Should the Braves Be Looking For a New Closer?

The decision to change the closer is one of the most awkward a manager will face. Any other combination of bullpen arms can be shuffled around without most fans taking notice, but the save statistic and the entrance music make a closer highly conspicuous. Screw around with that guy, and it becomes a news story.
The Braves invested heavily in that position this winter, lavishing $16 million on 34-year-old Kenley Jansen. I’ll go to my grave believing this signing was at least partially about poaching a legendary Dodger the day after L.A. inked Freddie Freeman — you don’t want to go stag to prom when your ex has a date — but closers like Jansen don’t come along every day. The man pitched in three All-Star games and three World Series and entered the season with 350 career saves, more than Rollie Fingers, Robb Nen, or Bruce Sutter. Jansen had encountered some turbulence in the late 2010s and wasn’t putting up ERAs in the 1.00s anymore, but armed with a new sinker and slider, he’s still quite an effective closer.
Or, more accurately, he has been. In his past seven appearances dating back to August 27, Jansen has blown three saves in seven attempts, allowing 12 baserunners and three home runs in just 5.2 innings. On Sunday, the Braves launched a stirring five-run rally in the ninth to pull ahead of the Mariners, perhaps the only other team in all of baseball as hot as Atlanta. Jansen promptly surrendered two home runs and the lead. The second came on a 93-mph sinker right where Eugenio Suárez could 3-iron it into the Seattle bullpen. I had to look up what that pitch was, because the TV view bore little evidence of sink or cut.
MARINERS WALK IT OFF!! pic.twitter.com/ou5VYloSdX
— ROOT SPORTS™ | NW (@ROOTSPORTS_NW) September 11, 2022
Not a great way to lose a game, in short. And now Brian Snitker is getting questions about his star closer. So what should he do?
So here’s the good news for Atlanta: Jansen’s wobbliness over the past few weeks doesn’t seem to have jeopardized the Braves’ season. Since August 22, Atlanta is 11–5, which is the best record in the NL over that span. If Jansen doesn’t blow a save, Atlanta basically doesn’t lose. Moreover, if Snitker were determined to make a change, he has other options: Collin McHugh, A.J. Minter, or Raisel Iglesias, who’s as Proven Closer-y as they come and has allowed a solitary run in 17 appearances since coming over from the Angels at the deadline. Suffice it to say, this is not a situation where Jansen is the best of bad options.
But the question of whether to make a change is not actually a question, but three. First, is Jansen actually pitching poorly, or did he just get bum rushed by Julio Rodríguez? (An exit velocity of 117 mph looks ugly, but Rodríguez is going to end up doing that a lot over the next several years.) Second, is he pitching poorly enough that the benefits of a change outweigh the aggravation of reshuffling the bullpen? And finally, even if Jansen is going through a rough patch, is there a better place to hide him than the ninth inning?
So, for the first question: Jansen’s results definitely have not been good since the All-Star break. (All stats are current through Sunday’s games.)
| IP | ERA | AVG | OBP | SLG | wOBA | K% | BB% | HR/FB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st Half | 35.2 | 3.53 | .191 | .236 | .321 | .241 | 35.0 | 5.7 | 9.5 |
| 2nd Half | 17.1 | 4.67 | .231 | .346 | .523 | .366 | 25.6 | 14.1 | 14.3 |
That speaks to a pretty big drop in performance. A .241 opponent wOBA is about what Clay Holmes has put up this year; .366 is more in the neighborhood of a Jhoulys Chacín. The drop in strikeout rate and rise in walk rate are equally concerning.
But a look at the underlying numbers doesn’t reveal that much. Jansen’s pitch velocity is relatively consistent throughout his arsenal over this year, as is his spin rate. Jansen’s opponent hard-hit rate is up in the second half, but he was barreled twice on Sunday and just twice in his previous 23 appearances put together. That could just be one game. His whiff rate on his sinker and slider went through the floor in July and August, but given that he only throws a couple dozen secondary pitches per month, the difference between a 0% whiff rate and a 25% whiff rate can be as little as one or two pitches.
As troubling as his second-half stats are — and more than anything, the strikeout and walk numbers stand out as genuinely alarming — there’s no clear evidence in the underlying data that Jansen is nursing an injury or catastrophic mechanical problem.
The one concerning data point, and you really have to squint to see it, is that Jansen’s release point is starting to drop as the year goes on. It’s still a pretty tight grouping — within a quarter of an inch across all three pitches, most likely imperceptible to the batter — but it coincides with a decrease in the percentage of sliders Jansen threw at the edge of the strike zone in August. He has lived around the edge of the zone his entire career, getting hitters out not with big velocity or a magical breaking ball but with precision. The fact that he makes his living dotting the corners could leave him vulnerable to even a minute loss of command.
That could be enough to warrant yanking him from the closer’s role, or at least giving someone like Iglesias a turn so Jansen can have a few days off. But until and unless the problem gets worse, I wouldn’t make a change if I were Snitker.
All things being equal, I think it’s kind of silly to have an established capital-C closer in this day and age. But all things aren’t equal in the Braves’ case: Jansen, by his stature, his accomplishments, even his salary, is supposed to pitch the ninth inning. Removing him from that role, even for someone like Iglesias, would be a disruption for a team that’s playing extremely well at the moment. The Braves are a lock to make the playoffs; they can afford to wait and see if Jansen is really in trouble or if he’s just having a bad couple weeks.
Moreover, the ninth inning isn’t always a bad place to hide a pitcher who’s struggling. Ever since Andrew Miller set the world on fire in 2016, it hasn’t been a given that a team’s closer will be its best reliever. Some pitchers are best suited to multi-inning stints, entering with men on base, or unpredictable usage patterns. The Braves won the World Series last year thanks to a bullpen that was big on improvisation in the middle innings and had serious questions about its closer down the stretch. You might have heard about this; it was in the news. Keeping Jansen in the ninth inning leaves him with a predictable usage pattern, and if he pitches to the save rule, he’ll stay in his comfort zone, always enter the game with the bases clear, and leave the fireman role to pitchers more suited to it.
It’s not that Jansen can’t pitch with men on base; this season, he’s allowed a .281 opponent wOBA with the bases empty and .293 with runners on. For his career, those numbers are .245 and .236, respectively. The Dodgers occasionally used him as a multi-inning fireman. The Braves, though, have kept him out of those spots. He’s entered just three of 54 appearances this year with a runner on. McHugh has entered with a man on 19 times in 49 appearances, Minter 13 of 63, Tyler Matzek 14 of 35. Iglesias has also entered with the bases clear almost exclusively with Atlanta, but last year the Angels called him in 20 times with at least one runner on.
If Jansen enters a game with the bases empty, it also mitigates two career-long problems for him. The first: He’s not going to induce many double plays. He’s never been a ground ball pitcher, and his GB/FB ratio this year is 0.50, fourth-lowest out of 164 qualified relievers. And while baserunners are only 8-for-10 stealing off him this year, he still makes Jon Lester look like Tippy Martinez. When Tyrone Taylor got caught stealing off Jansen in May, he was the first baserunner a Jansen battery had nabbed since 2016.
It might seem paradoxical, given how much more conspicuous a blown save is in the ninth than in the seventh, but the Braves can protect Jansen from disadvantageous situations and still trot him out in save situations. We’ve known for decades that the save rule and the one-inning closer usage that it inspired are ridiculous. But Snitker, if he’s clever, can use that to his advantage.
Michael is a writer at FanGraphs. Previously, he was a staff writer at The Ringer and D1Baseball, and his work has appeared at Grantland, Baseball Prospectus, The Atlantic, ESPN.com, and various ill-remembered Phillies blogs. Follow him on Twitter, if you must, @MichaelBaumann.
I don’t think this is the right way to look at it at all. It seems pretty obvious that the problems didn’t start in late July but rather after he came back from the IL. Remember, he went on the IL with heart fluttering (or something like that) at the end of June and didn’t pitch again until mid-July. If you look at this game log, when he came back, he was not good. He returned into being vintage Jansen in mid-August before completely falling apart again.
Given Jansen’s history of heart problems, and the possibility of a connection between that and his current downturn, I don’t see how you can even begin to approach this without taking that into account. If there is any hint of a problem, I think you give him a rest. If there isn’t, then I think you move on to trying to fix him.
Agreed. The 9th inning is not the place for a pitcher to work out his troubles. Iglesius is clearly a better pitcher and should be the closer.
Yes the place to hide a bad pitcher is low leverage. So ninth inning only if they’re losing a blowout
The drop in groundball percentage is pretty concerning. I’m guessing that’s at least partly from the gradually dipping release point. That’s probably what is leading to the (almost) career-high rate in home runs per 9.
One more thing that comes to mind–what are the ethics of signing Kenley Jansen if he still wants to play at this offseason?
I mean, if I were Kenley Jansen, this would be my last year. He’s made a ton of money
and he’s got another 35 years ahead of him (hopefully more) if he takes good care of himself. He should hang out in Curaçao with his kids and go to local baseball games, maybe take a job as a scout if he wants to stay involved. But of course, the sort of person who works himself into becoming an All-Star closer has a lot more invested in that than me, and a different personality to boot.
So exactly where does that leave a team? Do you want to hire a guy knowing that he has heart problems? I don’t think it’s right to discriminate against people based on their health status (people with heart problems work all the time in stuff that could make their condition worse) but I would be awfully conflicted about signing him.
I think your last sentence is key – teams have to presume that Jansen is comfortable enough about his personal health risks to keep playing if that’s his choice. Unless it’s something egregious, like the Rockies tempting him with a 4-year $100 million offer that also requires him to carry the team’s venison stash up the stairs to his teammate’s homes during homestands, I don’t see any moral hazard in a team offering Jansen work.
I do agree he should call it a career from a health perspective. I don’t know if he’s thinking at all about career records or a possible HOF slot (his resume is probably a notch better than Bruce Sutter but a notch below Billy Wagner), but if you’re regularly getting this type of health scare then it’s probably not worth the risk imo.
Here’s another way of putting it–is there an ethical issue that would somehow lead to a different answer than the question of his general health and availability? If you’re worried about his heart flaring up, you could very easily cross him off your list based on the concern that his availability is in question and you don’t want to sign a guy who you think won’t be able to pitch for you the whole year.
But is there a scenario where you’d say “we’ll live with the availability risk but are worried about something super bad happening anyway?” Either for ethical or cynical reasons? I’m in the “no” camp but I do think this is an interesting question.
Also I think the question is largely irrelevant for most teams. Jansen probably has a very specific set of teams he wants to play for (he had been with the Dodgers forever before this year, the Braves were his favorite team growing up, and I can’t imagine him signing with a team like the Rockies or Tigers no matter how much money they offer him). And I think the question of whether he finds work if he is willing to search broadly and take a lower salary is pretty obviously a “yes”.
I wouldn’t cross him off my list based on availability any more than I would Byron Buxton. I’d probably pay less than for a more durable player.
I do wonder if altitude + air quality end up being specific factors for Jansen. He specifically had problems with the altitude in Colorado, and Atlanta is also at enough altitude that it could make a difference (I’d lived there, and the asthma that runs in my family was clearly worse). He might do well signing with an AL team that plays its home games at sea level.
I mean if air quality is a problem (and I don’t know if that is a major concern for someone with arrythmia), that rules out a lot of the country. Fire season in the west of the US is now basically April through October.
I’m surprised to hear Atlanta as having particularly bad air quality. I’ve heard of Houston, Detroit, and Chicago having lousy air pollution in addition to much of the western part of the US (I haven’t noticed personally but I think my lungs and heart are fine? Hopefully?).
I’d imagine that altitude is more of an issue. Although now that I’m looking at a list of altitude, Atlanta’s is at the highest altitude behind Arizona (barely) and Colorado (by a lot). I know his trips to Colorado triggered issues in the past. The teams in the eastern division are all at pretty low altitudes aside from Atlanta though, so somewhere else in the east might be a fit.
I don’t see how it’s discrimination if your entire job is based around being an elite athlete. He’s not an accountant.
I wouldn’t have a problem signing a player with a heart problem if he gets medical clearance as fit to play.
Kenley needs to hang it up. Dude is done. Iglesias should close from here on out.
The disruption thing isn’t at all important. The Royals won the 1985 World Series with Dan Quisenberry doing basically nothing. The Diamondbacks won the 2001 World Series with Byung-Hung Kim basically not allowed to pitch after Game 5. The Giants won the 2014 World Series with Madison Bumgarner basically a 1 man staff. If Jansen is the 5th best reliever he should be in lower leverage situations. If he’s the 12th best pitcher on the team he shouldn’t be on the roster.
This doesn’t totally track for me, given the huge upside of winning the division and the fact that Mets / Braves is so tight right now. Shouldn’t the Braves be doing everything they can to lock down wins?
100%
How much does winning the East boost their WS odds.
Now, what’s the dollar value of that.
Is that number greater than the dollar value of hurting Jansen’s feelings?
If yes, change how he’s used.
“Snitker, if he’s clever, can use that to his advantage.”
Snitker’s entire identity is based on not being clever. Why even entertain this?
Clever is not a word I would use to describe Snitker. I think I would go with conventional.
Did you watch the World Series last year?
Some of these comments, like some Braves fans in general, are acting like Kenley has been awful. That’s simply not true unless you’re using an incredibly small sample size. His ERA and FIP have been below 4 and are projected to be as well. Kenley ranks about 40th in reliever FIP by Zips ROS projections. That may not be ideal closer material (Minter and Iglasias are 4th and 5th) but it is absurd to suggest he shouldn’t be rostered as some have and also honestly that is still at a level that warrants higher leverage use.
So the question really is what do you lose if you try to shake up the roles in the bullpen? If Kenley can continue to be used in one-inning stints where he starts the inning, which is clearly what makes him and the team comfortable, but that inning just isn’t the 9th, will that help? Maybe? But like the lineup questions that are often asked, it matters way more which group of relievers you turn to in high leverage situations rather than the particular order (just as whether your stud hitter bats 2nd or 3rd pails in comparison to whether he plays or doesn’t).
Kenley still looks like a high-leverage reliever. The numbers also bear that out. So is it really worth risking a change that puts him in a new role and moves around everyone else and causes more rigidity before the ninth inning in order to hope someone else might close games better? I don’t think that it is.
“Which of the last 3 innings is going to lead off with the opposing teams 6th batter” is how I’d use him (either leading by 2+ or trailing by 4+)
Jansen is still too good to be using him in mop up, regardless. Feels like even some smart fans get very wrapped up in SSS when it comes to closers.
As Jansen has said, his delivery is all out of whack right now. His cutter was the most affected. He’s got his cutter working again. What wasn’t working in the loss against Seattle was the location of his sinker or slider.
His problems aren’t connected to the atrial fibrillation he experienced before going on the IL. Janson had a cardioversion while on the IL to reset his heart rhythm. He had to stay on the IL because he was put on blood thinners after the procedure. His heart has been fine since he came off the IL in July.
Snitker is doing what you’re supposed to do when your established closer is struggling: stay positive and keep sending him out there, hopefully with the largest lead possible, hopefully against the bottom of the lineup. What you don’t want to do is something that will damage your closer’s self-confidence or disrupt the team’s confidence in their closer or their manager. You don’t know what will get them to let it go and get back to being themselves.
Eh, their season may not be in jeopardy, but 2-3 wins is likely the difference between a first round bye and a coin flip of a first round loss. It’s a big deal.
Also, is there any bigger sunk cost fallacy than the idea that “we’re paying him for this”? Act your wage or lose your role. I also don’t know how “disruptive” moving him to lower leverage roles would be. You’re flipping him with one other pitcher.
Last post season, Snitker was the real MVP with maybe the best bullpen management in history. So I’m giving him the benefit of doubt here and trusting him (as a Braves fan).