Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Spencer Hall's Sports Meme Power Rankings

Building A Bullpen - Part 1

My goal over the next few weeks is to focus on bullpens. I'm going to look at them from a variety of angles and hopefully provide you with some insight (if I find any) regarding what makes a good bullpen. Let me be upfront about two things: I don't think smart teams build bullpens with a) older players or b) free agents. Those are my preconceived notions and I'm more than willing to put them to the test because I acknowledge them and think they're right. I've been meaning to give this a go for a while but time constraints have prevented me from doing so. Reading this article by Geoff Young over at The Hardball Times spurred me into action.

I was really frustrated reading that article because the logical framework that he starts up with becomes exceedingly muddy after about three paragraphs. He begins by citing the large contracts handed out to Danys Baez and Jaime Walker by the Orioles last year. He says:

The worst part of Baltimore's shopping spree? It didn't help. Walker pitched well (61.1 innings, 3.23 ERA), while Baez (50.1 innings, 6.44 ERA) was pretty much a train wreck. And the bullpen as a whole again sported the second-worst ERA in baseball (at 5.71, it rose nearly a half run from the previous season). The Orioles invested in relievers, but because they didn't invest wisely, they saw essentially no return.
Let's ignore the fact that he's using ERA and focus on what he's saying. There's nothing here that shows why they didn't invest wisely. Now the Orioles being the Orioles, that's usually a safe statement to make but based on two contracts? After acknowledging that one of those pitchers pitched well? Does that sound like a categorically poor investment to you? Me neither. In the paragraph preceding that he cites the Padres and Rockies as examples of how to build a bullpen -- again no reasoning why they are good examples. We're just supposed to take that on faith. Let's find out who actually DID build a good bullpen.

I went and looked for some defense independent statistics that are cumulative for bullpens. I found that ESPN has team DIPS information that can be sorted for relief. Check out their stats glossary for a brief explanation. I didn't want to stop there though. I also wanted to adjust for parks. Places like PETCO can make pitchers look better than they are with their spacious outfields. In fact that turned out to be exactly the case as the Padres ranked first in DIPS before park-adjustment but only 13th afterwards. So maybe they aren't such a good example after all so much as they are in a fantastic pitcher's park. I don't like ESPN's park factors so I used Baseball Reference's yearly park factors. You'll see that I do my best to bastardize statistics as often as possible. There's typically some volatility in bullpens so the core relievers aren't always there from year to year. I didn't want to rely on a single year's worth of data so I decided to find the best bullpen's across 2006 & 2007 combined. You can download the spreadsheet here.

Rank Team DIPS Average Rank Team DIPS Average
1 Dodgers 3.69 16 Phillies 4.11
2 Twins 3.79 17 Royals 4.11
3 Cubs 3.80 18 Mariners 4.12
4 Blue Jays 3.82 19 Tigers 4.14
5 Indians 3.82 20 Brewers 4.15
6 Red Sox 3.83 21 Cardinals 4.21
7 Rockies 3.84 22 Braves 4.21
8 Mets 3.87 23 Pirates 4.24
9 Diamondbacks 3.91 24 Giants 4.25
10 Angels 3.94 25 Yankees 4.37
11 Rangers 3.99 26 Marlins 4.38
12 White Sox 3.99 27 Reds 4.41
13 Padres 4.02 28 Nationals 4.44
14 Athletics 4.05 29 Rays 4.78
15 Astros 4.10 30 Orioles 4.88

I knew that the Dodgers had a good pen (although not that good) built around Japanese import Takashi Saito and young flame-thrower Jonathan Broxton. Does it surprise anyone that the Twins are second? Not me. The Cubs surprised me quite a bit but I'm just following where the numbers are leading me. The Blue Jays at #4 bought BJ Ryan for an absurd amount in 2006 but he missed all of 2007 with an injury. If you look at the yearly data, their DIPS adjusted for park jumps by a half run from 2006 to 2007. Indians and Red Sox at 5 & 6 -- that seems like a pretty good model. The Cardinals come in at 21 (a suspicion I had heading into this was that they would rank poorly). Personally, I like the methods that the Padres employ to find their relievers (under-appreciated soft-tossers, quirky delivery guys, etc.) but the method works, in part, because of PETCO.

The Orioles really do suck -- fiercely -- but I think it's poor analysis to lay that at the feet of Baez and Walker. There' are a variety of reasons that they can be bad and while I don't think Baez or Walker were good signings, I want to know what makes them poor signings. Two teams in rebuilding modes (Nats, Rays) follow the Orioles and then we have the Reds coming in at number 27. Wayne Krivsky seems to have a reliever fetish most recently exhibited by the Francisco Cordero signing. Cordero is a great reliever but a quick glance at my other spreadsheet (you can't have this one yet) shows that the relievers over 30 are scarce among those top 3 relief teams. That's not even to speak of relievers 32 and over -- it's not many.

Looking at the DIPS list those teams at the end seem like they belong there and the teams at the beginning seem like rational examples as well. I haven't finished crunching all my numbers but next week we'll look at the statistics behind the relievers in each of the top 3 pens. There's a significant jump after the Dodgers and although the separation between 2 and 8 is minimal that's where I'm drawing my arbitrary line in the sand. In subsequent posts, we'll look at the composition of some of these bullpens and individual reliever data.

0 recs  |  Comment 75 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Great read, azru
Maybe my memory is horribly foggy, but wasn't our bullpen considered a strength last season? It surprised me to see in the spreadsheet that our DIPS for 2007 was higher than 2006. Does that mean the rest of our team sucked that bad for a lower-third DIPS unit to be considered the strength? Or did Kelvin Jiminez, Andy Cavazos, and Randy Flores to some extent drive it up that much?
Cardinal fan in War Eagle land

by Mr Redbird on Dec 7, 2007 4:26 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

That is pretty strange
Especially considering that Izzy had such an improved season and that Russ Springer added a lot of strikeouts.

I guess between subpar years from our lefties and so many bullpen innings going to Ryan Franklin, who's more reliant on his defense than your typical setup man on a multi-year contract, that whatever improvements Izzy and Springer contributed are more than wiped out, DIPS-wise.

by liam on Dec 7, 2007 4:36 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The good
of the bullpen last year was really good. But man, oh man, did the bad suck. The top four were great, but after that it got brutal.

Jimenez, Wells, Maroth, the guy that looked like Hancock but was actually Mexican... Besides Miles and Spiez, we had a terrible mop up crew. And unfortunately, there were a lot of blow outs not in our favor..

Mike Maroth in relief alone had to skew those nimbers by -.5.

I will be brief.

by Alxfritz on Dec 7, 2007 4:40 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

How could I forget Nice Guy Maroth
And also in response to liam, I guess I didn't make the logical leap to the fact that our philosophy is "pitch-to-contact" and "rely-on-your-defense," which would naturally skew the defense-independent numbers.
Cardinal fan in War Eagle land

by Mr Redbird on Dec 7, 2007 4:43 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

AZ bullpen, other notes
  The D-Backs bullpen was similar this past year and it seemed to work for them.  They had 3-4 guys who were nearly lights out, but the remainder of their bullpen was really horrible.  They used the good in close games, the bad in games where they were already getting blown out.

 I remember the Cubs GM was blasted for signing Howry and ?Eyre a few years ago under the rationale of chasing MR with 3 yr deals is a futility exercise due to the volitility in relievers.  From fantasy baseball, it seems Howry has worked out for them.

  I've heard a theory that a good bullpen doesn't have the best pitcher as closer (ala Tigers/Cubs) but has up-and-coming flamethrowers as setup guys.  LA has this with Broxton, Zumaya  (sp?) in Detroit, and Marmol in Chi.  Broxton and Marmol were both SPs in the minors but maybe didn't have 3 strong pitches.  I know that's why Broxton got converted to relief work.

by Recon on Dec 7, 2007 9:55 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Your first paragraph might explain
why sometimes a team's pythagorean record does not jibe at all with its actual record.  Strange goings-on in terms of blowout games (provided your team plays in a lot of blowouts) can skew the RS/RA numbers.

by MdRedbirdFreak on Dec 7, 2007 2:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

There is another theory
That is similar to the setup man pattern you've mentioned where your best relief pitcher is used in the highest-leverage situation.  I think both make sense...The last three outs aren't always the hardest to get, so you need to have someone who is very good to get the high-leverage outs in the 6th, 7th, and 8th innings.  

I think what it goes to show is that the way baseball is today you need a "good half" of the bullpen that is very effective, or you're in trouble late in games.  

by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 7, 2007 3:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The "Fireman Strategy"
Old school is next school, all over again.

by liam on Dec 7, 2007 4:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

problem is...
... it's hard to know what the highest leverage situation is gonna be. a situation in the 6th inning may be a high leverage situation, but a more high leverage situation could occur in the 8th or 9th. if your best pitcher is already used up, then you can't use him in the highest leverage situation.

catch-22.

by kindred on Dec 7, 2007 4:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i'd rather put it all on the table
then wait until it's too late. but you also have to have more then just one "go to" guy. the cardinals had that last year, they had 4 go to'ers in izzy, springer, percival and franklin. i half way think either of them could've been interchangable, about any of them could've racked up about as many "saves" as Izzy. (taking nothing away from Izzy)

by erik on Dec 7, 2007 6:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sort of
We had a very bi-polar pen.  

Good: Izzy, Springer, Percival

Terrible: Maroth, Jimenez, Cavazos

Those three were so bad (82R in 69ip) that they basically sunk the whole pens average by themselves.

Now that means it should be easy to improve the team in this area.  Worrell or Perez would be an upgrade in any of those spots.

by DriverZn on Dec 7, 2007 4:41 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting Table Az
I thought Young's article had more to do with just the question of spending money on mid inning relief.  If we could plot a curve of the average pitchers salary by inning pitched, I'm sure it would show that the first three innings are the most expensive, followed by a trough until the 9th.  Someone else must have decided that any inning that gives up runs is scored just the same, so maybe mid relief is under appreciated, and should be just as ludicrously paid as the rest of the game.

Regardless, Building a Pen necessitates a good appreciation of the task at hand.  If you could have predicted before the season (and some did) that the Card's starters would contribute toward a ballclub that would set various records for blowout losses, then you might rethink the roles and makeup of your Pen.  A pen designed for Loogy's and double switches, will take a beating when miscast for long relief.

Izzy had a terrific bounce back year, but unfortunately the Card's were dead last in SVO.  Bizarrely enough, the Nats lead in that category with SVO equal to W's, while being only 28th on your table above.

It might be interesting to show the average number of runs behind at the time that mid relief is given the ball, and in what inning that takes place, in addition to the percentage of time that the pen surrendered a lead.  If the pen is also tasked with giving innings to demoted or rehabing starters, in addition to frequent mop up duty on getaway day disasters, it won't leave pretty stats.  I'm just glad that Speez ended up with the  best record out of last season's debacle.

Thanks Az, we'll be looking for part 2.

Watching the Playoffs as Reigning Champs is not a bad thing.

by Birds on the Bat on Dec 7, 2007 8:49 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Question Azru
Would it be better to use something like BP's WXRL for an exercise like this? After all, it doesn't really matter so much if your mop-up guy gives up 5 runs when you're already behind 8-0. Take a team like the Dbacks for instance, last year they were 2nd in WXRL because their top bullpen guys were great (and they did a good job of getting these guys in high-leverage situations) even though their mopup guys were awful.

by mikedallas23 on Dec 7, 2007 9:38 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Also forgot to add
There's a roster management advantage to having a pen with mostly young guys too. You can go back to a 6 man pen and if they get overworked you can send a couple of guys back and forth on the Memphis shuttle to get some fresh arms in the mix. Likewise, if one of the young guys starts to struggle you can send him down to Memphis until he gets things worked out and try someone else, if you have a bunch of vets you have to invent a reason to DL a struggling reliever or DFA him. If you go back to a 6 man pen you have room on the bench to add another pinch-hitter (I'm looking at you Jrod), which could come in might handy if you have an offensive black hole coming to the plate (cough, Izturis, cough) with the game on the line.

by mikedallas23 on Dec 7, 2007 9:52 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ideally, I'd use WXRL
or some other win counting stat but I couldn't find data at the team level. If you can point me too it, I'll crunch some more numbers. It would be interesting to see the disparity there. I do like the idea of at least looking a DIPS because there's something to be said for building a solid bullpen from top to bottom.

by azruavatar on Dec 7, 2007 10:12 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No problem
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=231207

To generate your own reports, you can go to the statistics page, then under the "custom reports" dropdown menu select team pitching. Then select the categories that you want in the report, click the arrow to add them to "your selections", and then hit the "submit statistics selection" button.

by mikedallas23 on Dec 7, 2007 10:22 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Mucho gracias
This will come in handy for the next post!

by azruavatar on Dec 7, 2007 10:34 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

shit
the padres came out first

by azruavatar on Dec 7, 2007 10:34 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Don't think so
Looks like from the glossary definition it's lineup-adjusted, but not park, darn. They should get to work on that :)

by mikedallas23 on Dec 7, 2007 10:53 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

it's a counting stat as well
my initial reaction was premature. I'll have to make things into rate stats. I'll get it sorted out by next friday.

by azruavatar on Dec 7, 2007 11:17 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

To what degree is our bullpen's DIPS
affected by the abominations that were Jimenez, Cavazos, and some of the other below-replacement level pitchers we ran out there last year? It seems that the top of our 'pen was very good but the bottom was beyond atrocious. They were very good at turning 6-2 games into 12-2 games quickly. However, they had little to no impact on the team's record as they entered losing games and turned them into games that we needed Spiezio and Miles to finish.

by chuckb on Dec 7, 2007 9:50 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I know this is off subject
but I don't want to start a diary for this thought.

I read a rumor yesterday that Brian Roberts could be on the trade block for Baltimore. Anyone else heard this?

 He would be the perfect fit for us. A solid lead off man that plays 2B. Also, he is a SPEED DEMON. I would love to see the Cards go after him.

I know that we already have Kennedy under contract, but I think if we could acquire someone like Roberts it would be worth having Kennedy on the bench (for $3 million a year, ugh).

Even if he is not on the block, the O's would probably listen to offers for him.Maybe this is the kind of guy we could put an OF and Reyes (although I hate the thought of trading a young Reyes) package together to get him.

Any thoughts?

by plaz on Dec 7, 2007 9:55 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Brian Roberts
Heard he was in the mix with Cubs and definitely on the block.  I love this guy and have since before Baltimore gave him the 2-3 year deal - which was pre-Kennedy and pre-Womack.

Pay extra for the good lead-off hitter with speed.  I'd trade Dunc straight up for him now and throw in more.

I don't care what they do with AK

by Hinkster on Dec 7, 2007 11:16 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Cubs
I heard the cubs were after him as well since they lost out on Matsui, I guess they don't think Fontenot/Derosa can't handle 2B???  Maybe they want Derosa to play all over the place so they don't want to commit him to one spot.

I don't know what Baltimore is in need of, but if STL has some players of interest it may be worth a shot depending on what Baltimore wants.

Roberts is 30 years old which is not ancient.  He definitely has way better numbers than Kennedy even excluding 2007 for Adam.  It would be worth a shot, and I would hope STL would take a look.  Kennedy's contract is insignificant because if you can get a better option you need to get it.  You have to pay Kennedy if he plays or doesn't.

by ICbirdfan on Dec 7, 2007 11:34 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

hate to say it...
but I don't see baltimore getting rid of Roberts for anything but top prospects, and I don't think we have too many of those... His contract (6.3mil '08, 8mil '09) is a bargain for a player who is 28th in the league in VORP.

by duncansarmy on Dec 7, 2007 1:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

bigger fish to fry
i like roberts but i think there are more pressing needs, like a shortstop and reliable, healthy pitchers.  also, there is some sort of situation with third base that might need attention.  i'd consider giving up something substantial for him if he were tied up for longer than two years.  as it stands, the cards look to be doing a remodeling project (i dont want to say rebuilding) that will last at least for 2008.  it might be 2009 or 2010 before the cards are back to legitimate contenders (i dont think adding roberts and the expense of duncan is going to make the cards favorites for the post season).  i'd be hesitant to give up a lot to get a player who might be gone by that time.

by dmb60614 on Dec 7, 2007 2:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

correction
...roberts AT the expense of duncan...

when is firefox going to add a grammar check as well?

by dmb60614 on Dec 7, 2007 2:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

no lead-off hitter
is a pretty pressing issue

by Hinkster on Dec 7, 2007 2:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Who is going to hit leadoff this year?
I don't see anyone who can do it well.

Maybe Barton, but I doubt he will start initially...

Please, not Izturis!

"Jumpy, jumpy, jumpy, fall!" - Bob the King

by bobtheking on Dec 7, 2007 3:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well,
Barring anyone else coming on board, what about Edmonds?

Still an average OBP (which, on this team, is better than average).  His power has dropped more than a bit, which means we would miss him less in a heart-of-the-order spot.

He strikes out a lot, but he still sees his share of pitches, works counts.  Not much speed, but still a good baserunner.

I'm thinking as I'm writing here, but as of right now, Barton is the best option.  The earliest, if at all, that he would be batting in the one spot is some time at the end of the first half of the season...if I know TLR.

Why not Edmonds?

by arch support on Dec 7, 2007 4:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Crap
Further down in the thread, sdrone posted the same idea not eight minutes before I posted mine.

That'll teach me to type slow.

Reeeeeeaaaaaaaal sssslllloooooowwww.

by arch support on Dec 7, 2007 4:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Leadoff hitters...
I think everybody sees the potential for Barton to bat at the top. I like Rasmus even if he won't be up right away. I wish we could get some inside info on what they are planning to do with him if he isn't traded. Ryan/Schumacher might fit the bill in the short term as well. We should start taking odds on the favorite for the leadoff spot with maybe a pair of tickets up for grabs.
The Red Blazer

by Red Blazer on Dec 7, 2007 4:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

what about the rotation?
dont get me wrong, its nice to have someone like roberts at the top, but i think the other issues are a lot more important.  if you lose duncan in the trade and edmonds/rolen are the same as last year it doesnt matter who you have at the top of the order.  the rotation is wainwright, looper and pineiro plus huge questions marks in mulder, carpenter, reyes, thompson, wellemeyer, etc., and its not like looper and pineiro are locks to be solid either.

by dmb60614 on Dec 7, 2007 6:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

O/T
Anyone else having trouble opening diaries and posts?

It seems about half the time I try to open a diary, it opens but I can't see any comments.  Same with the front page stuff.   Open it, main post but no comments there, go back to main page, try again, comments there.

by RedbirdRay on Dec 7, 2007 10:31 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Yes
Happened to me this morning.  I am internets stupid so I assumed it was me.

by gonzostl on Dec 7, 2007 10:53 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

oddly enough
mine hangs up (no comments can be seen) only when the Glennfiddich slow evolving multiple color liqour ads are in play - all other ads no big deal

by Hinkster on Dec 7, 2007 2:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I've also
had problems with the Rotoworld sidebar the last couple of days.

by saladdays on Dec 7, 2007 11:08 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Could it be the advertisements?
Sometimes the advertisement at the border of the post and comments takes a while to load and that stalls the loading of the comments.

If that's the case, it's a problem with the advertiser's server. It got bad for me at one point last year so I installed the firefox adblocker doohickey to skip them from my laptop.

Not installed on this box and things are loading smoothly today.

by liam on Dec 7, 2007 12:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

no problems for me
i'm using firefox.  havent had any problems with either of my computers.  i havent had any problems on my phone either (opera mini browser).

by dmb60614 on Dec 7, 2007 12:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Mozilla works
I used to have similar problems while sticking with MS IE, while listening to my teenager scolding me for not switching to Firefox.  It got worse again on a new machine with Vista, so I took the plunge.  

Hardly ever crashes, and if something else of Microsoft causes a shut down, you can come back and restore all the same windows. And you get a spell check editor to work with veb posting.

Won't go back.

by Birds on the Bat on Dec 7, 2007 12:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

a random bug on firefox
it works fine on my desktop at work (XP, Firefox 2.0.0.11) but on my desktop at home (debian lenny with 2.0.0.8) it freezes for ~10 seconds whenever I reload VEB.  Totally hijacks the system, can't move the mouse or anything.

It's quite annoying and almost certainly due to the ad server, since it only happens on VEB and is always showing ad.somethign.com in the location bar when it freezes...

Christmas lights are an extremely efficient method for converting Christmas Spirit into heat. -anon

by SleepyCA on Dec 7, 2007 1:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

adblock plus
I assume you have it.

If not - it's a must get.  Free add-ons rock!

by silent_bob on Dec 7, 2007 3:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the interesting thing to me
is how the padres crank out these relievers.

kevin cameron was a rule 5er.

Cla meredith was from a trade for a backup catcher.

heath bell was traded for nothing.

linebrink was a failed starting, now making big FA bucks from the W Sox.

by erik on Dec 7, 2007 11:32 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

and they just got carlos guevera in the rule 5
who averaged 12 K/9 in the minors. doesn't throw hard, but has a screwball. pretty interesting player.

by erik on Dec 7, 2007 11:36 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hmm....
Reminds me of someone in the Cardinals organisation.

by realbrit70 on Dec 7, 2007 11:49 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Location
He can't afford to miss location!

Has anyone seen him pitch live?

I would like to see his approach.

by ICbirdfan on Dec 7, 2007 4:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

his approach
he's a competitor, aggressive with his approach.   gets ahead in counts, won't give in to batters, or base runners. I don't know if his stuff will make it to the big leagues, but his makeup would make him a crowd favorite in weeks. if ryan Freel pitched, he would look like Walters
"My cat's breath smells like cat food"

by Dave Barry on Dec 7, 2007 4:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Astros
dfa'd Linebrink.

by chuckb on Dec 7, 2007 12:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

w/r/t...
... spending money of FA relievers:

it obviously makes little sense for marginal or rebuilding teams to spend money there if they have bigger concerns (unless they have a lot of solid position-player prospects that just need a year or two to development), and it doesn't make sense for small market teams to drop a lot on relievers.

but i think it make sense for teams in certain scenarios. first, if you expect to contend for the playoffs (and be in the playoffs), then a lock-down bullpen can be the difference. for example, the Astros teams from '04-'05 had horrible offenses. their starters, other than Oswalt, usually couldn't go especially deep into games. upgrading either the SP or offense with truly impact players was probably impossible given their budget. but their bullpen was so lights-out from the 6th-9th that could could get 5+ from their starters and few runs and still win every game 2-1 or 3-2. without the permutations of Wagner/Dotel/Lidge/Qualls/Springer, that team wouldn't've been in contention in those years. with them, they made it to an LCS and World Series despite an anemic offense. the Padres have been playoff contenders in recent years despite poor offenses for much the same reason (although their SP, from top to bottom, is probably superior to those Astros teams).

similarly, teams with potent offenses but weak starting pitching can benefit a lot from strong bullpens. in that regard, i actually think that the Reds' strategy isn't too horrible. they can't afford to buy all the best SP on the FA market, but their offense has been strong enough that a really strong bullpen could steal them some games even if their starters get behind early. in a weak division, or in the Wild Card race, those marginal games can make the difference.

so, for a team with budget constraints and a possibility of contending , it might be a lot easier to significantly upgrade a bullpen than to get impact position players or SP. obviously, a lot of the Reds' specific gambles have been unwise (Majewski, Guardado, etc.), but the strategy itself makes some sense.

by kindred on Dec 7, 2007 3:45 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I agree the Reds did what they
felt they had to do.  Cordero's contract seems way too generous-maybe even downright stupid. But he could also turn into their Izzy, which would make him a bargain.  The Reds have tried for two seasons to find a quality bullpen-both internal and external options.  Not much has worked out for them to date.  This signing moves Weathers to set up man, a role to which he's more suited and allows to take some of the pressure off of their younger developing bullpen arms like Bray and Coffey.  It may not be a good financial move, but it is a wise baseball move-it's the only thing they haven't tried-to bring in an actual closer.  Time will tell if they made the right decision.  But I see them as having no other choice.

by jillsinmo on Dec 8, 2007 9:35 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

A leadoff batter
Since we don't have an obvious leadoff hitter and they're hard to find, should we be considering Edmonds?

I love his power, obviously, but might he be more useful getting on base in front of Pujols in our upcoming Year of Crappiness?  

I'd prefer to use him lower in the lineup, but he seems to do pretty well when cutting down his swing.

by sdrone on Dec 7, 2007 4:14 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Agree
We've got nothing to lose this year.

And with the pitcher batting ninth last year, La Russa has shown he's not opposed to less-than-conventional lineups.

I don't think we'd miss Jimmy's bat in the heart of the order that much, given how much his power has dropped.

by arch support on Dec 7, 2007 4:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know
He has an OK OBP for how bad he was last year.  But he just strikes out way too much, and does no longer has Alfonso Soriano power so I think he should not lead off.

Good chance Jimmy strikes out and now the Cardinals may be looking at Ankiel batting #2 who is a strike out waiting to happen.  So basically Albert will have a lot of ABs with nobody on and two outs.

by ICbirdfan on Dec 7, 2007 4:25 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

How direct
is the correlation between strikeout rates and OBP?

Edmonds has struck out alot throughout his whole career, yet always gets on base at a decent, or better, clip.

Same with someone like Adam Dunn: strikes out a ton, gets on base all the time.

Ankiel may be an issue in the two hole unless he can increase his walks.  But that's independent of his k rate.

But Edmonds' k's don't necessarily mean he doesn't get on base.

I'd argue with J-Ed batting first, Pujols will come up with runners on more often than last year.

Not that that's saying much.

by arch support on Dec 7, 2007 4:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

K's are more strongly correlated
w/ batting avg.  If you never strike out, some of the balls you hit find holes and, all things equal, you're batting avg will be higher than someone who strikes out a lot.

But you're correct -- Edmonds has always had a high, high OBP -- of course he was hitting between .260 and .290.  He had a lot of K's and a high OBP.  Edmonds isn't a bad idea at all -- the K's are irrelevant in my mind.  If he can put together a high OBP -- definitely questionable at this point (definitely questionable?) -- he's probably the best candidate we have.  Last year he was abysmal and never got on base.  It depends on what we get from Jim.

by chuckb on Dec 7, 2007 4:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Generally
The standard rule is that you can live with about a 1:1 ratio of BB:SO.

Edmonds season average rate is 61 BB: 106 SO, which is not god awful.  His Pitchers per plate appearance actually was better than ECKS.

Maybe Jimmy could do it.  I guess he OBP is probably going to be better than Kennedy, Ryan, or Izturis.

Heck it actually may be a good idea to bat him there.

by ICbirdfan on Dec 7, 2007 4:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ank...
... should probably bat 6th or 7th. he's gonna be the Reggie Sanders of the '08 team, i think. decent enough power to stay in the line-up, but low OBP means that he shouldn't be in the middle/top of the order.

if Barton sticks, he might be an option. he's put decent OBP at every level (he struggled a bit in 25 games at AAA last year, but that's a small sample and he was hurt). thing is, i doubt he's gonna play that much.

Ludwick's OBP last year was .339. not very good, but that makes him one of the top options on the Cards. Spiezio's OBP the last two years was .366 and .354. If Rolen gets traded, or Spiezio ends up playing a lot all over the field, that could be an option. but i think TLR likes Spiezio to pinch-hit. Edmonds' OBP the past four years go like this: .418/.385/.350/.325. He should be batting in the 5th-6th spot. Ryan's OBP last year was .347, which is right in line with his career minor league numbers.

if the season started today, i'd like to see this general order:

  1. Ryan
  2. Duncan
  3. Pujols
  4. Rolen
  5. Edmonds/Ludwick
  6. Ankiel
  7. Molina
  8. Pitcher
  9. Kennedy
with these possible permutations:
  1. Spiezio (2b)
  2. Duncan
  3. Pujols
  4. Rolen
  5. Edmonds/Ludwick
  6. Ankiel
  7. Molina
  8. Pitcher
  9. Izturis
vs. LH pitcher:
  1. Schumaker
  2. Barton
  3. Pujols
  4. Rolen
  5. Molina
  6. Ryan
  7. Spiezio (LF)
  8. Pitcher
  9. Izturis
something like that, as a rough outline.

by kindred on Dec 7, 2007 4:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd swap duncan and rolen
but other than that, I agree.  Of course we have an ideal leadoff man (hoffpauir) rotting away in memphis...

Also, FWIW Ludwick had a .359 OBP after 1 Jun and a .380 OBP from 1 Jul on.  He fits TLR's prototypical #2 guy mold, and put Rolen 5th.

edmonds
ludwick
apu
duncan
rolen
...

Christmas lights are an extremely efficient method for converting Christmas Spirit into heat. -anon

by SleepyCA on Dec 7, 2007 5:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

those are some atrocious lineups
it's going to be a long year.

by willievinceterry on Dec 7, 2007 10:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Take a Walk
If someone could help Ryan learn a little plate discipline we could see that OBP rise. I have to admit I'm hoping that Ryan can not only bridge the gap and prove last year wasn't just a fluke, but can become a better, more patient hitter. If he does that then we've found our SS and leadoff man.

by realbrit70 on Dec 7, 2007 10:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

those lineups...
...include six outfielders. but i don't think they will start the season with six. five seems more standard. if there are 12 pitchers and 13 position players -- with 2 catchers, a 1b (AP), a 2b (AK), a ss (izturis), a 3b (?), and two extra/utility infielders (ryan and spiezio) -- then that only leaves room for 5 outfielders. schumaker looks like the odd-man out unless one of the other lefties is traded, if only due to his LH-ness and barton's RH-ness.

by willievinceterry on Dec 7, 2007 10:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

true...
... i wasn't really counting. all things equal, Skip prolly starts the season in AAA unless Barton totally flakes out in Spring Training.

by kindred on Dec 7, 2007 11:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No to Edmonds
batting lead-off. His isolated power is something like .175. That's a total waste. Even if his power is diminished, it's still a significant asset.

by Red in Chicago on Dec 7, 2007 4:51 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I agree JEd should not bat lead off....
but it might surprise you why.

Last year he started the season with virtually no spring training coming off of two surgeries.  He turned 37 during the season.  Nevertheless, I had this sneaking feeling that he looked pretty good at the end of the year.  I went back and pulled his stat line after 7/31 and it looked like this:  .291/.366/.569 with an OPS of .936
If you take his production for that period and extrapolate to 450 ABs you get 16HR and 84 RBI.

Now, I am not predicting Jimmy will put up an OPS of .936 over a full season, but my point is that he is not quite done yet.  With a healthy off-season it would not surprise me to see JEd be a key contributor next season and a significant run producer.  

That being said, I would still trade anybody in the right deal.  Let's just make sure we know what he is still capable of when estimating his value.  I don't think he is done and I won't be upset if he is our starting CF most of the time.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Dec 7, 2007 8:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i agree...
... i think JED is still at least a league-average CF next year, if he can stay on the field. he's not the problem.

3B, SS, 2B, C, RF, and the starting rotation are the problems.

by kindred on Dec 7, 2007 9:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

other than that they should be great
I can't believe i gave up a homerun to that punchinjudy hitter-major league 2

by punchinjudy on Dec 7, 2007 9:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

He wasn't quite that good ;)
Gotta admit, your numbers surprised me.  unfortunately they aren't quite right.

edmonds 7/31 - 9/30

Actual numbers were .292/.362/.465  .827 OPS

Not MVP caliber like your original numbers, but i agree, he's not dead yet either.  

Christmas lights are an extremely efficient method for converting Christmas Spirit into heat. -anon

by SleepyCA on Dec 7, 2007 9:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

thanks for cleaning that up
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Dec 7, 2007 9:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Still good numbers...
We all know a healthy Jimmy is productive. Just the same as Rolen. We really got hit hard by injuries but it has to do with the type of players and team we built. The gamers are great but they sacrifice thier bodies and get banged up pretty good. People crack on Manny but sometimes you have to pick your moments. No one is invinceable.
The Red Blazer

by Red Blazer on Dec 7, 2007 10:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hey
Hey everyone,

Talk about it here! We have a great sports forum that just started last week and we already have 166 members. We really have started well. We have forums for MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL, college sports, general sports, music, movies, gernal talk, etc. However, we need more members to insure we stay active. We have a Baseball Mogul 2008 league, an MLB trade center, and a fastbreak basketball league all on our sports forum. Thanks for your time and I hope I see you there!
www.overtimesports.tk

Teams Open in Trade Center: TOR, TBD, DET, KCR, MIN, SEA, TEX, FLA, CHC, CIN, HOU, STL, PIT, ARI, SFG

Register and post in the Trade Center section under GM Sign ups.

Teams are also open in Mogul league and nba fastbreak.

Please Register!

by Cardsfan255 on Dec 7, 2007 11:14 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

So Great!
Our spambots can't figure out vanilla html!

Gernal talk!

Stick it in the eat!

by liam on Dec 8, 2007 4:06 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Start posting about the Cardinals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar_small
How to EASILY make tables for Fanposts
1753738656_110919ebe9_o_small
2010 Hot Stove Post #1: CHONE hitter projections

Recent FanPosts

Arch_small
Number 15
Small
Some thoughts on Holliday (and potential replacements)
Small
Ok let me try this again...
Knights-09_small
Disenchanted Blue Jays Fan Looking For A New Team
Painterlance_small
The Holliday Dilemma (Rocks Fan Perpsective)
375830-r1-025-11_011_small
Anybody read Bob Gibson's new book yet?
Flanders_small
Yadi2first
Small
40 Man Question..

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Jack_benny_small DanUpBaby

Editors

Bender1_small azruavatar

Adam1_small chuckb

Kid-a-bear_small the red baron