Talking Chop

I think most people are assuming the option won’t be exercised.

I would really hate to see that.

Not only is that a very affordable option for someone of Hudson’s caliber, but I just really like Tim Hudson. He’s a great Brave. Those Karaoke performances on the big screen are priceless.

10-4 - January 14, 2009 reply

I’d love to have him back as well…but we can’t say for sure now how he’ll recover from his surgery, and whether he’ll still be the same pitcher. If everything goes well then I think he’s worth excersizing, but who knows?

Agreed. He’s one of my favorite Braves who didn’t come through the system. If I’m not mistaken it’s a mutual option, correct? I would imagine if Hudson comes back strong from the surgery he’d probably decline the option b/c he’d make alot more than $12mil on the open market. Of course if he doesn’t perform well after the surgery the Braves probably wouldn’t exercise the option…I just don’t see a scenario where he’d end up staying. Maybe someone can point out something I don’t see.

apoxonbothyourhouses - January 15, 2009 reply

Don't think you're missing anything

but I think it’s just as possible for the Braves to “reach out” and re-work the deal, maybe extend it for a year or two. Personally, considering the price of pitching, I think the Braves will do everything in their power to keep Huddy. At least I hope so.

scstrato - January 14, 2009 reply

To pick up his option would be about the same anual price we pay for Kawakami and Vazquez. So I have to think they would trade one of those guys in order to keep Huddy, who is not only the better pitcher but also is from the area and is already a crows favorite.

And I am not with the same belief as some that he won’t be as good after TJ surgery. He is a fighter. He is super competitive. And I think he will push himself to get back to where he was before.

Fischerking - January 14, 2009 reply

its all about winning

I think Hudson is a gamer also, so he’ll do what he can to be as best as he can. The only scenario I see him staying with the Braves though, is if we really have a good season. I think the feelings of the past, where people would come to Atlanta b/c they have a sure shot at winning, is gone. However, I think Hudson is that caliber of a person and player that if the Braves did well, they might be able to work something out, for a last hurrah chance.

Hell, maybe Smoltz will comeback to close for us if we make a real push…

traphicg - January 14, 2009 reply

but that's for 2011

He would be pitching for us is 2010, correct?

According to Rotoworld…option is for 2010: link

Smoltz's Beard - January 15, 2009 reply

Fatazfoot will be here any minute now with his/her projected 2009 rotation containing Hanson and Teheran.

Kind of like an episode of Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares

Every dinner service is a shitstorm, and it comes on every night, on BBC.

and the only way to turn your establishment around

is to use local produce, lower your prices and change your menu…sometimes, firing your chef is necessary too.

You mean Hansen, Tehern, and Jurggens right?

and don't forget Shaffer

buzzdeadwax - January 14, 2009 reply

What about Pharr?

I guess he’s trade bait?

mburris1 - January 14, 2009 reply

This outlook just makes me definitely feel that Morton or JoJo are used in a soon to be trade for our corner outfielder.

10-4 - January 14, 2009 reply

I’m I the only JoJo Reyes supporter???

Come on guys, he has only pitched 160ish MLB innings.

and has been frighteningly bad, bordering on horrible

bigjoe - January 14, 2009 reply

Reyes (ML Innings)
163.7Innings Pitched – 5.94ERA – 1.656WHIP – 105K – 189H – 82BB – 27HR

Maddux (1st Season)
155.7Innings Pitched – 5.61ERA – 1.638WHIP – 101K – 181H – 74BB – 17HR

Reyes has really good stuff, your just being an idiot and judging him too quickly. What if Tommy Hanson comes up and stuggles initially? Are you gonna dump him after a season???

i’m only armed with a subjective observation here… but the problem is that reyes’ stuff really doesn’t look all that great. he has to locate well or he is totally fucked. on the other hand there’s morton, who, while not putting up great numbers himself, still showed some impressive stuff in terms of the movement on his pitches.

brndn - January 14, 2009 reply

I wouldn’t call myself a Reyes supporter but I think you’re underestimating his stuff a little bit. He brings it easily in the low 90’s from the left side, which is pretty good, and has a really nice curveball. His problem is TERRIBLE command and he seems to be somewhat of a headcase. I definitely don’t want to give him a spot in the rotation but I think he’s ok as a fall-back option or trade bait.

ajones2522 - January 14, 2009 reply

that’s fine, i have no evidence. i just know that i’ve been unimpressed with his “stuff” ever since his debut; however, i didn’t get to watch him in richmond, where he was apparently doing something else… carving the strike zone like glavine, i assume.

brndn - January 14, 2009 reply

you’re seriously not comparing jojo reyes to greg maddux.

bigjoe - January 14, 2009 reply

I would say the same thing. But after looking at it the numbers are strikingly similar.

Fischerking - January 14, 2009 reply

points to one thing. Jo Jo Reyes will become Maddux. Period.

SayHeyWerd - January 14, 2009 reply

Heh heh

That one got me chuckling. That probably would’ve been a beer-through-the-nose comment if I wasn’t at work.

WienerDog - January 14, 2009 reply

I kno righ? Totally beer thru tha nose bra, cuz what you doin at work? I didn’t even want to read it, cause Id bust out laughing every time!!!

What the hell are you thinking, that wasn’t funny at all… ohhh, your the type of person that says chuckling, that explains ALOT! Period.

well, well, well...

aren’t you just a tool…

I was just making a point that you shouldn’t give up on a pitcher so fast. I could have pick from alot of pitchers, and they would mostly all have similar stats for their first couple hundred innings.

Bwellnjonesco,
The truth is, that if Tommy comes up to the MLB and struggles, he will get the same treatment. The same thing happens with unproven prospects everytime. The same reaction

Whodunnit?4040 - January 14, 2009 reply

Yeah, I know. I’m just having fun with these guys while trying to make a point that JoJo Reyes still has the potential to come back and be a 6’2 230LB lefty monster.

bwellnjonesco - January 15, 2009 reply

When he’s got his stuff on and his mind right, he’s as nasty as any young lefty that I’ve seen. Obviously your point wasn’t that Jo Jo was the next Glav or Maddux, but that the first 200 innings don’t always tell the whole story. Maddux used to be similar to Jo Jo (although right handed). 91-94 mph with no real game plan. Unfortunately, in 4 plus years I’ve seen Jo Jo pitch, he’s never demonstrated the ability to manipulate the ball like Maddux, and on the intelligence quotient side, I don’t know if he’s in the same neighborhood as Glav.
He does have the potential to be a monster, and I’d take the opinions of scouts and player personnel staff before I gave credibiity to most of the negative things said about him on here.

230! Ha!

He’s down to 220 right now…

If you say so. I’ve always thought he was one of the worst conditioned guys in the system and he ballooned in the second half last year.

even when i got my first JOJO baseball card in…2002 or 2003 (can’t totally remember), i thought he looked doughy

Hahahah…Yeah, you both are right..
It doesn’t mean he’s not in shape right now though
More ballooning in his future? Perhaps

Ballooning ain’t too bad, take a look at CC, big pitchers actually seem more durable…

bwellnjonesco - January 15, 2009 reply

Doughy is the exact word to describe him. Some guys are big, some are fat, Jo Jo is doughy.

Jo Jo is thick and a big boy to begin with. He’s not soft guys…He just…well.. …. ……………

But to be honest, he’s in good shape right now…so he’s not even “doughy” Ok?

I’ll let you know in 2 months

Yep.

we still need a bat, but

I really like our rotation..just three days ago I thought we would be fightin’ with the Nationals for last place. Now, I think if we get a bat in the outfield I think we can compete for the division…

coachg3 - January 14, 2009 reply

The only issue I have with the rotation is that we lack a lefty, but that’s not a huge deal. It will create a favorable match up for the Phillies and their strong lefty lineup, and I think Vazquez and Kawakami will struggle keeping them in the park. Nevertheless, I feel decent about the starting rotation…not overly optimistic, but I think we’re in better shape than I thought we could get.

Now, as long as we go out and get Swisher, Nady, or Dunn** then I think we have an outside shot at competing this year.

**I’m not as high on Dunn as most around here, but I definitely wouldn’t be upset about him on my team. The LH thing isn’t a problem with his splits, but man is he a butcher in the OF.

I’m high on Dunn as most know, but I would be in favor of Swish if we could get him. Not sure what the Yanks would want in return…

I don’t know if I’m sold on Swisher. The guy’s stats last season were roughly equivalent to Andruw’s 2007 year. The problem so many of us had with Andruw that year wasn’t necessarily how terrible his production was, but rather how he continuously hit clean-up in the order and killed rallies time and time again. Swisher, presumably, would also bat in the middle of the order, and while I don’t think he’ll duplicate the 2008 season, it’s not out of the realm of possibility either.

The guy, to me, looks like a poor man’s, switch-hitting Adam Dunn. I’m assuming he’s probably a much better fielder, though….

Andruw constantly batting cleanup was Bobby’s fault for sticking with him for so Pujols-awful long. It was an embarrassment to see a lineup of the .300 Renteria, .300 Chipper, .300 McCann, .300 Diaz, .290 Francoeur, and seeing Andruw Jones sandwiched in between Chipper and McCann with his abysmal .193 or comparable average.

I’m good with Swish. He brings a little more athleticism and versatility (compared to Dunn) to the outfield, his switch-hitting would get lefty/righty hard-ons to STFU, and I’m on board with thinking last year was a legit fluke. And he too, would bring a bombshell companion with him.

good work on the important info as usual

Swo12bv - January 14, 2009 reply

I guess my point was that I find it interesting that alot of people here like to piss on guys like Ludwick and Nady for being total flukes because they happened to have great years last year, and yet they’ll completely jump on the bandwagon for guys like Swisher and Vasquez (among others) as just being victims of “bad luck”. I understand peripheral stats and all that, but sometimes guys just happen to get their shit together and click (for whatever reason) and sometimes guys don’t (for whatever reason, see Jones, Andruw). In the case of Vasquez in particular, dude’s almost always put up great peripheral stats in his career, but he has typically (lately) been an average to slightly above average pitcher.

Just seems like an interesting double standard.

I see what you’re saying, but in instances like those tend to cross the line into the intangibles category, and things that nobody can really explain. But then again, find one sports fan that doesn’t like a particular player for whatever reasons that nobody other than them can really grasp?

Fair point

And I guess if I’m going to sit here and knock Swish, I should provide a better alterantive, which I can’t really do… although I’m not as down on Ludwick as a lot of people here seem to be.

And Adam Dunn at the rumored 4/$56m price tag he’s seeking is a bit much.

I think the reason most people fell that way is because it’s easier to look at a player with a certain history of solid performance and dismiss a bad season, then it is to look a player with a certain history of lackluster performance and continue to expect an above average season. Oh course players can finally “break out” but I think most people would like to see two seasons worth of stats before they really buy into it.

The reason I don’t like Nady is because he doesn’t walk enough and his BB/K is terrible. He hasn’t shown any improvement in either of those areas throughout his time in the majors. I personally just happen to believe that he is more along the lines of his 2006 and 2007 self than the one that showed up last season.

Ludwick is an interesting choice. His BB rate improved from 2007 (his K rate did as well to be fair) and that resulted in a more respectable BB/K…although still not all that great. The BABIP certainly was high (.349) and his LD% spiked from 16.5% in 2007 to 26.3% in 2008. Does anyone know what would merit that kind of a rise? He’s an above average fielder, so he’s got that going for him. I actually wouldn’t mind acquiring him, but I was very against giving up KJ for him. If we can package Morton/Reyes with some prospects I would be down.

She’s quite attractive.

Swisher’s season was more due to bad luck he had like a 250 BABIP or somehting

Swo12bv - January 14, 2009 reply

Adam Dunn, just to use as another example, has throughout almost every season in his career posted a below average BABIP.

thats more due to his slow speed and the fact he hits a fair amount of fly balls, tho…he doesnt get a lot of infield hits, somehting Swisher is capable of. because he is an all or nothing type of hitter, he will naturally have a low BABIP. So i really don’t care that he doesnt have an avg BABIP.

Swo12bv - January 14, 2009 reply

Swish hits about an equal percentage of fly balls and Dunn stole like 19 bases a couple years ago.

I’m not sure if I buy what you’re selling.

19?!

Huh, who’da thunk it?

Your comparison of their seasons is warranted. But it’s interesting to look at Swish’s stats for the last three seasons:

2006 – 14.9% BB/9, 27.3% K/9, 0.64 BB/K, 19.3% LD, .287 BABIP
2007 – 15.6% BB/9, 24.3% K/9, 0.76 BB/K, 17.5% LD, .308 BABIP
2008 – 14.2% BB/9, 27.2% K/9, 0.61 BB/K, 20.9% LD, .251 BABIP

There doesn’t appear to be any major deviation from those stats aside from the BABIP. You’re right about his defense though, he’s a wizard out in LF. If we were to put him in CF or RF, however, he’s going to be below average according to UZR. His contract is very attractive as well.

Good stuff.

May I ask where you get your info from? I’m still a bit of novice when it comes to defensive metrics and what not and would like to join in on some of the uber-stat nerdom this site is all about.

I used to just try and crunch the available numbers myself, but someone posted a link to Fangraphs and it’s all right there. They’ve got some nice articles that’ll make you think as well. Type in a player into the search function and it brings up all kinds of stats.

The reason your comparison is interesting is that if you look at Andruws numbers before his 2007 campaign they aren’t all that different either. His BB rate was right in line with his career, but his K rate was a little higher than normal. Andruw’s Isolated Power (SLG-BA) absolutely plummited however along with his LD. Swisher’s ability to talk a walk better than Jones makes me think he has a better chance of rebounding, also helped by the fact that his ISO was almost exactly the same as 2007 and his LD actually improved from his previous 2 seasons.

To summarize, I think it’s obvious than Andruw was actually declining offensively, whereas Swish just seemed to get unlucky.

BraveBronco0121 - January 14, 2009 reply

Ever heard of Batting Average on Balls In Play?

because almost all the difference between Swisher’s previous seasons and 2008 can be attributed to bad luck with BABIP.

To be fair, he’s alot like Dunn in that he typically has seasons in which his BABIP is lower than normal…but yeah, last year at .251 was the worst he’s ever had. They both have FB% of around 45% for their careers…is that higher than the average player?

BraveBronco0121 - January 14, 2009 reply

45% is quite high...

and that would lead to a lower BABIP than someone like Ichiro who runs out grounders and lines the ball over the infield, but .251 is a ridiculously low BABIP by any standard. I think overall, his last two years in Oakland are a pretty good measure of his skills – he strikes out in around a fourth of his at bats, walks about 15% of the time, and hits the ball quite hard. The three publicly available projection systems have slightly different takes on him – CHONE pegs him for .247/.360/.454, the James system has an almost identical projection, and Marcels came out with a .245/356/.434 mark which I think is a little low. In fact, I think all of the models are slightly low on him because of 2008 – I don’t think any of them take into account such a major single season fluctuation in BABIP.

YUM

I <3 stats

I'm sending it back

Hanson is much more valuable in the rotation

Ha, Ichiro has a career FB% of 23.5% to go along with his career .356 BABIP…amazing.

He might have a sissy swing, but that first step towards first base he gets in his follow-through makes up for the world of difference, especially how often we see plays at first that were “beat out by just a step.”

Sometimes I think his BA would be under .300 if he didn’t bat lefty. I think I remember reading that his dad forced him to bat lefty when he was a kid. Oh those hardcore Asians!

On the topic of BABIP, have you guys read Bendix and Dutton’s Hardball Times article on BABIP? There’s a spreadsheet you can d/l at the bottom with data from 2005 to 2008.

If you look at the Bill James and CHONE projection, Swisher’s wOBA is .358 and .360, which is similar to his 2006 and 2007 performance of .361 and .368. Basically, both these projection systems look like they’re saying that offense as a whole in 2009 will be a lower than 2006 and 2007, and, because of this, they are saying Swisher will be just as valuable as before relative to his peers.

I probably should have made a comment on the article. It goes a lot further than the usual LD, GB, FB, and IF projections. They factor in things like spray, speed score, batting lefty, and a bunch of other stuff.

Oh, and on the topic of spray hitting, pull hitters tend to see a lower BABIP because of the shift. Another reason why Dunn’s BABIP is lower than what simple BABIP measures may projection.

Interesting stuff.

Smoltz's Beard - January 15, 2009 reply

xBABIP ftw

mattdiaz4life - January 15, 2009 reply

Ever heard of CBSABS?

That will make you all think twice..

dabraves - January 14, 2009 reply

I think calling him a switch hitting Dunn .....

doesn’t give Dunn much credit. Not that Dunn is a “great” player, but Swisher certainly is only average to a little above average at best. If you look at only hitting production per-at-bat, I think Dunn is miles above Swisher. I would say we already have a (hitting only) Swisher on the club. His name is Greg Norton. I’m not in any way saying we use Norton as a starter, but as hitting goes, they are both about the same. Same power and slugging per-at-bat, and I think Norton is a better AVG hitter. Swisher obviously is younger, and is much better defensively. Not to mention he plays CF (not really sure how good though?). If we are looking for defense though, we have that in the minors. Just don’t think Swisher is the answer. Nady would be, but I wouldn’t want to give up anything of value to get his one-year-rental. I think if we can’t trade for a .270 .350 .440 20-25 70-90 or something close to that, we should just go with a Diaz/Jones platoon. In all seriousness we probably are the 3rd or 4th best team in the NL East on paper. Why give up anything of value for just this season, or for a guy like N.Swisher who’s production could be matched with one of our bench guys. Maybe I’m way off base.

I do like our new look rotation though. No true ace but we have: Lowe (1.5), Vasquez (2.5), Jurjjens (2.5), Kawakami (2.5-3.5), and Morton (4.5) and I’m low balling Jurjjens/Vasquez a bit IMHO.

Don’t post much, but I do read what my fellow Braves fans are saying, and for the most part are equal disappointed and excited about Wren’s offseason. We’ll see where it takes us.

BabyGoatEater - January 14, 2009 reply

Saying Norton is as good of a hitter as Swisher is kind of insulting considering Norton has one year in which he had over 300 ABs.

Well, I tried to qualify it by calling him a “poor man’s, switch hitting” version of Dunn, implying he was clearly inferior.

And the Diaz/Jones platoon doesn’t sound too appealing. We need to have to some sort of depth/insurance in the outfield this season to make sure we don’t have the same historically bad production that we got from it last year.

I agree completely that Swisher is a better "baseball player"....

and yes Norton hasn’t really done it over the long hall. I guess I was just trying to say that if you spread Norton’s hitting stats over a full season (which he may or may not be able to produce for that long a period) and you get Nick Swisher minus the D. I just don’t think that’s much better than a Jones/Diaz platoon. Maybe I’m giving Jones more credit than he’s due, but we all know Diaz can rake leftys (at least in AVG, OBP, not so much slugging). I would just hate to give up a Jo-Jo, Parr, or even Redman for that matter. Even though most likely all three will never be above a 4-5 rotation guy. Just the chance they will make it is worth more than Swisher, (IMHO of course).

BabyGoatEater - January 14, 2009 reply

Now....

if it were (and I completely grabbing this out of the air) a Dye, then that might be worth it. Yes he is gone in two seasons, and yes we would have to give up more than a Jo-Jo, Parr, Redman….but he is a difference maker at the plate. Kinda going against my earlier posts’, but, even trading fro Nady wouldn’t be too bad. We’d give something up for sure, but we would also get that 1-2 draft pick in comp after he leaves. Who knows. Not many good options out there to upgrade. Hopefully Wren can pull off another Renteria or Acsiano trade this offseason and get us a gem OF.

BabyGoatEater - January 14, 2009 reply

I would love for Huddy to come back. With his style of pitching, TJ surgery show be fine or strong than before. The question is, If Huddy comes strong at the end of 09’ would he want to come back and not go for the money on FA mark. Though let’s say he does come back strong wants to stay. I would rather have Huddy at the same cost over a Vaquez and assuming that does his 200+IP and 4.00 ERA that he would probably have the highes value to team and fetch some talent that we could use in 10’ (Closer,3B High Ceiling Prospect,etc..) All I am say is that if huddy wants to be a brave and he his 100% healthy why would we let him leave and get nothing in return? Lowe Huddy KK Hanson JJ seems like a fierce rotation in 10’ with getting something in return for Vaz to fill holes. If Huddy is healthy and wants to stay I say this is a no brain in keep him and trading Vaz.

Hanson-Ace - January 14, 2009 reply

if huddy wants to be a brave

I believe that this part is very important, but it rests on a number of factors, like fielding a competitive team.

Rafael Belliard's SLG % - January 14, 2009 reply

I'm gonna put this out there. If you like it, you can take it. If you don't send it right on back

For the purposes of this let’s assume Hudson’s 2010 option is excercised.

So the rotation would be 5 of these 6:

Hudson
Lowe
Jurrjens
Vazquez
Kawakami
Hanson

As gondee mentioned, we’ll most likely need a closer in 2010.

What if the Braves pull a Papelbon and use Hanson as a closer in 2010? I know he’d be more valuable in the rotation, and I’m not saying I like or dislike this idea. Just putting out there for some discussion.

I don't like the idea at all

Mainly because Hanson is the best SP prospect we’ve had in a long time, and his value to us is much greater as a potential cheap, frontline starting pitcher than as a closer.

And I also think the closer is one of the most overated positions in sports.

I disagree...

You may want to ask Tim Hudson if having a good closer is important because Bob Wickman blew like 4 games for him alone in 2007. All kidding aside, if you look at the Braves since 2004, I think that it is pretty clear how a dominant closer can vastly improve a team.

2004:
Total Saves = 48
Team Leader – Smoltz with 44
Also with saves – Chris Reitsma and Kevin Gryboski

2005:
Total Saves = 38
Team Leader – Chris Reitsma with 15
Also with saves – Dan Kolb, John Foster, Kyle Farnsworth, and Macay McBride

2006:
Total Saves = 38
Team Leader – Bob Wickman with 18
Also with saves – Macay McBride, Ken Ray, Tyler Yates, Jorge Sosa, Chris Reitsma, and Mike Remlinger

2007:
Total Saves = 36
Team Leader – Bob Wickman with 20
Also with saves – Peter Moylan, Tyler Yates, Rafael Soriano, Oscar Villarreal, Chad Paronto, and Mike Gonzalez

2008:
Total Saves 26
Team Leader – Gonzalez with 14
Also with saves – Will Ohman, Blaine Boyer, Jeff Bennett, Manny Acosta, Rafael Soriano, and Peter Moylan

Since 2004 the Braves haven’t had a closer save more than 20 games and I believe the inability to close out games has been one of the biggest faults of this team since 2005. We only saved 26 games last year, and we lost about a billion 1-run games during the course of the season, granted our team wasn’t very good but how much better would we have been if we would have been able to trot out a healthy, dominant, closer last year?

Closers are crazy, they get all hyped up, go pitch an inning and hopefully go home with a save. If they lose a game, they have to forget it immediately because they might be out there again the next day. If you have a good one I believe that it effectively shortens the game. It takes an interesting person to do that, hey perhaps it is all psychological, but I think they are important none the less.

Past World Series Winners: Lidge with 41, Papelbon with 37, Isringhausen with 33, Hermanson with 34, Foulke with 32, Looper with 28, Percival with 40, you have to go back all the way to the Diamondbacks in 2001 to find a World Series winner with a closer under 20 saves (which is what the Braves have been doing the last few years) when they had Byung-Hyun Kim with 19, but then you have Rivera with 36, 45, and 36.

So yeah, in sum, I believe that closers are important.

I think the main argument with closers is that when they go down the setup man normally steps in and does the job just as well…for the most part. Obviously you’re going to have situations where Wickman is closing and someone much more suited to close is setting him up, but I believe that is the general consensus.

It’s like…why would you drop a boatload of money on K-Rod when if you’re shrewd enough you can plug in someone like Matt Capps or Bobby Jenks for a fraction of the cost? So maybe what I’m trying to say is that the position is not overrated, but the players that fill it and often get labeled as “closers” are overrated. Does that make sense?

Damn

You beat me to the punch.

I understand what both you and get swoll are saying.

Especially with this quote,

So maybe what I’m trying to say is that the position is not overrated, but the players that fill it and often get labeled as "closers" are overrated. Does that make sense?

My reasoning is that our team would have been better last year if Smoltz (from 2004) was closing, if Papelbon was closing, or if Rivera was closing, because those guys are dominant and reliable. And of course those guys are going to get paid because they are great at what they do, and they have done it for multiple years in a row.

You are also both right about the risk of signing a closer to a huge contract because sometimes pitchers just stop being effective in that role for whatever reason. Then you might be stuck paying a good sum of money for a middle reliever or a crap closer, which is the example of Borowski.

There is simply no evidence to support the fact that we would have been better with Smoltz or Rivera or anyone else closing. The Braves as a team only had 44 save opportunities — the fewest in the majors by far (the next closest was 51). Of those 44 saves ops, we saved 59% of them for 26 saves, again the fewest saves in the majors. But we had the fewest saves in the majors because our starters and our offense didn’t put us in a position to have the lead late in games. K-Rod saved 62 games because his offense and starting pitching gave him and the relievers in front of him 89 opportunities to do so.

I’d rather spread my money out in the bullpen and have two or three guys who have closer-type stuff (like I think we will have going into 2009). This makes up for the slumps that some of these guys go through and gives a manager extra arms to throw at key situations in the seventh and eighth innings.

gondeee - January 14, 2009 reply

I guess the way I look at it might be wrong, but...

The Braves saved 26 out of 44 games for 59; for his career K-Rod has saved 86 of his games 208 in 241 opportunities; for his career Rivera has saved 89% of his games 482 in 541 opportunities. I would assume that if the numbers translate and that if we had either one of these pitchers that they would get most if not all of the save opportunities (especially since we had so few), that K-Rod would have saved 37 games (86% of 44) for the Braves (+11 from our save total), and Rivera would have saved 39 games (90% of 44, or +13 from our save total).

I agree that we had fewer save opportunities because of our starting pitching and our offense, and fewer saves because if it; however, a 59% save conversion rate for the opportunities that we did have is abysmal at best and I would rather have a health, dominant closer that would have slammed the door in 37 or 39 of those 44 games instead of merely 26.

But, maybe I am looking at this wrong.

You’re right on. And not only would it have given us 11 to 13 more wins, but there’s also the psychological thinking that MUST go through some players’ heads some of the time. You don’t think a starting pitcher doesn’t look to see that, once again, his closer blew his win? What do you think goes through a pitcher’s mind, at least some of the time, when trying to get the game to the ninth for a guy who is money 90% of the time? He’s going to do everything he can to keep that lead because he knows if he does, the game is ours. With a good closer, I think you’d have seen more save opportunities based on that fact alone. Maybe it’s only ten more, but if the closer is money most of the time, that’s 8 to 9 more wins.

Now we’ve won 20 more games in this “What if?” world, and we’re tied for the lead in the East.

I don’t think the closer is the most important position, but if you don’t have one, you will wish you did.

SunDolphin - January 14, 2009 reply

I don’t disagree that a guy getting the last 3 outs in a game is an important thing in winning games. I just don’t believe (and have never believed) that it necessarily has to be a guy with the title of “closer”.

Wickman in particular was ill-suited for the role that year because he was struggling with his control and (seemingly) with his mechanics in general. There were more effective guys in the pen at the time that could’ve (and should’ve been used), yet we continued to trot Wickman out there because he was the “closer” and that was that. I also never understood the Tribe a couple years ago when Rafeal Betancourt was absolutely murdering hitters with like a 1.5 ERA as the set-up man, and Borowski was a total bum as the closer. It made no sense at all except for the fact that Borowski was already the established “closer”

Your most effective pitcher in the bullpen should be your closer. Pete Moylan, if he can come back 100%, should be fine in the role. Paying a guy $10+mil to be your closer doesn’t make sense to me at all.

Ha, nice post.

I always thinks it sounds cliché

But it’s very much a mental game too. Betancourt, whom you mentioned, after Borowski went onto the DL for sucking, and was subsequently cut afterwards, took over the reigns of closer, and couldn’t get the job done. His hits went up, his ERA ballooned from 1.47 to 5.07, and his WHIP frighteningly practically doubled from .756 to 1.423, and he gave up 11 jacks in less games and innings than the previous season when he only allowed 4. Plain and simple, when entrusted with the “role,” he couldn’t deliver. There are various reasons why the importance of the role has transformed the task of getting three outs into this monumental ordeal, but there just are people who know how to deal with it, and those who don’t.

Yup…picked up Betancourt on my fantasy as I was waiting for him to become the closer and watched the entire situation play out before my eyes.

as did i

:patpat..patpat:

but then again, i also drafted rafael perez in one league…that didnt work out too well

bigjoe - January 14, 2009 reply

how many of those 1 run games

were losses due to the closer not getting the job done?

most were bigger deficits where our comebacks just fell a run shy, or they were ties in which someone else gave up the run to lose it. we didnt have a whole lot (i know we had a few) of blown saves last year.

by this i mean

saves blown by our “closer” in the 9th inning. many (or at least more than a couple) of our blown saves were in the 8th inning.

if you just use our 3 CAPITAL C CLOSERS (acosta, soriano, gonzalez), we had a total of 5. but a couple of them may have been in the 8th. boyer on the other hand had 4, and blown saves don’t take into account games we game back to tie, only to lose.

apoxonbothyourhouses - January 15, 2009 reply

Kimbrel or Medlen or Marek

We’ve got a lot of internal closer candidates, not to mention the fact that Moylan is close to having the stuff to be a closer. My bet is on Craig Kimbrel. If he comes close to what he did in half a season last year, he should be in the majors by July or August. So any of these guys would be my choice before we used Hanson in that role. Hanson has too much value as a starter.

gondeee - January 14, 2009 reply

Cordier?

I thought he had the best raw “stuff”. Though he wasn’t exactly a world-beater in Rome last year.

TradeAndruw - January 14, 2009 reply

He’s still trying to get healthy. In four pro season he hasn’t even pitched a full season’s worth of innings. If he can pitch throughout 2009 as a starter and finally put some innings on his arm, they might be willing to throw him in the pen in 2010 and let his electric stuff move him up quick.

cbwilk - January 14, 2009 reply

the guy's had ALOT of surgery

Cordier has GREAT stuff…but the guy’s been under the knife 2 times in the past 2 years.

he wasn’t a world-beater in Rome b/c he hadn’t pitched in 2 years.

I'm sending it back

Hanson is much more valuable in the rotation
(sorry, this was meant to be posted here, something balked)

Just Trade Surplus of SP….

I rather trade Vaz which would probably have the most trade value which we could use to get a closer type

Hanson-Ace - January 14, 2009 reply

If he is any good at all, I think we pick up the option on Huddy.

Glad to see us going back to that early 90’s style ball: Pitching first.

Mike Kerns - January 14, 2009 reply

Looking any further than one year into your rotation is completely ridiculous. No on can predict how our rotation will look in 2010 and for that matter our rotation could be completely different by mid 2009. If you want evidence look at our 2008 rotation and projected 2009 rotation. Jurrjens and Campillo are the only two guys who were on the team last year. Jurrjens is the only one who started last season with the team and Camillo came up later.

jack dein - January 14, 2009 reply

Vazquez

as #3 is a severe underrating. He’ll be the #2 behind Lowe, with JJ as the #3 and KK as the #4.

Yakker - January 14, 2009 reply

Completely agree. Let’s not put too much pressure on KK and let him eat a bunch of innings out of the 4 hole in our rotation.

ajones2522 - January 14, 2009 reply

I personally think that the slotting is pretty irrelevant, as it’ll get mixed up during the year. And if by some set of circumstances we make the playoffs, then you simply choose who’s pitched the best that year, regardless of who you think has the best stuff.

Sure

I agree re slotting. But since the OP starts with a slotted rotation that had Vasquez in #3 for both 2009 and 2010, I felt I needed to say something. Especially as Vasquez will likely outperform KK in both years.

Plus, I’m sensitive to the fact that JV gets no pub and like reminding people of that whenever possible. ;-)

Yakker - January 14, 2009 reply

I try to temper myself on how Vazquez will pitch because I know I’ll be cursing him and his immediate family members some time during the season due to all of the gopherballs that he gives up…but yeah, I would say that he probably gets the hat tip over Jurrjens as the #2 due to experience.

I would throw out there that KK might not be able to eat alot of innings due to that in Japan they use 6 man rotations and might be best sandwiched between Lowe and Vasquez, who are our 2 workhorses. It really doesn’t matter cause it will get mixed up but this will alleviate some of stress on the bullpen, which was worked way too much last year.

H0SS - January 16, 2009 reply

Kinda Random but...

It’s to bad we couldn’t sign Josh Fields a few years ago. That would of absolutely solved our “closer issue”.

Falconzfan284 - January 14, 2009 reply

Apparently nobody can sign Josh Fields. That guy must be some kind of special moron.

cbwilk - January 14, 2009 reply

So true

I mean, he’s a freaking relief pitcher! Did he expect to be taken first overall?

buzzdeadwax - January 14, 2009 reply

Did he not sign with the Mariners either? Geez what a douche.

10-4 - January 14, 2009 reply

No he didn’t, and yes, apparently he is. He can still sign with the M’s up until a week before the draft because he didn’t have any eligibility left. He’s going to play Indy ball and see if he can up his stock. I just don’t see why a team would want to spend a pick higher than where he was last year (20th overall) on a guy who hasn’t signed two years in a row. Especially when there’s a better reliever (Aaron Crow) with the same issues.
It’s like Bobby said, “Some guys want to play, some guys don’t.”

cbwilk - January 14, 2009 reply

Must….not….mention…Devine…

Grand Slam Devine?

SunDolphin - January 14, 2009 reply

Well, my point was that even if we would’ve signed Fields this wouldn’t have “absolutely solved our "closer issue"” due to the fact that Devine was pretty similar in terms of development and he was not able to put it together for us (for whatever reason I won’t get into).

Would Fields, do you think, have given up a grand slam every time he went out to pitch? But I do agree. Just signing a guy, especially a prospect, doesn’t mean anything. Think of what LA thought they were getting with Andruw. Look at all of the Pirates top prospects.

SunDolphin - January 14, 2009 reply

Ooooh man Pirates top prospects. Who was that pitcher they drafted first a few years ago? I actually have a tab open to Baseball Reference, but I don’t think he’s worth the effort to look up at all. I don’t know how they manage to FUBAR so many drafts.

BRIAN BULLINGTON

that was the 2002 draft, which was the famous moneyball draft, and resulted in an inordinate amount of current starters in the first two rounds…29 full time, part time starters in the first 72 picks.

Are you talking about Daniel Moskos? They picked him 4th in 07 just ahead of Wieters. I saw him last year with Lynchburg, he’s a very good pitcher, and an ever better person, but he’s no Wieters.

HIM TOO!

god i love the pirates. how about brad lincoln in 2006 over kershaw, miller, lincecum & morrow?

To be fair, Lincoln got hurt almost immediately, so judging him is hard to do so far. But, it is also fair to say that that could only happen to the Pirates.

Its part of their philosophy…RARELY do they take the best player on the board, they take the guy they know they can sign. They took the best player available this year (who happened to be their usual college guy), and it almost went completely to shit (how much of that is their fault though, I really still don’t know).

I think you hit the nail on the head there, college players. Their lack of faith in their own instruction (justified as it may be) and lack of patience (also justified) lead them to making even worse decisions by eliminating half the field.
Though, like you said, Alvarez was by far the best player at their spot. At least they did finally get him. I’m looking forward to seeing him this year.

Craig Kimbrel?

Did people forget about him? He’s already on the fast track and looks like he could be ready by 2010…Dominant stuff, good make up, successful closer hopefully

smscardinals1 - January 14, 2009 reply

Problem is that he’s so raw, and dominated the lower leagues. Yeah, he looks intriguing, but I wouldn’t go as far as to say he has dominant stuff or proclaim that he’ll be ready by 2010 when he hasn’t faced much above A ball.

apoxonbothyourhouses - January 15, 2009 reply

we didn't forget about him

in Rome, Kimbrel struck out 18.5 batters per 9 innings (in 12.2 innings pitched)

that’s just sick.

the kid’s our future Closer. but, in 2 years.

2 years might be stretching it…he was drafted out of community college, not high school (though he was not a senior). when you blow through THREE LEVELS in like 2-3 months, you’re legit. especially when you throw up the rates he did.

just look at that page and marvel at everything on it

What gets me is how small he is. I was shocked when I saw him with MB. 5’11" 205 is just a straight up lie.

he looks like a child in his profile pic. i have to remember…all of these guys drafted are younger than me, and its weird

He’s definitely got a baby face. He’s no Andy Pratt, but he looks young. Not like 107 year old Jason Heyward.

Greg Oden, anyone?

mattdiaz4life - January 15, 2009 reply

Nice projections. More than likely a spot or two in 2012 will simply be up for grabs. Hopefully we will have several contedors. Which will make filling whatever gaps we have at the time much easier via trading the surplus.

My desire for 2009 is a solid rotation and an overachieving Campillo. If he does well enough, we can flip him at the end of the season for something we may need at the time while turning the job over to Hanson/Hudson. Hopefully he could land us a fine bullpen arm for 2010, or a young 3B to compete for Chipper’s eventual absence. (Or whatever. Truth is, Campillo will likely underachieve. At least we have a few options for the spot.)

BBJ - January 14, 2009 reply

Nice staff

This is a nice pitching staff as consituted. It will be nice to throw professional pitchers out there this year rather than a triple-A staff like last year. It is not, however, comparable to the staff we had in the 90’s as a few have suggested. We have reliable innings guys who will keep us in games and not overtax the bullpen. We do not have an ace that we can send out every five days and expect to win, however. That is considering Bobby chooses not to over use the bullpen, as he has done at times.

I think if Hudson can get back to form, we will have a pretty darn good staff, as he could be that ace. That is a big if.

We now have the a little depth/experience to overcome an injury to our pitching staff. I don’t know if we are good enough to make the playoffs, but we will at least be in the discussion again with our future still bright. We have to remember that we were spoiled for a long time. A run we will likely not see again. But, being pointed in the right direction is refreshing after the last two years.

Lastly,

MurphyHOF - January 14, 2009 reply

WORD LIMIT REACHED