Braves Sign Closer Billy Wagner
by gondeee on Dec 2, 2009 8:20 AM EST
in Free Agents
203 comments
After a few weeks of inactivity the Braves picked up the pace Tuesday night and agreed in principal to a one-year, $7 million contract with closer Billy Wagner. The deal is pending Wagner passing a physical, which will apparently take place in Atlanta on Wednesday. If all is well, I would expect an official announcement and press conference sometime Thursday.
There is a second year on Wagner's deal and it is a vesting option worth $6.5 million, and will become guaranteed if he finished 50 games next season, according to Ken Rosenthal. I read that as "finishes" and not "appears in," so that means he pretty much has to stay healthy all season. Wagner has average 56 games finished per season over his career.
The $7 million salary for 2010 is essentially replacing Rafael Soriano's $7 million salary from last season. The Red Sox offered Wagner, a type-A free agent, arbitration, so the Braves stand to lose their first round pick. But by offering Soriano and Mike Gonzalez arbitration yesterday, the Braves should gain that pick back (plus some) if those two relievers, as expected, sign elsewhere.
Wagner will turn 39 next season, but when healthy he's one of the best closers in the game -- averaging over 30 saves a season, while sporting a career ERA of 2.39 and an 11.8 K/9 rate. I especially like the fact that he's a lefty closer in a division that has quite a few lefty sluggers. The ability to neutralize the left-handedness of the Phillies lineup will be invaluable.
This is a good signing by Frank Wren and company. Wagner proved he was plenty-healthy last year, and he is absolutely one of the best closers in the game. Well played, and a good upgrade (yes, upgrade) over Soriano or Gonzalez. Add to all this that Wagner hasn't made as low as $7 million since 2001, and we not only got a great closer we got him for a bargain -- pure Braves move.
Oh, and by the way, Billy Wagner's agent is named Bean Stringfellow... Bean Stringfellow.
0 recs |
203 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Who is Billy Wanger? I think this nickname has potential.
"Matt Diaz is a baseball player."-Joe Simpson
by 10-4 on Dec 2, 2009 8:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
YESSSSSSSS!
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 2, 2009 8:39 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Duuuude. I soooo called this, like months ago.
by beeswax on Dec 2, 2009 8:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
well good morning indeed
I thought hurricane season was over........
by bravesguy311 on Dec 2, 2009 8:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Great Move
Especially considering that if the Red Sox pick up either John Lackey, Matt Holliday, Marco Scutaro and Jose Valverde we would only give up the 52nd overall pick.
by jraypritch on Dec 2, 2009 8:42 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
You are wrong about the pick.
We are giving up our first rounder. The only way the Red Sox don’t get our first round pick is if we sign a higher Class A free agent; and the only ones are Bay, Holliday, Valverde (pointless with the Wagner signing), Lackey, and Scutaro, none of whom we are going to sign. (And if we signed Bay, the Sox would get both our first and second, lol.) So, while the price in dollars was right, the draft pick part is pretty painful—-we have one of the highest unprotected picks. Win-win for the Red Sox who won their game of chicken with Wagner.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 8:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Your right
I must learn to have coffee before posting if I want to get my facts straight. Thanks for keeping me straight!
by jraypritch on Dec 2, 2009 9:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But it will be recouped if Gozo and Soriano leave, no?
Here are Pujols's stats: 1.000/1.000/4.000/5.000. That's right. He is batting a thousand, with a thousand OBP (naturally), and every hit has been a home run, and thus his OPS is a perfect 5.000.
by TradeAndruw on Dec 2, 2009 10:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
only if they don’t get signed by a team with a top 15 selection. In that case, we would get the supplemental pick and that team’s 2nd rounder.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 11:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
or the team that signs them also,signs a higher rated type A
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Dec 2, 2009 12:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bean Stringfellow is the man!
"Matt Diaz is a baseball player."-Joe Simpson
by 10-4 on Dec 2, 2009 8:48 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I spit my Froot Loops all over the screen...
Great move for $7M. Wren is not messin’ around here. Going to eat my string beans for good luck in the 9th now…
by Abslilsweets on Dec 2, 2009 8:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I love this...
now I just pray Bobby doesn’t overuse him by June.
by mdhenshaw on Dec 2, 2009 8:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
If healthy...
great move, and if not, it won’t cost too much. Just need to sign another option or two in case he goes down again, and to help Moylan work the 8th.
Well done Mr Stringfellow. But what I don’t get, is why sign now, without knowing if Gonzo or Soriano will accept arb. If one of the two, say Soriano, shock us and accept, that makes for a pretty big bind financially, especially if Lowe isn’t moved.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 9:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
If not healthy, he costs a bit...
…$7 million going down in the bullpen would be a mess. Especially since we are not likely to sign back-up options after signing Wagner. I would still love us to shell out a couple of million for Calero as a set-up guy/Wagner-gets-hurt replacement, but I doubt we do that—-we’ll more likely be looking for a lefty set-up man to pair with Moylan.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 9:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
difference is,...
I think we do sign a few more options, at least one more if not two.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 9:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope so.
There are good low risk/high reward options out there. Time will tell.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 9:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. So far, so good. I initially was concerend about the vesting player option, but I suppose since that requires him to be healthy and effective all year long, it isn’t that much of a worry.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 2, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not really...
if Bobby overworks his butt from April-August, and he shreds his elbow late in August, the option can vest and it can be for a wasted year. Not saying that will happen, but it’s certainly possible, especially with the way Bobby works his relievers.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps
But since Wags only averages about 54 finishes a year, and Cox will be well aware of the 50 needed to vest the option, I don’t really see that happening.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 2, 2009 2:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bobby's not thinking about 2011.
He wants a squad for next year. I’m excited (but still thinking small).
by Mark Lempke on Dec 2, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is, now Soriano and Gonzo know they won’t be 9th inning guys. There is no way they come back now. This was a smart move perfectly timed
by eaheckman10 on Dec 2, 2009 9:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't this premature?
I am not surprised that we signed Wagner. The money seems reasonable, he did come at a discount, probably because of the surgery and the Sox’s arbitration offer. Still, being a lefty closer, he is useful for us, so long as he stays healthy.
Still, it seems premature. Why not just have the deal in place and only make it official when Soriano and Gonzalez decline arbitration? Not that it is likely that either or both will accept, but if either or both do, we will have way too expensive a bullpen and will have to trade someone for little or no value just to move salary. (We don’t have the payroll to afford a $15-20 million bullpen.)
It is an interesting move and shows that Wren is different from Schurholtz—-as he never signed top dollar closers, pretty much during his entire tenure in Atlanta.
Personally, I am ambivalent. If healthy, Wagner is an elite closer and the price is pretty good in dollars. I hate giving up the draft pick however, since the picks we get in return from Gonzalez and Soriano will not be as high and will probably be second round picks.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 9:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
If anything it's premature on Wagner's part to sign.
We got him before he was able to test the market and potentially drive his price up in a bidding war. eaheckman10 above you had another great poin that now Soriano and Gonzo know that they won’t be closing for us next year and are MUCH more likely to take deals elsewhere.
I don’t think the picks will hurt that bad once we get a bunch for Gonzo and Sori.
by Fischerking on Dec 2, 2009 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m confused, second round picks for gonzo and soriano? Ouch…
I was really hoping on a boatload of high picks…I hope we didn’t blow our top pick on Wagner…. hes good…. but the injury thing really scares me.
by fizzbot on Dec 2, 2009 9:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
We also get two compensation picks in between the first and second rounds. It’s also just as likely that we get first round picks as second.
by acie4mvp on Dec 2, 2009 5:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
picks
we’ll have, most likely, 4 picks in the first round + supplemental rounds. that’s 4 picks in the first 38 or so picks in a VERY deep draft. many kids will fall due to signability issues.
i think we draft Stetson Allie at the end of round 1 (he’s a SS/RHP) and see what he excels at more. i think SS.
then Austin Wilson, OF from HS with the other pick.
In the supplemental round, we take Nick Castellanos, 3B from Florida.
then a projectable arm with the other supplemental pick. Zach Lee out of Texas would be nice.
by apoxonbothyourhouses on Dec 3, 2009 1:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, that isn't likely at all.
The most likely scenario is that we get two supplemental picks and two second round picks for Gonzalez and Soriano. There are only 14 teams without protected first round picks (the Braves are the 15th). Boston will quite possibly sign Holliday, removing their first round pick from the scenario. The Yankees could sign Lackey and do the same. The rest of the teams without protected picks don’t seem like likely destinations for Gonzalez or Soriano. The Rays have said they are not paying for a closer. The Marlins won’t sign a marquis free agent. The Phillies have Lidge and way too much money tied up in the bullpen to sign a closer. The Cardinals have Franklin. The Twins have Nathan. The Tigers are shedding salary, not adding it. The Angels have Fuentes, the Rockies have Street. The Mariners have Aardsma and are relatively cheap with money. The Cubs, I guess are a possibility, but I don’t think they are adding salary at closer when they have internal options. The Brewers signed Hoffman to an extension. The Dodgers have Broxton, the Giants have Sanchez.
So, where, pray tell, are we going to get a first round pick from for Soriano or Gonzalez?
by cavebird on Dec 3, 2009 9:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gonzalez is above Lackey in the ratings...
with Soriano behind. So if the Yankees sign Lackey, it’d depend on which reliever they sign as well to determine if we or the Angels get their first.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 3, 2009 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow..
that was freakin’ fast! A great move by Wren to get an established closer QUICKLY! Now we don’t have to wait until late January to wonder/rosterbate who would finish games for us. And the second year option is bad ass.
by Fischerking on Dec 2, 2009 9:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
New SAT Test Question
Billy Wagner is to Craig Kimbrel, as Obi-Wan was to Luke
by Abslilsweets on Dec 2, 2009 9:33 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
So…Billy Wagner is going to allow himself to get killed before he can teach Kimbrel anything other than the basic idea of what a closer is, then show up as a ghost when he’s having trouble? Oh, and at some point Kimbrel will get his hand cut off and kiss his sister?
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 2, 2009 9:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the force is weak with this one...
Just got threw watching all six episodes yesterday with the kids… talk about a nerd marathon. Reminded me just how bad 1, 2 and 3 were.
by Abslilsweets on Dec 2, 2009 9:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You dont need to see his identification….
I thought hurricane season was over........
by bravesguy311 on Dec 2, 2009 9:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope..
Its more like the BB/9 is weak with this one… (Kimbrel that is)
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me." Hunter S. Thompson
by mad_dog_maddux on Dec 2, 2009 11:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
it's more like
Billy Wagner is to Craig Kimbrel as Yoda was to Qui-Gon Jin
by apoxonbothyourhouses on Dec 3, 2009 1:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i’m liking the way our pen is shaping out..
now sign dotel for around 4 MM per year and were good…
CL Wagner
SU Dotel
MR Moylan
MR Proctor
MR Medlen
MR Valdez
LOOGY EOF
with Kimbrel likely up by June
does anybody know how much dotel will be looking to make, 4 MM is just a rough guess…or any other possible set up guys…i think were one arm away from having a top notch bullpen
i’d be damn confident with that pen going into the season
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 2, 2009 9:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'd much rather have...
…Calero than Dotel. Calero will come much cheaper and has just as good an arm.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 9:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah i’d be down with that…
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 2, 2009 10:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So would I. The last time Dotel was here he was in a hurry to leave.
by John Holton on Dec 2, 2009 10:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dotel’s also a Type A, I believe.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 2, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But he wasn’t offered arbitration so that doesn’t matter.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 2, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, OK. Cool. I’ve been kinda out of the baseball news vortex for a few days, so I have no idea who did and who didn’t get offered.
Then yeah, I’d think about Dotel as an option, if he’s around in March and willing to sign for $2.5M.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 2, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No...
We’ll get 2 more picks back from the teams who sign Soriano and Gonzalez.
"Are you tryin to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?"
by mvhsbball on Dec 2, 2009 10:33 AM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
+ 2 more in the supplemental round if I'm not mistaken
Which I may be.
by Mark Lempke on Dec 2, 2009 3:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re not. If Gonazlez and Soriano sign elsewhere, the Braves get 2 supplemental picks, between the 1st and 2nd rounds, regardless of who else their new teams sign.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 2, 2009 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what is the order of those supplemental picks?...
would it go in order of their ranking among Type As, the Reds above the Braves because Valverde is over Soriano and Gonzo, Red Sox and Cardinals above both with Bay and Holliday, we’d sandwich the Angels if Gonzo, Lackey, and Soriano go, etc?
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 5:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I’m pretty sure that’s how it’s done. It’s the only way that makes sense to me anyway.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 2, 2009 6:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I'm the only one who doesn't approve
Also, dont trade javier vazquez.
by esadb on Dec 2, 2009 9:53 AM EST via mobile reply actions 0 recs
im uneasy about it
I think Wagner is a bit overrated and with the way we use relievers, I am not convinced of his health.
I could be wrong, but I seem to remember a lot of Wagner bashing on TC when he was a Met..funny how those things change.
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
by Doghnut on Dec 2, 2009 10:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wagner has the highest K rate of anyone with more than 800 innings with an 11.79 K/9. I think that he’ll be able to regain his control this year after being a little rusty last year and his FIP is consistently in the mid to low 2’s. Career FIP of 2.65
by acie4mvp on Dec 2, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
still got nothing to do with health
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
by Doghnut on Dec 2, 2009 7:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tommy John surgery has a pretty damn good recovery rate. I like his odds.
by FineHamAbounds on Dec 2, 2009 7:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Since he has only a one year contract, I feel his health won’t be as big of an issue as if he had a multi-year contract. Soriano and Gonzalez have both had injury troubles as well, but they’re almost certainly going to get more years. That makes them much more of a risk.
So yeah, there is an injury risk, but it’s considerably less than that of either Soriano or Gonzo.
by acie4mvp on Dec 2, 2009 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You aren’t.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good to know
Also, dont trade javier vazquez.
by esadb on Dec 2, 2009 1:52 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not happy either
I’d rather have Soriano.
by DrB on Dec 2, 2009 10:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bah.
Given the track record of pitchers coming back from TJ surgery to full health/effectiveness, I’ve got a lot more stock in Wagner’s health than Soriano’s. Plus Wagner has been far, FAR more consistent over his career in shutting down games. I very much like this signing, particularly because the big lefty sluggers like Ross Gload won’t snipe us in the ninth anymore…
by J-Freak on Dec 2, 2009 12:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ross Gload…well played
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Dec 2, 2009 12:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t approve is too strong, but I don’t love the deal the way many do. Wagner’s health scares me, but I trust Wren.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 2, 2009 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is a really good point about us signing Wagner forcing Gonzalez and Soriano to look elsewhere, knowing they both would probably want more money and years. This is a good move for the future I believe as well, with Kimbrel coming up, as has been mentioned above. It solves the closer problem for this year, forces Gonzalez and Soriano to basically leave, so we’ll get draft picks for them, and it allows us to plan on having Kimbrel in the near future, without tying up 7-10 million per year for a closer over the next 4-5. Good move on Wrens part. He starts filling holes early and also allows us to have some future financial flexibility!
by michaelcooksey on Dec 2, 2009 10:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Best part about this whole deal...
is that the Mets basically traded 2 high draft picks for Carter, and a enough salary relief to sign Alex Cora. Gotta love Minaya
I thought hurricane season was over........
by bravesguy311 on Dec 2, 2009 10:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Like it
People are always going to get upset about losing draft picks, but you can’t get something for nothing, I guess. I won’t lie and say I’m not concerned about his health & age, but at least it looks like we are going for it in the old mans last year. Just need a big bat…
BattleRedBlog.com DontMessWithTexans.com
Clutchfans.net - Chuck 4 TexansTalk.com - Frak The Jags
Twitter - Zepp1978 Facebook - Zepp1978
by Mike Kerns on Dec 2, 2009 10:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Ya I can see Wagner being sick at first, then bobby running him into the ground and our 7 million dollar superstar sucking by august/sept. Just in time for playoff races!
by fizzbot on Dec 2, 2009 10:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Why is everyone fussing about losing draft picks? When we actually have a high one we blow it on trash like Mike Minor! :)
"Matt Diaz is a baseball player."-Joe Simpson
by 10-4 on Dec 2, 2009 10:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Minor is not gonna be anything I agree, especially when we coulda had Matzek…. sigh….drools….cries..
by fizzbot on Dec 2, 2009 10:16 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
you missed the sarcasm in 10-4’s voice…
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Smoltz and Glavine got rocked their first years in the major leagues…
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, those 38year olds really
"Are you tryin to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?"
by mvhsbball on Dec 2, 2009 10:33 AM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I’m uneasy about this one. Don’t get me wrong, I like Wagner a lot and feel very comfortable with him coming in at the end of the games. However, I think paying a closer $7M is just stupid.
That is a lot of money to give a guy to pitch 3-4 innings/week. I have made it known before, but I am very much of the persuasion that the closer is the most over-rated position in baseball. Shelling out millions to a guy to get 3 outs in the 9th inning is just ridiculous.
Plus, look out across the baseball landscape at the big-name, successful closers out there – Papelbonn, Rivera, Bailey, etc…those guys were all home grown. Spending big in Free Agency on a closer is bad baseball management. Guys who can get 3 outs are a dime a dozen, but we just spent a dozen dimes on one.
I like Wagner. I don’t like this deal.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I agree to an extent
I would much rather have a home grown closer but if he becomes an elite closer then he will expect money like Papelbon ($7M) or Rivera ($15M). Bailey only made $400K last year but if he continues to put up similar number you can bet on him asking for a lot more.
Knowing the Braves we would trade him away before he asks that much. I like the deal if nothing else it shows that we are serious about contending next year.
by jraypritch on Dec 2, 2009 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. Ride those guys until their walk year and trade them/offer arbitration and recoup the picks. Then start again.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the problem is that we don’t seem to find guys to fill that role very often
by jraypritch on Dec 2, 2009 10:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We’ve had quite a few that have or COULD have filled that role for us over the years, or could have used our scouting department to trade for someone like that at a cheap cost, potentially even a throw-in in a larger deal (much the way Texas got Feliz from us).
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Our scouting dept. seems to be very good at finding #3-4 starters, not closers.
by FineHamAbounds on Dec 2, 2009 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
but just what exact homegrown option would you want?...
Moylan? Medlen? Valdez? When we don’t have one available, at least until say next year or the year after depending on Medlen/Kimbrel, signing one seems the best way to go. Generally, I’d agree with you on developing closers from within, but without an internal option right now, what other option is there to avoid a Reitsma like problem with a possible playoff team.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Moylan – yes
Medlen – yes
Valdez – Yes
Those are 3 very strong closing candidates for us, and with Kimbrel waiting in the wings, I have reason to believe that spending big money on a FA closer is a mistake.
I couldn’t care less about losing the draft pick or the fact that he is coming off of TJ. I think that financially, this doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Couldn’t we have just offered Gonzo $7M in arbitration and gotten as good production?
I don’t like spending millions on what equates to a made-up position.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough...
personally I’d have less confidence in Valdez and Kimbrel as rookies, and like the idea of Moylan/Medlen in the 8th. But to each their own, and it’s all specualtion without the dreaded 20/20 hindsight anyway.
I’d have rather bunched say Saito, Calero, and a lefty to see who holds up, but Wagner, if healthy, can be more than effective there. Plus, he also allows Kimbrel to work his way into the bigs as a set up man before, if successful, closing as KRod, Rivera, Heath Bell and others have done lately working under veteran closers like Percival, Wetteland, and Hoffman.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 2:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed there. I wouldn’t have confidence in the rookies either, but specifically for the closer position (not the OF as discussed above) it wouldn’t bother me too much. There have been many good rookie closers over the past few years.
My preference would be to let Medlen have the CP job (if we have to label someone for it) and use Moylan in the high-leverage situations with EOF and Logan, and sign someone like Calero and use Valdez in spots to get him used to the bigs.
I just think the $7M was too much to spend on something as insignificant as a closer.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 2:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m with you on the closers are overrated thing, but I think Wagner is different. I think he’s worth 7 million. He’s not just some “proven” closer like what apparently Bob Wickman or Dan Kolb was, he’s Billy Wagner. He’s consistently put up great numbers for over 10 seasons.
I guess my opinion is that the Braves had a decent amount of blown saves last year via Gonzo and Soriano, and Wagner will cut down on those significantly, directly resulting in more wins.
"Sometimes I wonder what'd it be like to be outside and not hear the birds chirping...I think it'd be kind of nice."
by alligatorimpersonator on Dec 2, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gonzo and Soriano were both up and down...
Gonzo, while he had a great year, lost the closers job early and was always kind of the uneasy variety of closer (in that they tend to let guys on before getting out 3, make ya sweat it out a little). Soriano was great early, but struggled down the stretch. And all 3 have significant injury questions in their past, but of the 3, 2 had significant workloads last year—Gonzo and Soriano.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 5:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree to an extent...
…I think “proven” closers are overrated and overpaid. However, in Wagner, we have at least signed an elite relief pitcher; the numbers he has put up are incredibly good. If he is healthy (and his performance at the end of 2009 indicated this), and puts up a typical season, it would be a better season than Soriano had last year, which was very good. As for the money, it isn’t much more than Soriano made last year and is the market range for closers. If we had spent the same money on someone like Fernando Rodney, I would have been miffed as he is not that good of a pitcher.
Yes, we could have gone bargain hunting and maybe found a gem like Calero cheaply. But, if we are going to pay, at least we paid for an elite relief pitcher. Personally, I am more concerned about the draft pick.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
fernando was 37/38 for saves last year, i woulda payed 7 MM for that
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 2, 2009 10:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
look at his perrefials not the save nbrs and don’t focus on one year
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Dec 2, 2009 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's the wrong stat to look at.
Fernando Rodney had great saves numbers because he got easier opportunities. It just happens sometimes. His K/9, BB/9, even ERA and WHIP numbers were very pedestrian and very much in line with his career numbers. Remember that Kolb had great save numbers the year before we got him. Rodney is not who we want to spend significant money on.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 10:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you (as well as a lot of people) undervalue the psycological aspect of coming into the 9th inning. If these were machines we were talking about then I think Medlen could close. But when he first came into the league he didn’t have the nerves to even come into the game. It takes good stuff as well as that psycological component to close, so while I agree the closers are over paid ($15mil? Jeebus.), I don’t think that $7MM is out of line.
by soup du jour on Dec 2, 2009 10:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We have been discussing this back and forth in another thread.
I disagree about the ninth inning being more pressure prone than other high-pressure relief situations likes runners on in a close game in the 7th or 8th. Yes, there are certain elite closers out there, but these guys are just the best relief pitchers. If the 9th inning was a psychological wall like some say it is, why aren’t there a bunch of great set-up guys who could never successfully close, but could always put up great numbers as set up guys? There just aren’t any that I can think of—-certainly not ones who put up elite relief pitcher numbers.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What’s the difference in pitching with 0 on 0 out in the 9th inning and coming in with the bases loaded and 1 out or 0 outs in the 7th inning? The 7th inning scenario is more mentally challenging than the 9th inning scenario, yet never do you see closers come in the game in the 7th inning.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Illustrating the need for more than one guy though...
Wagner can handle the 9th, but we still need others like Moylan, Medlen, EOF, or another signee to work those pressure situations. The days of a guy like Goose Gossage, who can come in those tight spots in the 7th and finish a game out, are long gone. So we need guys who can fill the multiple roles in the 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th. Hopefully Wagner can be healthy and lock up the 9th, allowing Moylan, Medlen, etc to work the other innings.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’d rather that we don’t assign a specific pitcher to a specific inning. Why not use the best option based on the current situation?
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 1:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That "closer by committee" idea though...
never seems to work well. Even this year with Soriano and Gonzalez, there appeared a clear pecking order with Soriano getting the call if he hadn’t been overworked in the preceeding games. In history, at least to my eyes, bullpens seem to do better when guys have clearly defined roles with a closer locking up the 9th and others finding their spot in the earlier innings.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 2:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the closer by committee didn’t work though, because bobby wouldn’t go with it based on the game situation. Look at the games against Philly – he used Soriano against the heart of the lefty-heavy philly lineup. Gonzo should have been in then.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 2:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
THIS.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 2, 2009 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ever notice that the same arguments get made day after day, thrad after thread?
The Braves brain-trust obviously feels that having a elite veteran closer is essential to building a championship level team. I agree with their wisdom on this issue.
by fandave on Dec 3, 2009 9:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The reason the same arguments get made...
…is there is nothing else to do in the offseason, there was just a big signing, and well, let’s face it, some people on the internet are wrong on some issues, so we have to explain their errors to them. As for the necessity of an elite closer for a championship level team, the 1990’s Braves just called and they aren’t happy you dissed them.
by cavebird on Dec 3, 2009 9:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and the reason that the brain trust feels the same way about having an elite closer is that it is common practice in baseball…for some reason, GMs think it is smart to pay 1 guy millions of dollars to get 3 outs in a game, when they could just as easily get the same 3 outs from a guy making less than 1 million dollars.
I still don’t nor will I ever understand the mystic auroa of the 9th inning…it’s like, all of a sudden, pitches get harder to throw and the offense is more focused and determined or something?
I’ve said it a million times over, but the guy who gets out of the bases loaded jam with a slim lead back in the 6th or 7th inning was under more stress than some guy brought on in the 9th inning to retire the next three batters, no matter who they may be.
Ron Mahay was our best pitcher out of the pen back in 07, but Bob Wickman was our “closer” – the guy who gets credit for holding the BP down and keeping the opposition from winning in the late innings? Explain how that even makes sense.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
so, to sum it up, your grasp on baseball reality is far and away superior to that of the Braves’ brain-trust, with thier collective several hundreds of years of actual experience at the highest level?
by fandave on Dec 3, 2009 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think it is smart to bunt a runner over to 2nd?
You are probably right though…the general concensus can never be wrong. Heck, burn me at the stake like they did those guys who insisted the earth wasn’t flat.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not in every scenario, but seriously?...
“it is smart to pay 1 guy millions of dollars to get 3 outs in a game, when they could just as easily get the same 3 outs from a guy making less than 1 million dollars.”
Cause Kris Medlen can close games as easily as one of the 5 greatest EVER, which Wagner has proven he is when healthy? In some cases, I’d agree, like Andrew Bailey vs. Kevin Gregg. But truly “elite” closers like Hoffman, Rivera, Wagner, Nathan, etc, have gotten that title for a reason, and that is they are VERY good relievers. You could use them in the 6th or 7th to get out of a jam, or you could use them for the save, I’m pretty sure they’ll be effective in either scenario. But saying a guy like Medlen could just as easily do the job as Wagner is about as foolish as saying Peyton Manning can drive 30 yards as easily as he can 70. Can he get the job done? Certainly. But the extra distance, and extra money, are there for a reason and can make a difference.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 3, 2009 11:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What makes any of those guys "elite’ closers? Saves. A made up stat that is more or less worthless.
Give me a team of Ron Mahays in my bullpen and you can have your team of league average BP and one “great” closer, and I will win that BP battle every time.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 1:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong...
saves make them “closers” by definition of the job and the stat. What makes them elite is they get guys out, a lot, and a lot more than they let guys reach base.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 3, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I beg to differ. Getting saves, not outs make them elite. There are some really good pitchers there, and I don’t deny that. However, because MLB is wrapped around this thing called the “Save”, these guys are not utilized in the best way possible.
How many 1 or 2 run games are lost in the 6th or 7th innings that these guys could have probably literally saved? I bet the number would be staggering. But, because MLB has it in their collective minds that these guys can and should only pitch in the 9th inning, their true skills are wasted in chasing the ever increasingly overrated save.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 7:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Trevor Hoffman – the most innings he ever pitched in 1 season was 90 – his rookie year. He has only pitched more than 80 innings 3 times in his career. He has a career whip of 1.041 and a career ERA of 2.73 – both very respectable numbers. He has just over 1000 career innings pitched – or roughly, 5-6 seasons’ worth of games.
If you think someone who puts up good numbers in very minimal numbers of innings is worth millions and millions of dollars, by all means, be my guest.
I’ll save my money for equal to near equal production from other guys who make a fraction of what big-name closers make.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
neither one of us are spending or saving that money, because we aren’t in that job. But the guys who are paid to do that job, they don’t seem very hesitant to give a guy like Hoffman, Nathan, or Wagner “millions and millions of dollars”.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 3, 2009 5:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, pardon me. I thought you were an exec too….
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 7:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh, the ‘we’ argument? Really?
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 3, 2009 8:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Off of this...
“I’ll save my money for equal to near equal production from other guys who make a fraction of what big-name closers make.”
Yeah. What money is he saving? I get it, you can find cheap closers. But if it was as stupid for a club to spend on an “elite” closer as justin keeps claiming, how the hell do so many guys get $7-8+? Obviously the “elite” closer has value.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 3, 2009 10:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I get the basic argument and I’m on your side, the bullpen by committee crap doesn’t work in the real world. I was commenting on pointing out that neither he nor you work for the Braves and there for shouldn’t use ‘we’. We’re all fans, we say we, that’s just what we do.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 3, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't mean it like we as fans...
meant more we as paying baseball players. We don’t do that, and the guys that do apparently see value in “closers” and specifically “elite closers” like Wag, Rivera, Hoffman, Nathan, etc, or else they wouldn’t get paid what they’re paid or used how they’re used. It was in direct response to the “I’ll save my money” remark and that alone. Or I’m just being an ass again.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 3, 2009 11:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I got how you meant we.
And, while it’s another argument., we do pay baseball players, we contribute a lot more to their salaries than any executives.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 4, 2009 12:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
9 of the top 20 saves leaders from last season made $3 million or less.
Of the 20, only 6 of them got $7M or more.
Of those 6, 3 of them posted the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th worst ERAs of the whole group.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 4, 2009 8:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Right. And people don’t understand that there could be other reasons besides being retarded that clubs shell out big money for closers. It protects the GM (and manager) from some second-guessing and probably helps keep the fanbase happy.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 4, 2009 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cause GMs and Manangers...
constantly base decisions on fan opinion and fan reaction.
In theory, I agree with justin. I’d love to sign say Saito, Lyon, Calero, and Mahay for a combined $10-12m, but would that work out, or would they come so cheap? Or to continually churn out good young arms like the A’s with Street, Duchscherer, Bailey, Devine, Wuertz and Ziegler would be ideal, but that’s not the position we are currently in. If Wagner is healthy, I think the current set up can work wonderfully and with Saito and others, we have the option to use him in any situation not just the 9th (if Bobby wanted to). Just think, we now have two solid veterans at the back end, with a load of other young arms to come up and learn from them this year before hopefully taking on a larger role in the future. Maybe after this year, we can move to an A’s model, letting Gearrin and Kimbrel and Valdez and some of the live arms starting in A/rookie ball, among others start working the late innings for us, but as of right now I think we are a year or two at best away from being able to rely on them.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 4, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with that. My only point in all this diatribe is that, despite what many GMs do, spending millions on a commodity without a significant amount of true baseball value (I am talking about someone to “lock down the 9th” here, not a good BP arm) is foolish.
I love having Wagner and Saito on the team now. I just don’t like the contracts for each.
I really hope that Atlanta goes the way of Oakland in regards to the BP. Oakland is pretty much the team I have had in the back of my mind during this whole discussion.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 4, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pick your poison though...
“I love having Wagner and Saito on the team now. I just don’t like the contracts for each.”
That’s what those guys warrant on the open market though, so we aren’t getting one (the player) without the other (the contract it takes to get them).
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 4, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
San Diego is another excellent example.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 4, 2009 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Additionally, 6 of the remaining 20 (ESPN only lists the top 40) saves leaders made more than $3M – many of them making more than $5M even.
I know that this can be misleading, because some of them actually had good ERAs, but this just goes to show how overrated a “Save” can be.
Bottom line: Teams are spending unecessary amounts of money on a commodity that is easily available for much cheaper.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 4, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, but...
that happens across the board imo. See rumors of Derosa somehow warranting a 9+ per for multiple years, or Arroyo, Dempster, etc getting $10-12+ to start, or us giving GA as little as a couple mil to produce like a one legged Gregor Blanco. Bad contracts, especially considering the insane #s some guys get, are apparently part of the game, and the idea that teams can get similar, if not better production, for cheaper is not exclusive to the bullpen.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 4, 2009 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
doesn't matter how stupid it is...
as long as other teams are willing to do it. I agree 7mil sounds like a lot but as noted it’s not unheard of, and besides I think our closer combo of the past year made about 10 mil with rafael soriano earning 6.3 mil of that.
So i guess we got a fairly reasonable price based on everyones assessment of wagner, who IMO is better than soriano (when healthy of course)
by cirela20 on Dec 2, 2009 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It absolutely matters that it is stupid. Look at the Mets. Because some other teams do what Minaya has done doesn’t make the stupidity of it all any less relevant.
And to say that Wagner’s salary is not as much as we paid for a closer combo is inaccurate too. We didn’t use a “closer combo”. We used 2 guys in 2 different roles. Unless Wagner can pitch with his left hand on Tuesday and his right arm on Wednesday and be just as nasty, the comparrison doesn’t work.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well to recoup what we had last year we need to sign a setup guy in the same caliber as SOriano for around 2-3M…which is pretty likely
wait for us to sign or not sign a replacement for the Soriano (assuming Wagner replaces Gonzo, bc of handedness)
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Dec 2, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem with having a boatload of picks is that we probably don’t have nearly the budget to sign 3 first rounders and 2 supplemental rounders. We didn’t even have the budget to reach on one player this year, so I don’t really mind losing the pick.
What bothers me is that it is a lot of money for a closer considering our budget. I hope Wren has something up his sleeve to fix the offense within our budget, because I’m sure he knows that going into next season with this offense would be unacceptable.
by soup du jour on Dec 2, 2009 10:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Don't worry about the budget, we won't have any first round picks next year.
Soriano and Gonzalez will likely net us second round picks (maybe the Yanks final selection in the first round) by signing with teams with protected picks or with a team (i.e. the Sox) who sign a higher Class A free agent (i.e. Holliday). We will likely have two supplemental round picks and three second round picks and our bonuses will likely be under $5 million even if we don’t draft based on signability.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 10:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and then it just comes down to making good choices with those picks...
same as would be the case if we were spending more in the 1st.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ummmmm.
no.
i can see boston signing one. i could see the white sox signing one. i could see the angles signing one. i could see the dodgers signing one. the cards.
by apoxonbothyourhouses on Dec 3, 2009 1:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
Let’s see. Boston is a possibility, I guess, they have the money to blow way too much on a set up guy. However, I think they will sign Holliday, shifting us to a late second round pick. The White Sox? They have Jenks and Thornton; that wouldn’t make any sense. The Angels just spend closer money on Fuentes last year, still have him, and have huge holes to fill to replace Lackey, Figgins, and Vlad—-they don’t have the spare money to duplicate a part they already have. Dodgers have financial issues with the owner’s divorce (this is why they did the stupid move of not offering Wolf arbitration) and Jonathan Broxton—-zero chance they sign one. The Cards have to replace or resign Holliday and want to extend Pujols. They also have spots to fill in the rotation and a Franklin as closer. They won’t sign either.
I would love the Braves to get a first rounder, but I just don’t see it.
by cavebird on Dec 3, 2009 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Franklin is not a good pitcher. Or, at least, he isn’t as good as he was made out to be early in the season last year.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 3, 2009 9:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Franklin had to win his job last year...
I don’t think they are sold on him permanently. The White Sox are discussing dumping Jenks, so I don’t think they are set on him for the future either. Dodgers and Angels clearly have the job filled, and Boston is an interesting scenario. Yes, they have Papelbon, but he has already talked about walking as a free agent next year or demanding a Rivera like $15m per. Having them sign Gonzo or Soriano to shore up the 8th inning and provide leverage in negotiations with Pap makes sense for a team clearly willing to spend top dollar.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 3, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Could the money people have rosterbated towards the OF...
be unneccessary and filled by Schafer or Heyward from day 1 (in spite of cries to the contrary around here?). If we’re just looking at 1B among position needs, that changes what we can spend on relief pitching, especially if Lowe or Vasquez get dealt.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 1:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t want to count on 2 minor leaguers for consistent production from the OF. I’d rather have someone in place that we could perhaps part ways with later, if one of the two prove capable, but relying on 2 unproven guys like Logan and Heyward is a recipe for disaster.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So it'd be disaster to rely upon them in the OF,...
but not to rely on unproven guys like Valdez or Kimbrel to close? I just don’t understand the difference.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 2:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the difference is that one set (the OFers) you are dependant on for offense. They are key to scoring runs and can be the difference in a game every single day.
They other group (closers) are not significant. The value of someone who can get 3 outs in the 9th inning has been severely inflated. Saves are about as worthless a stat as wins, and having someone designated to pitch the 9th inning just because it is the last inning in a game is dumb. What makes the 9th any more important than the 8th?
I wouldn’t rely on rookies to be my lights out guys, but having 1 rookie in the bullpen along with Medlen, Logan, EOF, Moylan and company is not nearly as dangerous as having 2 of your 3 OFers unproven rookies.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 2:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mentally, the 9th seems to be different than the 8th...
especially for rookies. And there has been successful rookie OFs at least as frequently if not more so than successful rookie closers, so I guess we’ll just agree to disagree there. Also, I wasn’t trying to say either would be depended on for offense, with McLouth, Chipper, Escobar, McCann, and a 1B signee (Glaus, LaRoche, et al) slated to carry the load in the order.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For rookie closers....
see Joey Devine. It can work out badly too. And the role of closer does seem pretty insignificant, until you don’t have one. See back when we had Reitsma, or Kolb, or other unreliable options at closer. The difference in mentality for a team changes. You have a different feel all game long knowing you have a Rivera to slam the door shut if you can just get a lead going into the 8th/9th vs. an unreliable option like Kolb or Reitsma, where you never feel comfortable and seem to be just waiting for the inevitable collapse at the end of every game.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 2:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It only mattered with those guys because we made it an issue. Reitsma would have sucked whether he pitched the 8th or 9th.
That’s my point – why bother designating that at all? It is just anohter inning in a game. Use your best available option based on the situation.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
pitching with a 1 run lead in a bases loaded no out situation in the 7th inning is more mentally challenging than coming in to “close” a game in the 9th.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 2:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But you need guys capable of doing both,...
and having the 9th locked down with a healthy Wagner allows quality arms like Moylan and Medlen to fill the role. There are plenty of ways to skin a cat, you have yours and it appears Wren has another method. Only time will tell if his is effective.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Billy Wagner has never done it for me.
However people whose opinion I trust seem to like the signing, so I will go along with it.
by Sid Bream's Moustache on Dec 2, 2009 10:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Dave O'Brien on XM Radio... 11am eastern Wed.
His comments should be interesting. Baseball channel (duh) #175. Sirius 210.
by carpengui on Dec 2, 2009 10:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Okay, they weren't that interesting...
…better analysis is being done here.
by carpengui on Dec 2, 2009 12:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
On the fence with this one
Wagner proved he was plenty-healthy last year,
a good upgrade (yes, upgrade) over Soriano or Gonzalez
Sorry Gondeee, but I have issues with these statements. First, 15 innings does not prove that he was “plenty healthy”. On top of that his walk rate jumped to 4.6 per 9 in those IP’s which tells me he had control problems, which is expected of someone coming off TJ. The problem is neither one of us should be using those 15 IP’s to judge him due to the sample size.
I also can’t see how Wagner is an upgrade over Soriano. Sure the Wagner of 2004 or 2005 might justify that statement, but not the Wagner of 2007 or 2008. So when I look at his Age, the fact he should struggle some due to the surgery and recovery time, his salary and the fact we lose a first rounder, then I believe Soriano might have been the better deal. It obviously depends on what Sori signs for but I can’t believe he’ll get more than 1 or 2 mil more per season.
Just my two cents.
You aren’t the czar of typographic emphasis
by scstrato on Dec 2, 2009 10:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think Gonzo will be better than either Wagner or Soriano.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been saying this for weeks, but in light of Gonzo’s new agent meaning he’s pretty much impossible to bring back, I still hold that Wagner was the next best option. I won’t lose a wink of sleep when Soriano walks away.
by J-Freak on Dec 2, 2009 3:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Personally, I’m hoping that we have the horses to throw deeper into games this year so that Wagner’s health becomes no issue. I do give Wren credit for getting this done NOW so that there’s plenty of time for other matters.
by carpengui on Dec 2, 2009 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s true. Get this one issue out of the way early and deal with everything else over the winter. Good call.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 10:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you mean like letting Hanson or Jurrjens...
work the 9th inning of a shutout?
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. I think most of the starting five (or six… or seven…) could go nine at least once a month. Never mind Wagner for a sec… I don’t really wanna see Moylan run out there 85 times again this year.
by carpengui on Dec 2, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
actually the 2004 wagner and 2008 wagner are very similiar…
04’- 45 G, 2.42 ERA, 21 saves, 0.77 WHIP, K/9 11.0
08’- 45 G, 2.30 ERA, 27 saves, 0.89 WHIP, K/9 10.0
sure his velocity has gone down, but he still knows how to get guys out
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 2, 2009 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
an increase of .12 in WHIP and a drop in 1K/9 is statistically significant
Further, and those nbrs arent the best indicators (i wont bother checking it now as i need to go to class).
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Dec 2, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For a starter, I would think that would be relatively significant, but for a reliever with a very limitted number of innings pitched, wouldn’t it be insiginificant, as the difference in those numbers could very well have been only 2 or 3 hits over the course of the season?
Based, of course, on the number of innings pitched only.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with both of you
The limited sample of the years in question is small enough that the indicators aren’t that significant even though there is a big difference in his k/bb ratio. So I’ll concede that ’04 and ’08 were fairly similar but the point I was making is that he was a different pitcher back then (younger and not coming off a major surgery) and comparing those years to Sori is more realistic over comparing them as relievers now. At least in my opinion.
You aren’t the czar of typographic emphasis
by scstrato on Dec 2, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sori
Soriano’s numbers were digressing throughout the season. He was kind of run into the ground, and with an injury history, I could picture Soriano having injury trouble next year.
"Sometimes I wonder what'd it be like to be outside and not hear the birds chirping...I think it'd be kind of nice."
by alligatorimpersonator on Dec 2, 2009 5:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends...
Wagner may have been working out the kinks last year, and if healthy we’ve got a good long track record of what he’s capable of.
And if you are talking Soriano from the first half, it’s hard for ANYONE, even Rivera to be better. But Soriano down the stretch was not nearly as strong and Wagner, historically, has been much better than that.
by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 2, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
don't know what to think about this...
…I know all the smart people say this is a good signing, but I have to admit I have a bad feeling. I still think of Wagner as an Astro and a Met so it’s going to be hard to root for him. Plus, he was one closer I was never scared of in the 9th inning when he was facing the Braves.
by hippybustins on Dec 2, 2009 10:59 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
you are joking right?
You do realize that there are a lot of lefty sluggers in the NL like Howard and Fielder. Having a proven lefty closer seems to make sense to me. The guy knows how to pitch.
I think a lot of people just worry about his health.
by Sparhawk on Dec 2, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Still need this
Here are Pujols's stats: 1.000/1.000/4.000/5.000. That's right. He is batting a thousand, with a thousand OBP (naturally), and every hit has been a home run, and thus his OPS is a perfect 5.000.
by TradeAndruw on Dec 2, 2009 11:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The timing on this one is perfect.
Wren: “Hey Gonzo and Soriano, we’d like to offer you arbitration.”
Gonzo and Soriano: “Excellent!”
Wren: “Also, we just signed our closer for next year.”
Gonzo and Soriano: “Bogus!”
Since both view themselves as closers, Atlanta ain’t the place to be.
by FineHamAbounds on Dec 2, 2009 11:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
so he is wasting time then?
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 11:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
AHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!
Double negatives abound………
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me." Hunter S. Thompson
by mad_dog_maddux on Dec 2, 2009 11:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
nope, just a jokester.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Dec 2, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess this is how Yankees fans would have felt when they signed Johnny Damon… if they had souls.
by hippybustins on Dec 2, 2009 11:48 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’m OK with this, if it means the Braves have more money to focus on a couple of good run producers. The pitching’s fine; they need guys that can put points on the board.
by John Holton on Dec 2, 2009 12:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Draft Picks
Is everyone getting out of whack with the whole concern over draft picks? yes…I agree that you don’t want to give up picks if you can avoid it. However, NOT signing a needed part of your roster because of the draft pick seems a lot to weigh in given that a 1st round pick has a success rate of about 50% (and that is just getting to the Major Leagues…not being successful in the majors…just making the 25 man roster).
Keep in mind that regardless of who signs Gonzo or Soriano the Braves get 2 supplemental picks….plus they are likely to get some combination of 2 picks between the first and second rounds. They will come out fine in the long run.
I just worry that many people are arguing against moves largely because of the draft pick loses. It needs to factor into the decision…but should it be THAT important of a factor?
Does everyone realize that given the price of 1st round draft picks you are paying A LOT for a player who has about a 50% chance of making an MLB roster…and a substantially reduced chance of being a major competitor?
by calbers on Dec 2, 2009 12:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
yes but it is also known that the higher the draft pick the higher the rate of success, we gave up a high draft pick….
by fizzbot on Dec 2, 2009 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No we didn’t. We gave up the 20th pick. We gave up the picks between 20 and 30 with regularity in the 90s to get players for the Major League team and the farm system was always good, and is still good.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 2, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It should be considered however.
It is just another factor in the analysis. The draft pick that is. If we could have gotten just as good production for the same price without losing it, which is very questionable, then we should have done that. As with all signings, time will tell. I still think we need to look at some other set up guys, like a $2 million or so on Kiko Calero.
by cavebird on Dec 2, 2009 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1000 to calbers
"Sometimes I wonder what'd it be like to be outside and not hear the birds chirping...I think it'd be kind of nice."
by alligatorimpersonator on Dec 2, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
love this move.
now stay healthy Wagner!
by Sparhawk on Dec 2, 2009 12:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
We get an old guy coming off of TJ surgery for $7 MM and lose our top draft pick?
Is this supposed to be a good thing?
by Lennox on Dec 2, 2009 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
it will be when were holding a 1 run lead in the bottom of the 9th with ryan howard at the plate.
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 2, 2009 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and wasn’t john smotlz an old guy coming off TJ surgery too before he saved 55 games?
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 2, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, Smoltz was 2 years removed from TJ when he posted 55 saves.
He was also younger than Wagner is now.
by Lennox on Dec 3, 2009 3:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ok? he had about the same ERA and WHIP the two seasons before that? and he’s also pitched about 4 times as many innings as wagner, about 2500 more innings to be exact, so yeah i think that makes up for the difference in age, don’t be ignorant and act like its impossible to come back full strength after TJ surgery, smotlz, moylan, and plenty others have proved that…so yeah, your statement would make more sense if it read:
We get one of the best relief pitchers in the history of baseball for a very reasonable 7MM and only lose our top draft pick.
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 3, 2009 9:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and theres also the fact that john smoltz was completely new to closing after his surgery, and wagner has been doing it his whole career, so i think he can handle it
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 3, 2009 9:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s amazing how when you only use part of the information you can make anything look bad.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Dec 2, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Or vice versa!
You aren’t the czar of typographic emphasis
by scstrato on Dec 2, 2009 3:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me try
Some guy named Bean convinced ATL to give his client $7M?
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 2, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No
Some rather respectable old chap by the name of Bean Stringfellow did. It helps if you read it in The King’s.
by FineHamAbounds on Dec 2, 2009 4:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bean
I hope he talks like a Proper English Gentleman. That would be icing on the cake.
"…aren’t worthy enough to hold his (Pujols) ass cheeks apart while Playboy models wipe him with thousand dollar bills after he craps out the cure to whatever previously-incurable disease." by royhobbs 1/7/09
by buzzdeadwax on Dec 2, 2009 7:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand the worry about Wagner’s health, but Soriano and Gonzo wouldn’t be any better. Both have been injured, and instead of only getting a one year deal (as we did with Wagner) we would have had to give them multi-year deals. I’m more than a little suspicious about Soriano, as many players said that he had surgery when he didn’t really need it when he had 2 years left on his contract and then he does very well in his final contract year.
by acie4mvp on Dec 2, 2009 5:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
i think the multi year deal is the big thing to me. Gonzo and Soriano might be better, but their contracts are gonna be much worse ( the salary will be similar but much longer in terms of years
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Dec 2, 2009 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gonzo and Soriano might be better, but their contracts are gonna be much worse ( the salary will be similar but much longer in terms of years.
Not if they’d offered arb and waited on Wagner.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 2, 2009 10:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
im working under the assumption that neither Gonzo or Soriano are going to accept arb.
i dont know what i think about signing Wagner this early (i like the signing besides that). It gives us time to address other needs, but we probably paid a premium to sign him early. ANd like u said we could have waited to see what happened with Gonzo and Soriano
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Dec 3, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
we probably paid a premium to sign him early
I think this is probably correct. Also true for Saito. Upside is there’s very little risk that Sori or Gonzo will accept arb now, and Wren can focus on building the rest of the team with the bullpen essentially finished. The downside is that it probably cost him an extra $3-5M (including Saito’s incentives) to do so.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
by Yakker on Dec 3, 2009 7:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
great point
+1
"Im a fullonrapist, I do men, women, autistic kids, children, the elderly." -Charlie Kelly
by Hcgadawgs on Dec 3, 2009 9:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We might end up with Gonzales if other teams worry about the
arm to price ratio given his injury history. In any event Wagner
provides the anchor for kimbrel, medlen, and the fast climbing Gearrin
with moylan in the set-up mix. .
by sealift67 on Dec 2, 2009 9:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Talking Chop
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- CC Sabathia mocks Hamels' video grenade ad with one of own
- Spring Snapshot: Angels look to retain their iron grip on AL West
- Mathis hopes strong postseason will translate into better at-bats
- Rangers manager Ron Washington regrets cocaine use in '09
- Nationals release Elijah Dukes, though nobody's quite sure why
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
