Because most closers are put in there with runners on base or with a 1 or 2 run lead. As you can see Gagne has had to deal with that about 20% (only 17 of the 84 times) of the time during his streak, not very remarkable. Like I said, America just loves streaks. We will continue to disagree, you think one thing I think another. Oh well, I'm sorry I don't agree with you guys but I think it's overrated, you might not but I do. I'm entitled to my opinion and so are you so let's quit all the bickering and just leave it at that. We agree to disagree.
I don't. I'm not going to lie, I was even interested in the streak but like I said it just doesn't impress me as much as it does others.
No, it was just an assumption of mine but please feel free to prove me wrong. Won't be the first time.
i don't have any numbers on it. but i doubt you'd find that he was being used much differently than any closer on any other team. considering the dodgers had the worst offense in baseball last year and a below average one the year before, they haven't had big leads on teams period. i'm not sure that wagner's circumstances would have been any different than gagne's...and without that perspective, i have no relational context for the numbers you provide. i only know that the guy was called on to close out a game 84 times...and he was perfect over those 84 times...and that no one has ever come close to doing that. that's the only relational context i know.
I don't know if Gange is overrated but I think saves are. How are Dotel and Lidge not just as valuable as Wagner were last year. And before you say, look at what Dotel did when he was the closer, his stats were just about equal to Wagner's when he was traded.
Maybe that's what I meant, that saves are overrated. I've seen Gagne play about two times and that's it so he may be an exceptional pitcher/closer. I still think the streak is overrated even if you don't!
again...overrated as compared to what?? to other closers??? to what? your stats indicate you mean he had an easier road than other closers, and that was the cause of his success. if that's what you mean, then we need some comparative numbers to see if that bears out. otherwise you're just saying, "i don't find it impressive" without any real reason at all...which is fine...you're certainly entitled to that...but i'm just trying to understand the reason you've been asserting for your view.
Hate to bring this back up, Lil Pun, but if the numbers in this article don't convince you, then nothing will. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1835274 Best part: So the Elias Sports Bureau has devised a formula for something called a "Quality Save." To earn a Quality Save, a pitcher needs to: Earn a save in a game in which the tying run was in scoring position when he entered. (And/or) save a game in which he protected a one-run lead for at least one inning. And if you use that definition, it's clear Gagne didn't just earn the most saves in baseball during his streak. He also earned the toughest. During Gagne's streak, just 30 percent of all saves qualified as "Quality Saves." But almost half of Gagne's saves were Quality Saves. Here's the leader board, courtesy of Elias: MOST QUALITY SAVES DURING THE STREAK: Gagne 38 of 84 (45.2%) Guardado 21 of 64 (32.8%) Rivera 21 of 70 (30.0%) Wagner 21 of 63 (33.3%) Nathan HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF QUALITY SAVES DURING STREAK (MIN.: 10 QUALITY SAVES): Eric Gagne 38 of 84 (45.2%) Joe Nathan 10 of 23 (43.5%) Matt Herges 10 of 24 (41.7%) Trevor Hoffman 11 of 27 (40.7%) Joe Borowski 17 of 42 (40.5%) Mike DeJean 10 of 25 (40.0%) Jose Jimenez 14 of 35 (40.0%) Of course, there's one big difference between those other guys in the 40-percent group of Gagne. They blew 36 saves in that time -- and Eric Gagne blew nada.
When I say overrated I mean compared to streaks in general. I give numbers to show that he wasn't put into too many comprimising situations, although the numbers Behad show may prove otherwise. I'm sorry, but I would much rather see somebody going for the 56 game hit streak, or home runs in consecutive game streak, etc. because the whole notion of a save is overrated, in my opinion. Like I said, the streak was impressive I just don't think it is as impressive as you all make it out to be and I also don't think it's anything we should argue about either. Can't we all just get along.
but why not??? i don't understand. at first you said it was because he got easy saves...that he wasn't tested. now that's been refuted...so your opinion hasn't changed?? why not? by the way...we can disagree and still get along just fine. this isn't an earth-shattering argument. not sure if it's even an argument at all...i'm just trying to understand what it is you're saying.
Well the stats the Behad posted left some stats I would like to see out, such as: How many innings were left? How many outs did he have when entering the game? How many strikes did the batter he have to face have? How many of the 38 quality or any saves did he do this in? Also, this is just one group's definition of a "quality save" it's not like it is official. I'm willing to bet many of the non-quality saves were easy or he had some leverage at least so he probably did get some easy ones during the streak and I never said all of them were easy. I'm saying, in my opinion, that saves are overrated and that this streak when compared to others is overated as well, impressive but overrated. My opinion only it's not fact it's just my thought, you may think differently and you're entitled to that and I'm sorry if I don't feel the same way you do.
Translation: No matter how much evidence is presented or how many of my original assertions are proved false, I will never, ever, ever, ever change what I think, so there's no point in even trying to convince me.
Not true and really none of my assertions were proved false, just challenged a bit, they can be proven wrong with a few more stats. So... I don't agree with you, don't be so bitter about it just let it be.
I just heard on the Jim Rome show that John Smoltz called this the most impressive pitching streak ever. The only one I could equate it with was Orel's consecutive innings without giving up a run streak. Like 50+ innings, I think??
Yeah, it was 59 straight innings. I consider that one more impressive than the save streak, just my opinion of course.
The difference between this streak and the hitting streak or games played streak, is that every one of the 84 consecutive saves equaled a Dodger victory. How many games do you think Baltimore lost during Ripkins streak? I mean, they were on the list of one of the worst teams in the last 25 years.
you don't have to keep apologizing for your opinion. i get it. and i may even agree with you...but aside from the orel streak, i'm not sure there is anything more impressive in terms of streaks related to pitching than 84 consecutive saves. a save in and of itself may be devalued in your estimation. but it's hard to deny the raw numbers...no one is even in the same ballpark as 84 consecutive saves...no one is remotely close to that. so however devalued it is, just compare it to others called on to do the very same task...and no one did it that many times in a row. or even close to that many times in a row. it may be less impressive than orel to you...but it's still a pretty daunting number. and when guys like smoltz, who've forgotten more about pitching than i'll ever know, say it's the most impressive pitching-related streak, then that says something.
