Franklin No respect as closer fromm CNNSI

Reading an article ranking 30 closers in the ML, Franklin is ranked 29? He has 0 era and a great whip, 7 for 7 this season. They list his current season numbers and career. Obviously his career has not been as a closer, but taking in his career numbers into account there is no reason for being 29 especially looking at those close ahead. Lindstrom for the Marlins has abysmal numbers. Even when you get into the much higher rated persons like Heath Bell, his current season numbers are great but career bad, why is Bell ranked 10th and Franklin 29th? I can understand career closers with excellent career numbers being hire ranked, Papelbon, Mariano Rivera, but Broxton for LAD and Bell, have bad/small career numbers but an as good to not as good season as Franklin yet they are 9th and 10th? What's the deal can anyone help explain this ranking or is it just bias. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/cliff_corcoran/04/29/closer.rankings/index.html

almost 3 years ago ADMDrayson 11 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Because 11 great innings isn't enough to convince anyone

that Franklin has suddenly gone from a mediocre pitcher all of his life, into an ace reliever.

St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008

by vivaelpujols on May 6, 2009 10:19 PM EDT reply actions

Good.

He sucks.

hecanthithecanthithecanthithecanthit

by Alxfritz on May 7, 2009 6:04 PM EDT reply actions

Yeah!

Classic underachiever.

by spants on May 7, 2009 6:13 PM EDT reply actions

He's probably not the 2nd worst closer in the MLB

But I wouldn’t rank him above too many other guys just yet. Lindstrom has great stuff, he’s just had a couple of bad outings this year.

Franklin’s better than whoever the Nats are throwing out (Beimel? Hanrahan? Tavarez?) at the moment, he’s better than George Sherrill (Bal), he’s arguably done enough this year to be regarded better than Huston Street. You could argue either way for Lindstrom – despite Franklin’s great start, I think I’d rather have Lindstrom tbh.

No way is he better than Bell or Broxton. Broxton is an absolute horse who will be one of the top 10 closers in baseball this year; he strikes out about a million guys per inning and has a career FIP of 2.6. Bell has been consistently good-to-excellent as a relief pitcher the last few years (career FIP = 3.12, elite K/BB numbers), and I’d rate him arguably in the top 10-15 too.

Seriously, Broxton and Bell are so much better than Franklin they’re barely on the same planet. Franklin can continue to have success but after 11 innings I wouldn’t put him in the elite reliever category just yet.

Because chicks dig the intentional base on balls.

by Felonius_Monk on May 7, 2009 6:21 PM EDT reply actions

actually

I think you could argue either way vis a vis Hoffman – I think he could well be finished, but time will tell. Realistically, I’d probably rather have Hoffman this year.

Because chicks dig the intentional base on balls.

by Felonius_Monk on May 7, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Oh.... also

I forgot, he’s probably better than Troy Percival (well, definitely better than Percival!) and Fernando Rodney too. So I’d have Franklin about 25, maybe 26.

Because chicks dig the intentional base on balls.

by Felonius_Monk on May 7, 2009 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions

by Felonius_Monk on May 10, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions

my main issues with the list:

1) Brian Wilson is too high
2) Despite this year’s struggles, I’d have Fuentes over Cordero. In fact, Cordero should be in the bottom 10, not near the top 10.
3) Percival and Rodney suck.

Because chicks dig the intentional base on balls.

by Felonius_Monk on May 7, 2009 6:33 PM EDT reply actions