|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 7, 2015 21:12:49 GMT -5
Sporting News MLB ?@sn_Baseball 6h6 hours ago Reds bolster bullpen with Burke Badenhop, will try closer Kevin Gregg dlvr.it/8RWls9
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 7, 2015 23:55:57 GMT -5
Sporting News MLB ?@sn_Baseball 6h6 hours ago Reds bolster bullpen with Burke Badenhop, will try closer Kevin Gregg dlvr.it/8RWls9 I am glad Badenhop finally found a job....but I can't understand why the Red Sox wanted Vavarro and Ogando and not him.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 8, 2015 1:55:19 GMT -5
Sporting News MLB ?@sn_Baseball 6h6 hours ago Reds bolster bullpen with Burke Badenhop, will try closer Kevin Gregg dlvr.it/8RWls9 I am glad Badenhop finally found a job....but I can't understand why the Red Sox wanted Vavarro and Ogando and not him. Badenhop 1 year $1m but there's an option for 2016 at $4m with a $1.5 buyout. That means he will either get 1 year and $2.5 or 2 years and $5m. Ogando $1.5m with a $1.5m potential performance bonus (presumably will only happen if he's healthy). We also have him under arbitration control for 2016. Varvaro, minimum wage and under control for several years. Under the rash assumption that they are all equal pitchers, Badenhop is the least attractive contract.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 8, 2015 15:50:28 GMT -5
If Ogando pitches well he will be paid more than Badenhop's option in 2016. If not he'll be gone. Unless you think that Ogando is going to start for you at some point, I don't see how Badenhop isn't worth the extra million.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 8, 2015 16:31:16 GMT -5
I don't think it has anything to do with the money. Badenhop had waaaay unsustainable numbers last year as far as home runs allowed and runners stranded. He's not actually very good (Steamer has him at replacement level next year), whereas Ogando might be. Ogando might also flame out, but given the depth in the bullpen I'd rather take a chance on the upside.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Feb 8, 2015 16:46:09 GMT -5
He's not actually very good (Steamer has him at replacement level next year) Hey, that's still better than Breslow, whom Steamer projects at -0.2 WAR...
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 8, 2015 18:47:35 GMT -5
Breslow is the guy I'm surprised they brought back, but that contract is basically a glorified NRI so whatever.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 8, 2015 19:27:56 GMT -5
My take on Breslow is that they know what was wrong with him last year and think it either has been or can be corrected. Before last season he was basically always good for his entire career. Either that or biophysicists are the new market inefficiency.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 8, 2015 20:14:11 GMT -5
My take on Breslow is that they know what was wrong with him last year and think it either has been or can be corrected. Before last season he was basically always good for his entire career. Either that or biophysicists are the new market inefficiency. What was wrong with him is that he pitched in 2013 more than he had in his entire career. At the end of the World Series it was clear he had been overworked. This carried over into his off-season work. The lack of support for Breslow on this board shows the human tendency to give excess weight to what they saw last. There are very few relief pitchers that have a track record that Breslow does. I don't see how you can ignore that especially given the extraordinary circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 8, 2015 20:27:32 GMT -5
My take on Breslow is that they know what was wrong with him last year and think it either has been or can be corrected. Before last season he was basically always good for his entire career. Either that or biophysicists are the new market inefficiency. What was wrong with him is that he pitched in 2013 more than he had in his entire career. At the end of the World Series it was clear he had been overworked. This carried over into his off-season work. The lack of support for Breslow on this board shows the human tendency to give excess weight to what they saw last. There are very few relief pitchers that have a track record that Breslow does. I don't see how you can ignore that especially given the extraordinary circumstances. Yeah, good point about 2013. He was superb down the stretch and then got some of the biggest outs earlier in the playoffs but was gassed in the World Series. Good call.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 8, 2015 20:46:30 GMT -5
Breslow is the guy I'm surprised they brought back, but that contract is basically a glorified NRI so whatever. Not sure about that. Breslow got $2m guaranteed, which is only $500K less than what Badenhop got, $1m less than what Neal Cotts got, etc. Not a huge commitment by any means, but also significantly more than the league-minimum.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Feb 9, 2015 3:47:53 GMT -5
@chriscotillo: Sources: #Padres in agreement with James Shields on four-year deal. Includes club option for fifth season
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 9, 2015 8:56:42 GMT -5
If Breslow is hitting 90 in spring training instead of 85-86, he should be fine.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 9, 2015 9:10:58 GMT -5
Breslow is the guy I'm surprised they brought back, but that contract is basically a glorified NRI so whatever. Not sure about that. Breslow got $2m guaranteed, which is only $500K less than what Badenhop got, $1m less than what Neal Cotts got, etc. Not a huge commitment by any means, but also significantly more than the league-minimum. I don't think Breslow's contract is significantly different from any of those guys; I think they all have essentially zero job security. As far as the wisdom of bringing back Breslow instead of Badenhop? I don't really agree with it. Breslow has had a 1.52 K/BB in his last two seasons/114 IP and he's going to be 34 next year; anything you can say about Badenhop's '14 performance being unsustainable you can say about Breslow's performance in '13. But either way I can't really bring myself to care.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 9, 2015 9:36:28 GMT -5
Not sure about that. Breslow got $2m guaranteed, which is only $500K less than what Badenhop got, $1m less than what Neal Cotts got, etc. Not a huge commitment by any means, but also significantly more than the league-minimum. I don't think Breslow's contract is significantly different from any of those guys; I think they all have essentially zero job security. As far as the wisdom of bringing back Breslow instead of Badenhop? I don't really agree with it. Breslow has had a 1.52 K/BB in his last two seasons/114 IP and he's going to be 34 next year; anything you can say about Badenhop's '14 performance being unsustainable you can say about Breslow's performance in '13. But either way I can't really bring myself to care. [ That's a false choice. Breslow is left handed and they have to have at least two lefties in the pen.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 9, 2015 10:35:59 GMT -5
It's not a choice at all. It's just a comparison between two decisions.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 9, 2015 12:16:32 GMT -5
It's not a choice at all. It's just a comparison between two decisions. Actually it is. They could not replace Breslow with Badehop because Badenhop is not left handed therefor you can't compare the two decisions.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 9, 2015 12:19:56 GMT -5
It's not a choice at all. It's just a comparison between two decisions. Actually it is. They could not replace Breslow with Badehop because Badenhop is not left handed therefor you can't compare the two decisions.Well, I did. [DELETED]
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 9, 2015 12:26:54 GMT -5
Actually it is. They could not replace Breslow with Badehop because Badenhop is not left handed therefor you can't compare the two decisions.Well, I did. (Deleted) The decision you proposed was unrealistic. (Deleted)
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 9, 2015 12:32:31 GMT -5
Deleted some comments that either did or bordered on violating the ground rules. Posts containing further comments to that end will just be deleted entirely.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 9, 2015 12:56:04 GMT -5
Right because you have no idea what you are talking about. The decision you proposed was unrealistic. There is a game played outside of fangraphs regardless of if you Iike it or not. I proposed a decision?
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Feb 9, 2015 13:00:05 GMT -5
Let it go guys.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Feb 9, 2015 13:05:18 GMT -5
Actually it is. They could not replace Breslow with Badehop because Badenhop is not left handed John Farrell would agree with you. Think about that.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 9, 2015 14:07:32 GMT -5
I'm going to say one more thing on this Badenhop/Breslow business. This was poor word choice: As far as the wisdom of bringing back Breslow instead of Badenhop? I don't really agree with it. "But not" would have been better there. I never meant to imply that the Red Sox had to choose one or the other. Just comparing the decisions made on two relatively fringy relievers. Now lets move onto literally anything else.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Feb 9, 2015 14:32:03 GMT -5
Actually it is. They could not replace Breslow with Badehop because Badenhop is not left handed John Farrell would agree with you. Think about that. And what he thinks is important. If Farrell is more comfortable managing a bullpen with a left handed option then the GM should try his darnedest to build a bullpen around those parameters.
|
|