92 replies to this topic

[Mackus]

Last 2 years

 

Jim Johnson

2012: 68.2 IP 3.28 FIP

2013: 70.1 IP 3.45 FIP

'12-13: 139 IP, 3.37 weighted FIP

 

Ryan Webb

2012: 60.1 IP 3.26 FIP

2013: 80.1 IP 3.60 FIP

'12-13: 140.2 IP, 3.45 weighted FIP

[You Play to Win the Game]

Last 2 years
 
Jim Johnson
2012: 68.2 IP 3.28 FIP
2013: 70.1 IP 3.45 FIP
'12-13: 139 IP, 3.37 weighted FIP
 
Ryan Webb
2012: 60.1 IP 3.26 FIP
2013: 80.1 IP 3.60 FIP
'12-13: 140.2 IP, 3.45 weighted FIP

How did you weigh the FIP over multiple years?

[dude]

Last 2 years

 

Jim Johnson

2012: 68.2 IP 3.28 FIP

2013: 70.1 IP 3.45 FIP

'12-13: 139 IP, 3.37 weighted FIP

 

Ryan Webb

2012: 60.1 IP 3.26 FIP

2013: 80.1 IP 3.60 FIP

'12-13: 140.2 IP, 3.45 weighted FIP

 

....ok.....so what conclusion are you drawing from this?  

 

You believe that Webb will be an equally effective closer over the next 2 years as Johnson was the last 2 years?

 

Man, the Marlins are really stupid.

[Mackus]

How did you weigh the FIP over multiple years?

 

By inning.  So (60*3.26 + 80*3.60) / 140 for Webb.

[Mackus]

....ok.....so what conclusion are you drawing from this?  

 

You believe that Webb will be an equally effective closer over the next 2 years as Johnson was the last 2 years?

 

Man, the Marlins are really stupid.

 

I didn't draw any conclusion.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Szymborski: "It's a good depth signing, reasonable.. worth the contract."

[mweb08]

There's no question I'd rather have Webb for 2/4.5 than Johnson for 1/10ish. 

 

I don't love or mind this deal. He's decent and at least he's shown the ability to pitch a good amount of innings out of the pen. He's also a good fit for the defense and park.

 

That said, I agree that the aforementioned collection of players is a bit steep in cost and Webb can basically be added to that so that's an issue. Patton would be the guy I'd most like seen out of the picture btw. Reimold at least represents a nice potential reward and Pierce is solid if used properly. It will be difficult to have both of them and Valencia on the same roster, though.

 

As for the comparisons of Webb to guys that can be had for a million or less, well the O's have already added a couple of those guys right? Webb is much more dependable and we are not talking about much more money. 

 

But yes, as Mack said, it's absurd that we really have to worry much about that difference in cost.

[You Play to Win the Game]

How did you weigh the FIP over multiple years?

 
By inning.  So (60*3.26 + 80*3.60 / 140) for Webb.

Thanks.

[JeremyStrain]

I like Webb as a potential 7-9th inning arm, as I've said about other potential back end options. You cut their teeth in higher leverage back end innings and keep shifting them back until you see if they can handle closing. That's how a large chunk of closers become closers.

 

The question is what happens with Matusz's audition for the rotation, and with Hunter. Is he enough of a set up guy that you keep him at that salary? What lefty takes BMat's high leverage spots late in games if he goes to the rotation? What other player gets signed as another 9th inning option? Axford? Rodney? Perez?

[clapdiddy]

I like Webb as a potential 7-9th inning arm, as I've said about other potential back end options. You cut their teeth in higher leverage back end innings and keep shifting them back until you see if they can handle closing. That's how a large chunk of closers become closers.

 

The question is what happens with Matusz's audition for the rotation, and with Hunter. Is he enough of a set up guy that you keep him at that salary? What lefty takes BMat's high leverage spots late in games if he goes to the rotation? What other player gets signed as another 9th inning option? Axford? Rodney? Perez?

 

Balfour, maybe?   Or will he be too expensive?

[dude]

There's no question I'd rather have Webb for 2/4.5 than Johnson for 1/10ish. 

 

The real question is whether that was the question that was asked.

 

It also assumes the only solution to Johnson contract is 1/10ish and that the bullpen is performance neutral.

 

What if you're picking between Johnson at 3/25 and Axford a 1/6 and then Webb at 2/4.5 versus ODay 2/8 or Hunter 2/8.

[mweb08]

There's no question I'd rather have Webb for 2/4.5 than Johnson for 1/10ish. 

 
The real question is whether that was the question that was asked.
 
It also assumes the only solution to Johnson contract is 1/10ish and that the bullpen is performance neutral.
 
What if you're picking between Johnson at 3/25 and Axford a 1/6 and then Webb at 2/4.5 versus ODay 2/8 or Hunter 2/8.

I had no interest in Johnson for 3/25 and he may have insisted on more than that anyway.

[JeremyStrain]

Balfour, maybe?   Or will he be too expensive?

 

Yeah that's another good option. O'Flaherty from ATL is another. Plenty of guys you can get cheaper than $4-5m per year and WAY cheaper than $10m. I'm not a person that likes to spend money in the bullpen though. Need to transition Wright and groom him for the job.

[SportsGuy]

Yeah that's another good option. O'Flaherty from ATL is another. Plenty of guys you can get cheaper than $4-5m per year and WAY cheaper than $10m. I'm not a person that likes to spend money in the bullpen though. Need to transition Wright and groom him for the job.

Balfour will get 6+ million IMO.

Wonder how cheap OFlaherty will go?

[JeremyStrain]

Balfour will get 6+ million IMO.

Wonder how cheap OFlaherty will go?

 

Possible. I think it's going to depend on who wants him to close versus setting up. Everyone knows a huge chunk of those great numbers were pitching in OAK, so you may see him get less.

 

O'Flaherty is a hard one to read. I'm going to imagine a team friendly one year deal to rebuild value, so he'll shoot for a team that's uncertain at closer so he's got the possibility of some saves.

[PD24]

I don't think this is a bad signing. I'd rather have Webb and Rodney or Perez for 10M total this year than JJ. Honestly, replacing JJ's production as closer isn't really that risky as long as there's a closer taking his place, as he was pretty bad last year.

 

The issue with trading JJ was never trading JJ. It was waiting until now to do it. The issue with this signing isn't that it's a bad signing. The issue is the collection of replacement level players that are making all of that combined money which someone laid out earlier in this thread. 

 

Of course, the real issue is that a team on the cusp of contending has to penny pinch and worry about a 4.5M deal for two years for a decent reliever. 

[SportsGuy]

Possible. I think it's going to depend on who wants him to close versus setting up. Everyone knows a huge chunk of those great numbers were pitching in OAK, so you may see him get less.
 
O'Flaherty is a hard one to read. I'm going to imagine a team friendly one year deal to rebuild value, so he'll shoot for a team that's uncertain at closer so he's got the possibility of some saves.

OFlaherty is a very good pitcher and in most years, he has been more than a LOOGY..very good buy low candidate.

[DJ MC]

Possible. I think it's going to depend on who wants him to close versus setting up. Everyone knows a huge chunk of those great numbers were pitching in OAK, so you may see him get less.

 

O'Flaherty is a hard one to read. I'm going to imagine a team friendly one year deal to rebuild value, so he'll shoot for a team that's uncertain at closer so he's got the possibility of some saves.

 

Sounds like the Orioles are a fit, then.

[JeffLong]

OFlaherty is a very good pitcher and in most years, he has been more than a LOOGY..very good buy low candidate.

 

Buy-low because he's having TJ?

 

Hasn't had an ERA over 2.50 since 2009 (when it was 3.04).

[SportsGuy]

Buy-low because he's having TJ?
 
Hasn't had an ERA over 2.50 since 2009 (when it was 3.04).

Not having...had.

And yes.