First of all, he gets two points for the save, so the closer gets 5 points and the other guy gets 3.

And if MLB would change the save rule to something meaningful I'd agree with you.

How about the closer that comes in with a 3 run lead, gives up two runs, and gets credit for a save?

Something is wrong there, IMO.

Way too many saves are really "cheap" - protecting a 3 run lead is nothing partcularly spectacular.

AAMOF, a reliever who comes into the game with his team losing 2-1 that pitches a 1-2-3 ninth and gives his team a chance to win did as much or more than a closer who comes in with his team winning 7-4 and pitches a 1-2-3 ninth and "saves" the game.

When MLB creates a rule that doesn't award a save unless the reliever faces the tying run, or at least has the tying run on deck, and the runners on base were not his doing, then I'll agree that a save is worth a lot.

But the way it is now, it's ridiculous, IMO.

And these fantasy games which don't deduct anything for a blown save...I can't understand that at all.

A typical reliever saves more than 80% of the games he closes, so a blown save has a tremendous impact on game because it happens relatively rarely. To not penalize the guy for that, but to give him points for saves when he protects a 3 run lead makes no sense to me.

And as far as the middle reliever geting the win, as I said, I'd much prefer a system where the official scorer awards the win to the pitcher who deserves it the most.

But since this is the way they do it, are you suggesting that we only award points for wins to starters?