Blue Jays Discussion: The "We could use the Man in White after today" Edition

[TheTotalPackage]

I'm curious, if the runner was running on an eventual ground rule double, would he not still be sent back to 3rd. That's what I thought of here.

 

[garce]

Well based on he was running on the play. Kinda judgement call or perhaps where the runner was at the time.

Judgement all the way, clearly going to score, great call.

 

[garce]

I'm curious, if the runner was running on an eventual ground rule double, would he not still be sent back to 3rd. That's what I thought of here.

I think he would have been put on 3rd.

 

[trellaine201]

Hope Minny can hold onto there 14-0 lead

 

[canucksfan]

Hope Minny can hold onto there 14-0 lead

If it were the Yanks I would still not be comfortable.

 

[Dr.Funk]

Scoreboard has been great to the Jays today

Indeed.


Rangers and Yanks lost, Orioles and Angels currently losing.


Only tampa got a W today.

 

[Daisy Jane]

the spot. They get lots of money to come in and not give up a run in the 9th when lots of pitchers do just that in earlier innings.

The "proven closer" is overrated when you can just go out and get a good pen arm for cheaper who can basically do the job just as well.

Look at Osuna, was a rookie from A ball before this year, now he's a closer, who's doing really well. Not because he was a proven closer before the year but because he's a good pitcher, and just about any good pitcher can close. But dumb GM's go out and pay 10 million per year for guys who've proven to be able to do that. It's such a waste.

I see.
so - if like..Big Name Closer was available at the end of august, we wouldn't want AA to get him (or at the Winter Meetings) because basically it is a waste of time, and we can spend the money else where?

that kind of makes sense. I guess I am just curious because so many times people go "Look at the ____ (usually the Yankees) Bullpen, it's so good/deep" so it should be a good thing to have. right.

Oh DJ...

Reason most say that is because they pitch one inning and most times, unless the reliever is horrendous, you'd still win most times. Relievers are also very streaky year to year typically. We haven't spent much on our bullpen at all yet have a very reliable Pen. Others will spend crazy amounts when you could use that money elsewhere.

why is it I pictured this huge sigh after that (or before that)?
thank you though. the only real good one I can remember (truly) was Eric Gagne, and I remember everyone went nuts over him. ((I think he did steroids though, right?). I was just wondering if there's a specific class of pitcher (the Closer) how could they ALL be over-rated.

but thanks for that explanation.

 

[Man Bear Pig]

Hope Minny can hold onto there 14-0 lead

They really need to hand the ball to Peterson and go for that insurance TD.

 

[canucksfan]

Two wildcard teams in the NL will likely have better records than the NL West and East division leaders

 

[Canada4Gold]

I see.
so - if like..Big Name Closer was available at the end of august, we wouldn't want AA to get him (or at the Winter Meetings) because basically it is a waste of time, and we can spend the money else where?

that kind of makes sense. I guess I am just curious because so many times people go "Look at the ____ (usually the Yankees) Bullpen, it's so good/deep" so it should be a good thing to have. right.

The Yankees don't actually have a "proven closer", Betances has always been a setup man, and I don't think Miller was a closer before he went to New York, even though he's making a lot of money.

They let their "proven closer" in Robertson leave, and he's been good for the White Sox, the Yanks have been doing just fine.

Bullpen's are so fickle and while you can spend 10 million on a closer you can pretty much put an entire bullpen together for that much, and have 1 of the numerous good pitcher you've put together for cheap step into that role and do just as good of a job.

Look at how awesome Hendricks and Osuna have been this year. Lowe has been great, Sanchez is a rookie. The proven guys coming into the year in our pen was Delabar(2013 not last year), Cecil, and Loup. Cecil was given the closers role for a short time before he lost it, the other 2 are in the minors, and we have a really good pen anyway.

Having a proven closer is great. But it's a luxury really, because you can pretty much close just as many games for cheaper with a bunch of good pen arms and not that proven closer. It's slightly riskier, but the better decision because like you said you can spend that money elsewhere. Had we gotten a proven closer in the offseason, or Papelbon during the year like was rumoured, we wouldn't have had the money under the budget for Price. That's an easy choice. I'll take Osuna back there, and Price starting over Pabelbon.

 

[garce]

Two wildcard teams in the NL will likely have better records than the NL West and East division leaders

Yup and terrible teams in all sports make the playoffs cause TV wants them to.

 

[garce]

The Yankees don't actually have a "proven closer", Betances has always been a setup man, and I don't think Miller was a closer before he went to New York, even though he's making a lot of money.

They let their "proven closer" in Robertson leave, and he's been good for the White Sox, the Yanks have been doing just fine.

Bullpen's are so fickle and while you can spend 10 million on a closer you can pretty much put an entire bullpen together for that much, and have 1 of the numerous good pitcher you've put together for cheap step into that role and do just as good of a job.

Look at how awesome Hendricks and Osuna have been this year. Lowe has been great, Sanchez is a rookie. The proven guys coming into the year in our pen was Delabar(2013 not last year), Cecil, and Loup. Cecil was given the closers role for a short time before he lost it, the other 2 are in the minors, and we have a really good pen anyway.

Having a proven closer is great. But it's a luxury really, because you can pretty much close just as many games for cheaper with a bunch of good pen arms and not that proven closer. It's slightly riskier, but the better decision because like you said you can spend that money elsewhere. Had we gotten a proven closer in the offseason, or Papelbon during the year like was rumoured, we wouldn't have had the money under the budget for Price. That's an easy choice. I'll take Osuna back there, and Price starting over Pabelbon.

The Yanks had the greatest "proven" closer of all time. Miller appears now to be a worthy successor. I like Osuna closing, but would prefer to have a different 8 th hard thrower set up and Sanchez in the rotation. Next year. Price surprised everybody.

 

[Kurtz]

The Yanks had the greatest "proven" closer of all time. Miller appears now to be a worthy successor. I like Osuna closing, but would prefer to have a different 8 th hard thrower set up and Sanchez in the rotation. Next year. Price surprised everybody.

Exactly. Yankees are firm believers in having ace closers. And not only ace closers but ace set-up guys. They went from Wetteland right into Rivera into Robertson into Miller. The only reason Miller wasn't technically a closer was because he was behind Paps/Uehara who are proven stud closer themselves. He got closer money this off-season, and he'd be closing on any team he's on.

And despite the Yankees having Miller, and Betances, who's as good as any closer in the league, they still went after Kimbrel.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Miller appears to be a worthy successor, but he wasn't a "proven closer" before he started closing games for the Yankees this year. And what do you know, a good reliever in general is able to pitch the 9th inning without giving up runs. Who would have thunk it.

That's my point. Get good pitchers. They will be able to close games if they're good enough. They don't need to have 100+ saves in their careers already. And the best part about that is good pitcher with a closer tag are cheaper than the same talent level pitchers with the proven closer tag.

and what do you even mean with the "Price surprised everybody". Oh course he did. But had we spent that money we had put away on Robertson in the off-season Paplebon mid-season then we wouldn't have had the financial room to acquire Price. How does "Price surprised everybody" rebutt that point?

 

[tp71]

?
They need a long man in that pen

They have Sanchez if they need him.

 

[garce]

Miller appears to be a worthy successor, but he wasn't a "proven closer" before he started closing games for the Yankees this year. And what do you know, a good reliever in general is able to pitch the 9th inning without giving up runs. Who would have thunk it.

That's my point. Get good pitchers. They will be able to close games if they're good enough. They don't need to have 100+ saves in their careers already. And the best part about that is good pitcher with a closer tag are cheaper than the same talent level pitchers with the proven closer tag.

and what do you even mean with the "Price surprised everybody". Oh course he did. But had we spent that money we had put away on Robertson in the off-season Paplebon mid-season then we wouldn't have had the financial room to acquire Price. How does "Price surprised everybody" rebutt that point?

I never thought Price would be acquired, would you rather have Robertson or Paplebon? For a full a season even? I wouldn't want Paplebon anywhere near my team. Millers a classic closer a hard thrower who doesn't rely on the fast ball.

 

[Canada4Gold]

huh? would I rather Robertson or Paplebon instead of Price? I thought I already established that in my point. Getting one of those guys would have blocked getting Price financially. We didn't do that, and instead got a reasonably priced pen that works and had the financial room to go make a substantial upgrade to the rotation. You don't need that proven closer, and us not paying through the roof for one this offseason was a good thing.

 

[garce]

The pen is less than great biggest need was a top 4 starter and AA got a ace, two decent veteran relievers. Why would have Paplebon blocked acquisitions?

 

[Canada4Gold]

The pen is less than great biggest need was a top 4 starter and AA got a ace, two decent veteran relievers. Why would have Paplebon blocked acquisitions?

his salary. Had we went out and got Pabelbon or Robertson(in the offseason) we wouldn't have had the money left under the payroll to get Price.

Did you miss the word financial, or money in there? It was the entire basis of my point.

You can get cheaper relievers who are as good, but they're cheaper because they don't have, "proven closer", or 100+ saves attached to them. And them use that money elsewhere(Price in this case)

If you're a bottomless money pit also known as the Dodgers, then feel free to go pay for all the closers because you seem to not have any financial restrictions whatsoever. Teams who have budgets and are close to them, would be better advised to go the good pitcher who isn't being paid 8 figures because of the saves he's recorded in the past.

 

[King Mapes]

I see.
so - if like..Big Name Closer was available at the end of august, we wouldn't want AA to get him (or at the Winter Meetings) because basically it is a waste of time, and we can spend the money else where?

that kind of makes sense. I guess I am just curious because so many times people go "Look at the ____ (usually the Yankees) Bullpen, it's so good/deep" so it should be a good thing to have. right.



why is it I pictured this huge sigh after that (or before that)?
thank you though. the only real good one I can remember (truly) was Eric Gagne, and I remember everyone went nuts over him. ((I think he did steroids though, right?). I was just wondering if there's a specific class of pitcher (the Closer) how could they ALL be over-rated.

but thanks for that explanation.

The idea of the title "closer" is overrated and they get paid a ridiculous amount in FA. Coming into this season we didn't have one and made a couple trades and all of a sudden our BP looks crazy good without a high profile closer. It doesn't hurt adding cheap, reliable relievers it's when you pay an insane amount. We traded for Hawkins, for example.

 

[dredeye]

I agree. He knows this market better than anyone and there wouldn't be a philosophy change to deal with. AA has put all the people in place to make this organization successful for a long time....let's not start re-arranging chairs.

Whatever happens AA should retain control of the baseball ops.
If you're worried about AA's ability to be president you can always bring in Gillick or someone in an advisory role to assist him.

Well considering everything being said about dombrowski not having interest in Toronto is because when they talked to him they told him they would not give him control of baseball operations. Their just looking for someone to take care of the dollars and sense and not the team itself

 

[Discoverer]

his salary. Had we went out and got Pabelbon or Robertson(in the offseason) we wouldn't have had the money left under the payroll to get Price.

Did you miss the word financial, or money in there? It was the entire basis of my point.

You can get cheaper relievers who are as good, but they're cheaper because they don't have, "proven closer", or 100+ saves attached to them. And them use that money elsewhere(Price in this case)

If you're a bottomless money pit also known as the Dodgers, then feel free to go pay for all the closers because you seem to not have any financial restrictions whatsoever. Teams who have budgets and are close to them, would be better advised to go the good pitcher who isn't being paid 8 figures because of the saves he's recorded in the past.

Agree with everything here. I remember discussing in the offseason how the rumoured $8 million should be spent. Some people were upset that they didn't use it to get a guy like Gregerson or Neshek to solidify the pen. My argument at the time was that you could use the $8 million to sign a solid reliever for the whole season, or you could go cheap in the pen and use the money to bring in an ace starter (I think I used Hamels as an example) for the last two months of the season.

Of course, there was always the chance that they fell far enough out of it that it would have been too late for even an ace to make enough difference, but it was a worthwhile gamble, and I think it was Anthopoulos's plan all along.

 

[frost king]

So what would happen from the beginning of the year, if you had flipped the Jays pen for the Yankees pen? In my mind, the Jays would have mirrored their Pythagorean record from day one. The Yankees would be in our tail lights, and the acquisition of Price would have been a moot point. We could have had a record like KC or The Cardinals.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

So what would happen from the beginning of the year, if you had flipped the Jays pen for the Yankees pen? In my mind, the Jays would have mirrored their Pythagorean record from day one. The Yankees would be in our tail lights, and the acquisition of Price would have been a moot point. We could have had a record like KC or The Cardinals.

The two bullpens have almost identical ERA's, SIERA and LOB%, with the Yankees having the better FIP, and the Blue Jays having the better WHIP.

I think you're overselling the difference it would have made.

 

[Discoverer]

So what would happen from the beginning of the year, if you had flipped the Jays pen for the Yankees pen? In my mind, the Jays would have mirrored their Pythagorean record from day one. The Yankees would be in our tail lights, and the acquisition of Price would have been a moot point. We could have had a record like KC or The Cardinals.

The Jays probably would have won more games in April and lost more games in May and June.

April - Yankees much, much better
May - Jays better
June - Jays much better
July - Almost identical, Yankees slightly better
August - Almost identical, Jays slightly better

The two bullpens have been almost identical this year by ERA, FIP, xFIP and all peripherals.