SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Chapman to the Yankees
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 31, 2015 12:05:44 GMT -5
I think the only real "non-win" for the yankees is the ick factor in Chapman, the player himself. I don't think anyone in the yankee organization is losing sleep over Jagielo or Rookie. They were both listed by Baseball America as part of the 2019 projected team (Rookie as 5th starter). Not great prospects, but guys who projected to be the best available player at their position. They've eliminated the possibility that they exceed expectations and end up good enough to not be supplanted by a veteran acquisition. It's a projection 4 years out haha. Not being mean or anything, but it's sorta a big "who cares." I'm sure at one point Baseball America or some other projection site quibbled between Cecchini and Middlebrooks as the Red Sox third basemen. Jags and Rookie are both "meh" prospects. Sure they might be wroth xx surplus vlaue at some point, but even at their likely ceilings, if they get there, they'll be players a team with a significant payroll can easily replicate through other means.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 31, 2015 12:50:58 GMT -5
I think the only real "non-win" for the yankees is the ick factor in Chapman, the player himself. I don't think anyone in the yankee organization is losing sleep over Jagielo or Rookie. Agreed. I think a lot of us are looking under rocks to find negatives for the Yankees' trade...whether it is a social, moral or criminal factor, a 'marginal' upgrade from what they had, that the players traded away represent value, that they will now trade away Miller etc. But when we sober up, the potential of that bullpen may never have been matched. 212 innings pitched and 347 SOs last year. For years, perhaps under baseball's collective noses, the Yankees have sold out for power pitching. It is not just in their now incredible relief corp. Pineda, Eovaldi, Tanaka when first acquired, Severino and even Nova can bring 96 +. They are now looking for yet another cost-contained young hard thrower in the Eovaldi mold. Other teams are starting to emulate that it appears...even the Sox. If that is truly the new path to success, let's hope that it does not take too long for us to catch up. Hopefully with a seeming plethora of young pitchers coming up capable of throwing 97-100, any such transition, if desired, won't take too long. But the Yanks do have a jump here and, painful though it may be, we have to admit it. Meh, this is just continued infatuation with velocity. It's only one element of what makes for a good pitcher. Changing speeds and command are arguably more important. Look at both Eovaldi and Kelly...middling results with essentially elite fastball velocity. Teams have been on the lookout for power arms forever. There's certainly been a proliferation of higher-velocity pitchers, particularly in relief, but that's not the sole determinant of their success. I think the Yankees got a steal, but it's true that they won't get "full" value from additional dominance. And of their starters, only Eovaldi and Severino are power pitchers at this point. Pineda and Nova and Tanaka all work around 91-93, and rely on secondaries. Wei-Yin Chen hits 96 on occasion and sits 92...you wouldn't consider him a "hard-thrower," would you? (he does mix speeds very well, though). I don't see the doom and gloom. I just hope NY gets skewered (they won't) in the media for acquiring an alleged (and probably soon to be indicted) wife-beater.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 31, 2015 13:08:41 GMT -5
Call me crazy but I think the loss of a very good swing man in Warren and Wilson pretty much balances the acquisition of Chapman just looking at 2016 alone. I'm not claiming these trades are negatives but they aren't likely going to gain or lose the Yankees more than one net win IMO. They basically traded Warren & Wilson for Castro & 1 year of Chapman.....I see this an upgrade, but with the longer combined control of who they gave up, not a massive upgrade, maybe a wash.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Dec 31, 2015 13:40:03 GMT -5
Sorry. That was an awful blog post bland. Uninformative. Had lots of conclusions without analysis. C- and only that high because the formatting made it easy to read That's not someone who posts here, is it? Sorry if so.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 31, 2015 13:44:43 GMT -5
Call me crazy but I think the loss of a very good swing man in Warren and Wilson pretty much balances the acquisition of Chapman just looking at 2016 alone. I'm not claiming these trades are negatives but they aren't likely going to gain or lose the Yankees more than one net win IMO. I think the impact is greater than you state. From a baseball perspective the Yankees are going to most likely get 1.67 seasons out of Chapman, and might be able to let him walk away and get a draft pick. The cost was nothing. Guys like Warren and Wilson have value but are not that tough to replace. A guy with Chapman's baseball skill set is tougher to replace. His presence gives the Yankees a 3 headed monster out of that bullpen. That could be one of the most dominating trios of relievers we'll ever see. The only thing that would make it close to a wash is Castro being terrible, which could happen. At age 26 you'd think he'd be reasonably productive.' Between Castro and Chapman the Yankees aren't exactly bringing in guys that are easy to root for - both guys have issues with violence. I'm not saying the Sox are altar boys, but I'm glad the Sox aren't actively discounting that kind of thing. I wouldn't want either guy on my team (even as good a reliever as Chapman is).
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 31, 2015 14:03:57 GMT -5
Call me crazy but I think the loss of a very good swing man in Warren and Wilson pretty much balances the acquisition of Chapman just looking at 2016 alone. I'm not claiming these trades are negatives but they aren't likely going to gain or lose the Yankees more than one net win IMO. I think the impact is greater than you state. From a baseball perspective the Yankees are going to most likely get 1.67 seasons out of Chapman, and might be able to let him walk away and get a draft pick. The cost was nothing. Guys like Warren and Wilson have value but are not that tough to replace. A guy with Chapman's baseball skill set is tougher to replace. His presence gives the Yankees a 3 headed monster out of that bullpen. That could be one of the most dominating trios of relievers we'll ever see. The only thing that would make it close to a wash is Castro being terrible, which could happen. At age 26 you'd think he'd be reasonably productive.' Between Castro and Chapman the Yankees aren't exactly bringing in guys that are easy to root for - both guys have issues with violence. I'm not saying the Sox are altar boys, but I'm glad the Sox aren't actively discounting that kind of thing. I wouldn't want either guy on my team (even as good a reliever as Chapman is). I have to respectfully disagree with you. Given the chance, I believe Warren could be a good #4 SP. Teams are paying ransoms for these type pitchers. Wilson is IMO better than O'Day & look what O'Day got. Also, how does the 1.67 yrs work? If that is the case, does Chapman simply pitch through, say, Aug 5th 2017, then become "available"? Given how a normal offseason works, free agents can go a month or 2 to get signed.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 31, 2015 14:25:32 GMT -5
Wilson is better than O'Day? What?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 31, 2015 14:28:22 GMT -5
First want to say I think it's great that majors sports is now suspending athletes for hitting women. That being said, where are the 50, 75, 100 and a whole season coming from? I don't know much about what exactly happened, but unless this is an extreme case I don't think he should get more then 25-40 games. You have to send a clear message and teach him a lesson, but you can't take away his ability to work for 1/3, half or a full season. How would you feel if you slapped your wife in a heated fight and couldn't work again for a year?
Second I really don't see this as a steal for the Yanks. While not giving up any elite guys, they did give up some good prospects that have upside for 3/4 of a season of a bullpen arm. I also truly believe that his on field value will be less for the Yanks then other teams due to the Yanks already have two very elite bullpen arms. When you then add in the negative press and how the NY media could spin this and this is not a slam dunk in my mind. Now if they trade one of there two elite bullpen arms Chapman's value will really increase and this trade would look better
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Dec 31, 2015 14:51:22 GMT -5
I think it was a good trade for the Yankees. They didn't give up anyone who had much of a future with them and they got a player who might help them get into the post season again - and do better there than they did this year. That is worth an enormous amount for the Yankees. Then, if he walks they get a draft choice that possibly could yield a prospect better than any of the ones they traded.
But I am very skeptical that the Yankee lineup can get them to the post-season. I think the East is going to be between Toronto and the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 31, 2015 15:07:24 GMT -5
First want to say I think it's great that majors sports is now suspending athletes for hitting women. That being said, where are the 50, 75, 100 and a whole season coming from? I don't know much about what exactly happened, but unless this is an extreme case I don't think he should get more then 25-40 games. You have to send a clear message and teach him a lesson, but you can't take away his ability to work for 1/3, half or a full season. How would you feel if you slapped your wife in a heated fight and couldn't work again for a year? Second I really don't see this as a steal for the Yanks. While not giving up any elite guys, they did give up some good prospects that have upside for 3/4 of a season of a bullpen arm. I also truly believe that his on field value will be less for the Yanks then other teams due to the Yanks already have two very elite bullpen arms. When you then add in the negative press and how the NY media could spin this and this is not a slam dunk in my mind. Now if they trade one of there two elite bullpen arms Chapman's value will really increase and this trade would look better As to your second point, don't forget that it's part of a season (I think it'll be more than 3/4 of a season, but who knows?) PLUS a draft pick. That draft pick alone could easily be better than any of the players they gave up if things fall right.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 31, 2015 15:11:45 GMT -5
In the last two years we've watched the Royals essentially play 6 inning games. And people think they need to trade 1 of miller or betances to get value out of chapman?
We can WAR and FIP all we want, but we can't use those stats to explain the pressure that is taken off a manager and other players and starting pitchers to have that kind of pen depth behind them.
|
|
|
Post by geostorm on Dec 31, 2015 15:24:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 31, 2015 15:42:08 GMT -5
I think the impact is greater than you state. From a baseball perspective the Yankees are going to most likely get 1.67 seasons out of Chapman, and might be able to let him walk away and get a draft pick. The cost was nothing. Guys like Warren and Wilson have value but are not that tough to replace. A guy with Chapman's baseball skill set is tougher to replace. His presence gives the Yankees a 3 headed monster out of that bullpen. That could be one of the most dominating trios of relievers we'll ever see. The only thing that would make it close to a wash is Castro being terrible, which could happen. At age 26 you'd think he'd be reasonably productive.' Between Castro and Chapman the Yankees aren't exactly bringing in guys that are easy to root for - both guys have issues with violence. I'm not saying the Sox are altar boys, but I'm glad the Sox aren't actively discounting that kind of thing. I wouldn't want either guy on my team (even as good a reliever as Chapman is). I have to respectfully disagree with you. Given the chance, I believe Warren could be a good #4 SP. Teams are paying ransoms for these type pitchers. Wilson is IMO better than O'Day & look what O'Day got. Also, how does the 1.67 yrs work? If that is the case, does Chapman simply pitch through, say, Aug 5th 2017, then become "available"? Given how a normal offseason works, free agents can go a month or 2 to get signed. I got the 1.67 seasons figure for Chapman estimating he'll be suspended for about 50 games (or approximately 1/3 or .33 of a season) which would allow him to play an extra season with the Yankees, so that's 2/3 of a season this year as he'd miss 1/3 of this season and a full season next year. I'm sure Warren could be a decent swingman, but my point is that he's not that hard to replace, nor is Wilson. Good luck replacing Chapman's talent - arms like that are not easily replaceable - the Yankees got that type of arm by waiting for his value to plummet - then they held their noses or ignored their consciences and got him for next to nothing. And Wilson is not better than O'Day. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that he is.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 31, 2015 16:05:56 GMT -5
OK, after checking the raw numbers, O'day is better on paper. I'm not sure it's a slam dunk though as Wilson is 28 & O'day is 33. O'day may have some downside forthcoming as Wilson is just starting his prime years. I think this whole swap out by the Yankees is going to hinge on Castro as he can go in any direction. You know what your getting from Warren, Wilson & Chapman. Castro is the wildcard.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 31, 2015 18:35:16 GMT -5
Justin Wilson had a pretty great 2015, but prior to that, he was more of a good middle reliever than an elite guy (2012-2014: 8.3 K/9, 4.0 BB/9, 50.9% GB, 2.99 ERA, 3.45 FIP, 3.83 xFIP, 3.55 SIERA; all in an NL pitcher's stadium and with a good defense behind him). I think Chapman is quite a bit (at least a win and a half) better than him.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 31, 2015 18:44:15 GMT -5
First want to say I think it's great that majors sports is now suspending athletes for hitting women. That being said, where are the 50, 75, 100 and a whole season coming from? I don't know much about what exactly happened, but unless this is an extreme case I don't think he should get more then 25-40 games. You have to send a clear message and teach him a lesson, but you can't take away his ability to work for 1/3, half or a full season. How would you feel if you slapped your wife in a heated fight and couldn't work again for a year? Second I really don't see this as a steal for the Yanks. While not giving up any elite guys, they did give up some good prospects that have upside for 3/4 of a season of a bullpen arm. I also truly believe that his on field value will be less for the Yanks then other teams due to the Yanks already have two very elite bullpen arms. When you then add in the negative press and how the NY media could spin this and this is not a slam dunk in my mind. Now if they trade one of there two elite bullpen arms Chapman's value will really increase and this trade would look better As to your second point, don't forget that it's part of a season (I think it'll be more than 3/4 of a season, but who knows?) PLUS a draft pick. That draft pick alone could easily be better than any of the players they gave up if things fall right. The draft pick could turn out better, but I like Eric Jagielo, Rookie Davis and Tony Renda. I see some good upside there and If I had to pick a supplemental pick next year or those 3 players for a team like the Reds I would gamble on those 3 players. Jagielo has a really good bat but has been injured a lot thus why he got traded, a text book buy low guy. Davis seems to have a pitchers frame and good stuff, could be a 4/5 starter type and Renda won a league batting title in 2014 and could become an above average hitting average defender at 2b per Baseball America. With the bullpen the Yankees already had not sure I would want the Media attention in the countries #1 market that Chapman will bring. I just think the risk of this blowing up is too great for a team like the Yankees with very little need for a player like Chapman. If this was pre wife beating Chapman it's a no brainer, slam dunk type trade.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 31, 2015 18:58:10 GMT -5
In the last two years we've watched the Royals essentially play 6 inning games. And people think they need to trade 1 of miller or betances to get value out of chapman? We can WAR and FIP all we want, but we can't use those stats to explain the pressure that is taken off a manager and other players and starting pitchers to have that kind of pen depth behind them. HaHaHa. If you look at bwar the Yankees had a much better top 3 then the Royals last year. Davis, Madson and Herrera had war of 3.4, 1.7 and 1.4. Yanks had Betances, Miller and Wilson at 3.8, 2.3 and 1.7 bwar. No other players for the royals Bullpen was worth over 1 bwar.
We aren't saying you have to trade Betances or Miller to get Value out of Chapman, just that his value will be less as the number 3 option in a bullpen then as the number 1 or 2 option. Thus his value to Yankees increases if they trade one.
Has anyone even thought about what Chapman is thinking? Going from being considered an elite closer to pitching in 6/7 innings in his contract year? Lots of ways this can blow up in Yankees face and I love it.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 31, 2015 20:31:42 GMT -5
In the last two years we've watched the Royals essentially play 6 inning games. And people think they need to trade 1 of miller or betances to get value out of chapman? We can WAR and FIP all we want, but we can't use those stats to explain the pressure that is taken off a manager and other players and starting pitchers to have that kind of pen depth behind them. HaHaHa. If you look at bwar the Yankees had a much better top 3 then the Royals last year. Davis, Madson and Herrera had war of 3.4, 1.7 and 1.4. Yanks had Betances, Miller and Wilson at 3.8, 2.3 and 1.7 bwar. No other players for the royals Bullpen was worth over 1 bwar.
We aren't saying you have to trade Betances or Miller to get Value out of Chapman, just that his value will be less as the number 3 option in a bullpen then as the number 1 or 2 option. Thus his value to Yankees increases if they trade one.
Has anyone even thought about what Chapman is thinking? Going from being considered an elite closer to pitching in 6/7 innings in his contract year? Lots of ways this can blow up in Yankees face and I love it.
What makes you think Chapman is pitching the 6th or 7th inning? He becomes the closer (and at this point, who cares what he's thinking?!). Miller, as great as he was last year, is the guy who gets pushed to the earlier innings. Chapman is a better, more established pitcher, and in this case, we're comparing totally awesome reliever to awesome reliever. And as far as if Chapman didn't have the domestic abuse situation going on, there's no way the Yankees get Chapman for the package they sent Cincy. Those three guys are fringy question marks. The Yanks would have had to part with their best prospects, not the next tier down. The Yanks had been trying to acquire Chapman for some time but did not want to surrender those prospects. The domestic abuse situation killed Chapman's trade value and with Brandon Phillips turning down the deal to Washington the Reds wanted to move Chapman's contract and Chapman himself and had to settle for what they could get.
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Dec 31, 2015 21:29:32 GMT -5
I have to respectfully disagree with you. Given the chance, I believe Warren could be a good #4 SP. Teams are paying ransoms for these type pitchers. Wilson is IMO better than O'Day & look what O'Day got. Also, how does the 1.67 yrs work? If that is the case, does Chapman simply pitch through, say, Aug 5th 2017, then become "available"? Given how a normal offseason works, free agents can go a month or 2 to get signed. I got the 1.67 seasons figure for Chapman estimating he'll be suspended for about 50 games (or approximately 1/3 or .33 of a season) which would allow him to play an extra season with the Yankees, so that's 2/3 of a season this year as he'd miss 1/3 of this season and a full season next year. I'm sure Warren could be a decent swingman, but my point is that he's not that hard to replace, nor is Wilson. Good luck replacing Chapman's talent - arms like that are not easily replaceable - the Yankees got that type of arm by waiting for his value to plummet - then they held their noses or ignored their consciences and got him for next to nothing. And Wilson is not better than O'Day. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that he is. Did they change the rules to exclude suspension time from the player's service time?
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Dec 31, 2015 22:02:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Dec 31, 2015 22:28:57 GMT -5
Agreed. I think a lot of us are looking under rocks to find negatives for the Yankees' trade...whether it is a social, moral or criminal factor, a 'marginal' upgrade from what they had, that the players traded away represent value, that they will now trade away Miller etc. But when we sober up, the potential of that bullpen may never have been matched. 212 innings pitched and 347 SOs last year. For years, perhaps under baseball's collective noses, the Yankees have sold out for power pitching. It is not just in their now incredible relief corp. Pineda, Eovaldi, Tanaka when first acquired, Severino and even Nova can bring 96 +. They are now looking for yet another cost-contained young hard thrower in the Eovaldi mold. Other teams are starting to emulate that it appears...even the Sox. If that is truly the new path to success, let's hope that it does not take too long for us to catch up. Hopefully with a seeming plethora of young pitchers coming up capable of throwing 97-100, any such transition, if desired, won't take too long. But the Yanks do have a jump here and, painful though it may be, we have to admit it. Meh, this is just continued infatuation with velocity. It's only one element of what makes for a good pitcher. Changing speeds and command are arguably more important. Look at both Eovaldi and Kelly...middling results with essentially elite fastball velocity. Teams have been on the lookout for power arms forever. There's certainly been a proliferation of higher-velocity pitchers, particularly in relief, but that's not the sole determinant of their success. I think the Yankees got a steal, but it's true that they won't get "full" value from additional dominance. And of their starters, only Eovaldi and Severino are power pitchers at this point. Pineda and Nova and Tanaka all work around 91-93, and rely on secondaries. Wei-Yin Chen hits 96 on occasion and sits 92...you wouldn't consider him a "hard-thrower," would you? (he does mix speeds very well, though). I don't see the doom and gloom. I just hope NY gets skewered (they won't) in the media for acquiring an alleged (and probably soon to be indicted) wife-beater. Well, I think that the Yankees and the rest of baseball are trending toward that velocity infatuation. Changing speeds and being the historically classic pitcher are nice and effective. Still, striking out 1.5/inning has significant value. Being able to throw 100 with other stuff is more valuable than throwing 90 with other stuff all things being equal. I believe that, with the advent of so many high velocity pitchers, down the road the mound may be moved back to restore competitive balance in the batter/pitcher match-up. As for the Yankees, Tanaka threw 95-96 before his injuries, Nova was known as "Super Nova" and easily threw 96, Pineda threw 96+ and Eovaldi can hit 100. No one is saying that velocity is the only thing...just that it can be a significant competitive advantage.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 31, 2015 22:55:17 GMT -5
I got the 1.67 seasons figure for Chapman estimating he'll be suspended for about 50 games (or approximately 1/3 or .33 of a season) which would allow him to play an extra season with the Yankees, so that's 2/3 of a season this year as he'd miss 1/3 of this season and a full season next year. I'm sure Warren could be a decent swingman, but my point is that he's not that hard to replace, nor is Wilson. Good luck replacing Chapman's talent - arms like that are not easily replaceable - the Yankees got that type of arm by waiting for his value to plummet - then they held their noses or ignored their consciences and got him for next to nothing. And Wilson is not better than O'Day. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that he is. Did they change the rules to exclude suspension time from the player's service time? What rules change? There are certain types of suspensions that cost a player service time. Domestic abuse suspensions, PEDs suspensions - they cost a player service time. Being suspended for causing a beanball war doesn't result in a loss of service time. If Chapman is suspended 45 or more days his service time stops to the point the Yankees get an extra year. If John Heyman is correct, the expectation is that his suspension will probably be about 25 games or so and he would still have enough service time to be a free agent at the end of this year.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 31, 2015 22:58:45 GMT -5
As for the Yankees, Tanaka threw 95-96 before his injuries, Nova was known as "Super Nova" and easily threw 96, Pineda threw 96+ and Eovaldi can hit 100. No one is saying that velocity is the only thing...just that it can be a significant competitive advantage. Per PITCHf/x: - Tanaka: averaged 91.6 over his career, including 92.0 in 2015
- Nova: averaged 92.8 over his career, including 93.2 in 2015
- Pineda: averaged 93.3 over his career, including 92.5 in 2015
- Eovaldi: averaged 95.5 over his career, including 96.6 in 2015
I understand this might just be semantic (most of these pitchers touched the velos you attributed to them above at least once, though their averages were a tic or two lower), and it's a fair point that the Yankees probably have higher velocity starting pitchers than most teams (average starting pitcher fastball velo was 91.7 last year). But Tanaka and Pineda are no more 95+ velo pitchers than, say, Clay Buchholz (averaged 92.1 last year) or Rick Porcello (averaged 91.3 last year).
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 31, 2015 23:05:46 GMT -5
Meh, this is just continued infatuation with velocity. It's only one element of what makes for a good pitcher. Changing speeds and command are arguably more important. Look at both Eovaldi and Kelly...middling results with essentially elite fastball velocity. Teams have been on the lookout for power arms forever. There's certainly been a proliferation of higher-velocity pitchers, particularly in relief, but that's not the sole determinant of their success. I think the Yankees got a steal, but it's true that they won't get "full" value from additional dominance. And of their starters, only Eovaldi and Severino are power pitchers at this point. Pineda and Nova and Tanaka all work around 91-93, and rely on secondaries. Wei-Yin Chen hits 96 on occasion and sits 92...you wouldn't consider him a "hard-thrower," would you? (he does mix speeds very well, though). I don't see the doom and gloom. I just hope NY gets skewered (they won't) in the media for acquiring an alleged (and probably soon to be indicted) wife-beater. Well, I think that the Yankees and the rest of baseball are trending toward that velocity infatuation. Changing speeds and being the historically classic pitcher are nice and effective. Still, striking out 1.5/inning has significant value. Being able to throw 100 with other stuff is more valuable than throwing 90 with other stuff all things being equal. I believe that, with the advent of so many high velocity pitchers, down the road the mound may be moved back to restore competitive balance in the batter/pitcher match-up. As for the Yankees, Tanaka threw 95-96 before his injuries, Nova was known as "Super Nova" and easily threw 96, Pineda threw 96+ and Eovaldi can hit 100. No one is saying that velocity is the only thing...just that it can be a significant competitive advantage. Jeez, I hope not. Finally baseball seems to have some sort of equilibrium between offense and pitching/defense. It's not like it's 1968 and league ERAs are under 3 and the batting champ just barely topped .300. I don't think it's that extreme. I think if they moved the mound back or something like that, batting average, ERAs, and runs scored would zoom up big time. It wasn't that long ago that league BAs were .270ish and AL ERAs were up around 5. I know that PEDs were a big part of it, but hitters weren't the only ones juicing - plenty of pitchers were too. The whole idea of this era is to make sure that balls aren't put into play during the latter 2/3 of the game. It's almost like the last 3 innings a bullpen pitched had become the new market inefficiency as in what's the cheapest way to improve your club - have two dominating middle men, and a dominating closer, and for less than a price of a pitching ace, you have 3 guys that can go 3 to 4 times per week and shut down close games in the latter third of the game. Of course, now everybody wants to do the KC Royals strategy so eventually bullpens will become ridiculously expensive, especially considering the volatility of relievers' results from year to year. It'll be hard to top what the Yankees have. The Sox look like they have their best pen in quite a while. Kimbrel has been a dominating closer for a long stretch. Koji, if used smartly and stays healthy, is highly effective and efficient. Carson Smith looks like a major asset in middle relief, while Tazawa, if used correctly, can be a big asset. Robbie Ross looked good at the end of the year - reminds me a bit of Alan Embree - could be useful against more than lefties, while Layne can become a true LOOGY and be exposed less to righties and Wright should be an effective long man. That looks like a highly functional bullpen and they have potential viable options down the road in Barnes, Workman, Hembree, and Light. Hopefully two of the latter four can step up at some point and replace Tazawa and Uehara in 2017.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 1, 2016 2:09:30 GMT -5
... As for the Yankees, Tanaka threw 95-96 before his injuries, Nova was known as "Super Nova" and easily threw 96, Pineda threw 96+ and Eovaldi can hit 100. No one is saying that velocity is the only thing...just that it can be a significant competitive advantage. Again, if speed were all that it's about Kelly would be king. You can also color me as unimpressed with Eovaldi as the poster who threw him into the same bin. He was just about as ineffective a "Joe": 154 innings, 175 hits, 129 Ks, 49 BBs. The times I watched him he was out by the sixth. Nova was right there with him, with a very mundane year. It really does take a bit more than hard throwing to make a big league pitcher. As for NY, they will compete, but honestly Tanaka is not the same pitcher at this point and he's largely doing it on guile. I can't see him ever pumping it up to the mid-90s again without surgery. Pineda certainly has good stuff but he wasn't anything to write home about either. And where are they going to hide Sabathia? They'll need that bullpen, no doubt about it. Porcello was touching 95 at the end of the year, so he can bring it apparently, but I'd prefer to see him keep that under wraps till he needs it. It's always been the same, keep the hitters off balance and keep them guessing by mixing it up. Throwing the same pitch over and over again, even when it's a 97+ MPH fastball, is nothing but a recipe for disaster.
|
|
|