Henry Schulman has a piece in today’s Chronicle about Brian Wilson’s future with the Giants. Wilson is a free agent after the 2013 season, so Schulman thinks it’s not too early to talk to Sabean about whether the Giants might sign Wilson long term. Sabean quite sensibly states that, given the fact the Giants have Wilson under control for two more years and that the pitcher has dealt with recent injuries, “we’re in the monitoring stage for obvious reasons. We’re in the wait and see period.”
That’s great as far as it goes. It’s later in the interview that Sabean scares me. Disagreeing with the sabermetric argument “that teams overvalue saves and a closer’s make-up, and by extension overpay for the position when any number of relievers on a staff can close, Sabean compares a closer to “a placekicker with the game on the line. A lot of guys can make kicks at any point during a game that might contribute to a win. The big difference is when you have to make it to absolutely decide the game.”
So Sabean compares closing to kicking a field goal on the last play of a football game. This is yet another example of the “saves” stat driving when a particular reliever is used, rather than having the situation in the actual baseball game drive when a particular reliever is used. Brian Wilson entering a game with a three-run lead to face the sixth, seventh, and eighth batters in an opponents lineup is in no way comparable to the pressure of kicking that last-minute field goal. And more often than not, Wilson enters the game with no runners on base, needing to get just three outs for victory.
Studies have shown that the odds of losing a game in which you have a three run lead with no opponent base runners is 2%. This margin does not change much regardless of the closer being used. (Well, except for Mariano Rivera, but there’s a reason he’s referred to as the “cyborg closer.”) Contrary to Schulman’s statement about Wilson’s make-up, he often doesn’t really have to face much “ninth-inning heat.” In fact, often the real heat is faced by Lopez or Romo when they are called into the game in the seventh or eighth inning to squelch a rally when the opponent has a man or two on base.
Brian Wilson had a fantastic 2010, will always be a hero to Giants fans, and will probably be an adequate-or-better closer for the Giants for the next two years. On a team with payroll constrictions, though, he can’t possibly be a part of the future. If the Giants want to be quasi-frugal, if they want to hit a certain number when it comes to year-to-year profits, they’ve forfeited their right to a luxury closer. Committing to Wilson for almost $10 million a season for several seasons would be a miserable allocation of money. Even if you assume that Wilson will be effective despite his declining velocity and horrific walk rate last year — a huge assumption — the Giants still can’t afford a luxury closer. Luxury closers are for teams that can afford luxuries. The Giants can’t afford a real shortstop.