The Importance of Being Gagne
Last night, Eric Gagne's streak of 84 straight saves finally came to an
end when he surrendered a two-run lead to the Diamondbacks. It's
a pretty impressive streak and certainly one players on the opposing
teams
were aware of. Much like when Mariano Rivera or Trevor Hoffman or
any of the other great closers came out of the bullpen during their
peak years, the opposition knew the game was over. But is his
streak historic? Will it stand for the rest of our lives and
beyond?
Well, it certainly appears that it has some legs. The closest
previous streak was 54 straight saves set by Tom Gordon. Gagne's
exceeds that by 55% and the next closest ones are around half as long
as Gagne's. Streaks with that much distance over the closest
competitors - like DiMaggio's consecutive games with a hit, or Cal
Ripken's consecutive games played - usually stand the test of
time. DiMaggio's streak is 27% longer than the next
longest. Cal Ripken's is 24% longer than Lou Gehrig's, and
Gehrig's was 63% longer than the next best. DiMaggio's is now 63
years old and Gehrig's lasted more than 50 years. So if the
margin over the second best is the primary criteria for longevity,
there's a good chance that this record could stick around a while.
Probably the most amazing thing about Gagne's streak wasn't the fact
that he was able to sustain a lead of 1-3 runs 84 consecutive times,
because with most good teams that margin will more often be three runs
than one. What makes Gagne's streak in particular so impressive
is that in 35 of those games he had only a one-run advantage when he
entered the game. That's not a surprising statistic given how
anemic the Dodger's
offense has been the last three years, but it does add some magnitude
to his achievement that
he was able to get those last three outs with zero margin of error in
over 40% of his opportunities.
The big problem with Gagne's record is that it was set during an era
that
was particularly conducive to setting such a record and that era is
still relatively young. Baseball players have been playing in
consecutive games and hitting in consecutive games ever since the game
began. That's almost 130 years of professional baseball in which
to
establish these kinds of streaks. Over such a long period of
time, there are bound to be some extreme examples like DiMaggio and
Ripken. And because baseball has been played for such a long time
and in such a manner that these streaks can occur, we have a high
degree of certainty that these kinds of things don't happen very often.
This is not true with Gagne's streak. The one-inning closer is
still a relatively new development. Many people point to Tony
LaRussa's use of Dennis Eckersley as being the starting point of the
trend. That dates all the way back to... 1988. Baseball has
been played this way for 16 years. For all we know, Gagne's
streak could be the equivalent of Babe Ruth's first 50+ home run season
in the advent of the live ball. Ruth had nearly doubled the
record he had just broken the year
before and many thought no one would ever come close to topping his
1920 total. But Ruth bested it the very next season with 59, and
54
has been tied or topped 20 times since, including three times by Ruth
himself and by three other players before he died in 1948.
If Gagne had set such a streak before LaRussa, when closers routinely
pitched two, sometimes three innings then we'd have a much
larger sample of performances by which to compare it to. Even
then, the save only became an official statistic in 1966. So even
if we ignore the way closers are now used, we're still looking
at a stat and a style of baseball that has been around for less than 50
years. Could Bruce Sutter or Goose Gossage or Dick Radatz or
Rollie Fingers have established a comparable streak had they been
allowed the luxury of pitching just one inning at a time and rarely
entering a game with anyone on base? Given the kind of years
those guys had, it certainly seems conceivable. Maybe even
likely. Not to take anything away from Gagne's achievement, but
if it's possible that there were/are comparably talented pitchers, then
Gagne isn't unique and therefore this isn't a unique streak. He's
just a great closer who pitches in an environment that is designed
especially to showcase
it. This also means that there will be other guys like Gagne
sooner than later. Who knows, maybe the next great streak will be
set by a guy who's pitching in the majors right now, but isn't closing
yet... just like Gagne was when he started.
Gagne became a closer because he couldn't break into the 2002 Dodger
rotation that was already over-loaded: Hideo Nomo, Kevin Brown, Andy
Ashby, Odalis Perez, Omar Daal and Kaz Ishii. In retrospect that
doesn't sound like an overly impressive rotation, but they did finish
with
the 3rd best ERA in the majors, albeit helped by their home park.
Gagne had struggled as a starter because he had trouble fooling hitters
the second time through the line-up and was put in the bullpen as much
out of necessity as it was that his manager thought he'd be a great
closer. This gives us a clue as to who, or at least what kind of
pitcher, might challenge and possibly break this streak.
His success as a closer is largely attributable to the fact that he has
3 good pitches he can rely on. If one isn't working, he always
has two others he can throw. What if the Dodgers had decided
eight years earlier that Pedro Martinez should be a closer rather than
a starter... could he have been as good as Gagne? How about John
Smoltz in Atlanta before he had all his arm surgeries? How
good of a closer could Josh Beckett be? In no way am I suggesting
that any starter can do what Gagne has done, but the three guys I cited
in particular appear to have both the stuff and the mental toughness,
that "closer's mentality" if you will, to come up big when the stakes
are highest. The problem with Gagne's streak is that more often
than not, the best candidates to break it aren't given the opportunity;
they are put into the rotation instead. But if a situation were
to arise where a starting pitcher with good stuff and control has to be
put into the bullpen - either due to injury concerns, lack of
endurance, no place in the rotation to put him, whatever - then it's
certainly conceivable that he could be as successful as Gagne. So
the question isn't really "can it be broken", but "will it be broken".
Establishing and maintaining a streak that relies on 100% success in
one-run games requires some luck. The luck factor is reduced
somewhat if the closer always gets to control the situation he comes
into, i.e. beginning the inning with no one on base. But luck is
always a factor in those games. One lucky swing or, as what
happened in the game in which Gagne's streak was broken, one unlucky
bounce and the streak is over. But given a team that can limit
the role luck plays by scoring lots of runs, where three run leads are
far more common that one-run leads, and a closer who (like Gagne) was a
guy with a starter's repertoire but one attribute lacking to stick in
the rotation then it's not only possible that this record will be
broken, but probable. It probably won't happen soon, the way Mark
McGwire's single season home run record lasted only three years, but it
will be lucky to last 20 years.