hitters.

But at least in the case of Darren Oliver in 2010, that assumption is false.

Here’s a breakdown in 2010 of the handedness of the batters faced by Feliz and Oliver:

Feliz (R) 131 TBF v. L 138 TBF v R
Oliver (L) 113 TBF v L 131 TBF v R

So Feliz faced opposite-handed batters 49% of the time in 2010 while Oliver faced opposite-handed batters 54% of the time.

And despite facing a greater percentage of opposite-handed hitters, Oliver was more effective overall, at least if xFIP is the measure, with a 2.86 xFIP compared to Feliz’s 3.68 xFIP.

To understand why, there is another split at play and one that may be just as important as handedness for a pitcher who earns half his pay in the hitters paradise of Arlington: home/away splits.

Feliz was strong on the road but was mortal at home, posting an xFIP of 3.03 in away games and a 4.13 xFIP at The Ballpark. By contrast, Oliver posted a nearly identical road record — a 3.09 xFIP — but was even better at home with a 2.62 xFIP. A look at his numbers shows why: A remarkable ability to adjust. Oliver’s k-rate dropped at home from 10.4 to 8.5 but his walk rate shriveled, from 3.09 to 1.21.

It seems to me the ability to adapt to a tough home park is as critical to a closer as the ability to overcome the natural platoon splits, and if that is true, then Oliver showed a great deal of promise in 2010.

this guy
15 years ago
Reply to  rotofan

This response destroys Dave’s articles for so many reasons.

CS Yankee
15 years ago

Didn’t they trade a decent closer to Toronto to pick up Nap?

Seems like poor planing on the Rangers part, first in telling Young we need you at 1B/DH…then get another platoon guy that bats from the same side that is 1B/C/DH…then don’t unload the Young (contract), all along while not exactly knowing on what they are doing with the Feliz?

Too many chiefs, not enough indians?