Phillip cites specific deficiencies with this statistic:
Like its ugly brother, the save, the blown save is a blunt object wielded to bash relievers into easily identified goats.
Consider these weird facts:
* A pitcher who enters a tie game and gives up the lead can’t get a blown save.
* A pitcher who enters with a four-run lead and gives up the lead can’t get a blown save.
* A pitcher can get a blown save if the go-ahead run scores on fielding errors.
* A pitcher who blows a save can also get the win.
* A pitcher can be charged with a blown save even though a run may not even be charged to him.
A blown save is merely a half-inning sample of a ballgame. That means that a team has at least 17 other half-innings in which to win any particular game. What do you call it when the starting pitcher allows a run in the fourth inning with a 7-4 lead? Or a sixth-inning reliever who comes into the game down 3-2 but allows a run to increase his team’s deficit? We don’t call it anything, of course.
Further minimizing the detrimental value of the blown save is the fact that the top two career leaders in blown saves, Goose Gossage (112 blown saves) and Rollie Fingers (109), are in the Hall of Fame. So Matt Phillip notes that more variables explain a team's loss than a single pitcher’s inability to obtain three outs in a particular game.
But perhaps a look at the definition of a Save is also appropriate. Since blown saves are dependent upon saves, then we need to find out if we should re-define a save, as set forth in Rule 10.19 of the Official Rules of Major League Baseball. The current definition of a save indicates the bar may be set too low:
The official scorer shall credit a pitcher with a save when such pitcher meets all four of the following conditions:
1. He is the finishing pitcher in a game won by his team;
2. He is not the winning pitcher;
3. He is credited with at least ⅓ of an inning pitched; and
4. He satisfies one of the following conditions:
----- He enters the game with a lead of no more than three runs and pitches for at least one inning
----- He enters the game, regardless of the count, with the potential tying run either on base, at bat or on deck
----- He pitches for at least three innings
If the pitcher surrenders the lead at any point, he cannot get a save, but he may be credited as the winning pitcher if his team comes back to win. No more than one save may be credited in each game. If a relief pitcher satisfies all of the criteria for a save, except he does not finish the game, he will often be credited with a hold (which is not an officially recognized statistic by Major League Baseball).
If the ultimate objective of a successful save is to shut down the opposing team's rally and preserving your own team's lead, you can see that some changes are in order. First, the potential tying run should already be on base; the batters at the plate and on deck should be considered the reliever's responsibility. Second, the pitcher getting the save should not have to be the finishing pitcher, so long as the lead does not change hands. And finally, get rid of the three inning rule, which is strictly a longevity save. A reliever who enters the game in the seventh inning with a six-run lead and pitches three innings does not deserve a save, because the potential tying run was not on base when he came in.
Here's a typical situation to illustrate this point. Athletics playing the Angels in Anaheim. Top of the eighth, Angels lead 2-1, Ervin Santana weakens and allows two hits. Fernando Rodney comes in, retires the next three batters. Then Jordan Walden comes in at the top of the ninth and retires the side.
Under the present system, Walden would get the save, because he faced the potential tying run at the plate in the top of the ninth. Rodney would be credited with a hold. But with my recommended changes, Rodney would get the save, because he inherited the potentially tying run and shut down the Athletics without the lead changing hands. Walden would probably be credited with a hold, if we still want to use that statistic.
By raising the bar on saves, we make blown saves more meaningful as well. Of course, raising the bar on saves would mean it would be a cold day in hell before a relief pitcher would get 62 saves in a season again. Thirty saves would be the normal max. And this would make the save more directly comparable to a win for a starting pitcher; twenty wins is considered the benchmark of dominance for a starter.
And finally, one other meaningful measure of merit for relievers should not be neglected. Inherited Run Scoring Percentage (IRSP) measures the relationship between the number of baserunners a reliever inherits from his predecessor vs, the number who score. So if a reliever inherited 100 runners during a season, and allowed 20 of them to score, his IRSP would be .200. Some examples are listed HERE to provide a frame of reference. IRSP is also a way to directly compare all relief pitchers, not just the ones used in save situations.
