Top relief pitchers of all-time

[HoustonGM]

As with the other lists, this isn't really a true list of the top 20 relief pitchers of all time because there are numerous relievers that I didn't include in my consideration set that I would rank above Troy Percival.

Note that I didn't include Dennis Eckersley. He accumulated far more value as a starting pitcher, and thus will be ranked with them whenever I get around to doing that huge task.

1. Mariano Rivera
2. Hoyt Wilhelm
3. Rich Gossage
4. Trevor Hoffman
5. Rollie Fingers
6. Lee Smith
7. John Hiller
8. Bruce Sutter
9. Dan Quisenberry
10. Firpo Marberry
11. Kent Tekulve
12. Jeff Montgomery
13. John Franco
14. Tom Henke
15. Roberto Hernandez
16. John Wetteland
17. Tug McGraw
18. Sparky Lyle
19. Jeff Reardon
20. Troy Percival

The top three are the only ones that I would put into the Hall of Fame, though I could be convinced on Trevor Hoffman and Rollie Fingers.

[Coach Owens]

As with the other lists, this isn't really a true list of the top 20 relief pitchers of all time because there are numerous relievers that I didn't include in my consideration set that I would rank above Troy Percival.

Note that I didn't include Dennis Eckersley. He accumulated far more value as a starting pitcher, and thus will be ranked with them whenever I get around to doing that huge task.

1. Mariano Rivera
2. Hoyt Wilhelm
3. Rich Gossage
4. Trevor Hoffman
5. Rollie Fingers
6. Lee Smith
7. John Hiller
8. Bruce Sutter
9. Dan Quisenberry
10. Firpo Marberry
11. Kent Tekulve
12. Jeff Montgomery
13. John Franco
14. Tom Henke
15. Roberto Hernandez
16. John Wetteland
17. Tug McGraw
18. Sparky Lyle
19. Jeff Reardon
20. Troy Percival

The top three are the only ones that I would put into the Hall of Fame, though I could be convinced on Trevor Hoffman and Rollie Fingers.

You should be convinced on Fingers just because of his moustache.

[dickay]

i think closers get too much credit for their longevity. As its historically been a position which has a shorter longevity, those who go much longer with less quality shouldn't get as much credit as they do for it. For example, i'd take Wetteland over many of those above him. And of course, same could be said of Eck.

[HoustonGM]

i think closers get too much credit for their longevity. As its historically been a position which has a shorter longevity, those who go much longer with less quality shouldn't get as much credit as they do for it. For example, i'd take Wetteland over many of those above him. And of course, same could be said of Eck.

Even if I was doing a pure peak ranking, Wetteland wouldn't be any higher than 14th/15th.

[dickay]

Even if I was doing a pure peak ranking, Wetteland wouldn't be any higher than 14th/15th.

i'm not going to debate where wetteland would rank if peaks were looked at alone, because I haven't looked at many at all.

i think "peak" for a closer isn't defined in one season but over a period of time...say 5-7 years. Thats likely the lifespan of an elite closers "peak period". Just taking Lee Smith as an example, Wetteland was a better close during his "peak period" than Smith was. Smith benefits from longevity.

Now, granted in fairness all HOF positions benefit from longevity. For closers however, a position which arguably offers the shortest duration (maybe outside of DH), I'd say HOF status should be granted on their "peak period" rather than compiled stats over a long tenure.

[HoustonGM]

i'm not going to debate where wetteland would rank if peaks were looked at alone, because I haven't looked at many at all.

Well, you said you'd rank him above several guys that I had ranked above him, so I assumed you had an idea as to where you'd rank him on peak alone, considering you're arguing for ranking closers by peak.

i think "peak" for a closer isn't defined in one season but over a period of time...say 5-7 years. Thats likely the lifespan of an elite closers "peak period". Just taking Lee Smith as an example, Wetteland was a better close during his "peak period" than Smith was. Smith benefits from longevity.

Smith has a slightly better peak. Wetteland's 1993 is the best season of both of them, but Smith had a few years slightly more valuable than Wetteland's next best years. Most of it is a function of Smith having more innings in his peak years, but that's valuable. According to WAR, Smith's best six seasons total 18.8 while Wetteland's total 17.1. It's a slight difference, and even if you give Wetteland an advantage, Smith has a MASSIVE advantage in career value, which I can't ignore.

Now, granted in fairness all HOF positions benefit from longevity. For closers however, a position which arguably offers the shortest duration (maybe outside of DH), I'd say HOF status should be granted on their "peak period" rather than compiled stats over a long tenure.

I don't see why closer should be treated any different than any other position. It should be a combination of peak and career.

[HoustonGM]

FWIW, if I only looked at peak and didn't account for career, my Hall of Fame relievers wouldn't change. Mo, Wilhelm and Goose would still be in while the others would still be out.

[Kobie]

Tom Henke, bitches

[200tang]

No Kazuhiro Sasaki? Your bias is transparent to anyone unfortunate enough to continue to read your posts.

[Kobie]

No Kazuhiro Sasaki? Your bias is transparent to anyone unfortunate enough to continue to read your posts.

I pray to Joe Pesci that this is a joke

[HoustonGM]

I pray to Joe Pesci that this is a joke

The second sentence should give it away. It's the quintessential Mightyzug quote.

[Wassit3]

no steve bedrosian? he has a cy young award for petes sake

[haveacigar]

How would Eric Gagne's peak (02-04) stack up with the others in your view?

[200tang]

How would Eric Gagne's peak (02-04) stack up with the others in your view?

bias.

[ragecage]

No Wild Thang?!? He struck out Carney Lansford in the Championship for pete sake!!