PDA

View Full Version : weathers, saarloss, stanton, majewski hammond etc



redsupport
05-05-2007, 12:04 AM
all the same dross

Razor Shines
05-05-2007, 12:08 AM
Given enough chances Santos could be just as bad.

CTA513
05-05-2007, 12:10 AM
Given enough chances Santos could be just as bad.

Victor Santos is the best player ever to wear a baseball uniform.

redsupport
05-05-2007, 12:23 AM
whats your alternative weathers or maybe stanton yeah they are proven major league pyromaniacs whose best performance was with reagan as president

reds44
05-05-2007, 12:27 AM
whats your alternative weathers or maybe stanton yeah they are proven major league pyromaniacs whose best performance was with reagan as president
Victor Santos has never had a best perfomance. He's just had least horrible ones.

Victor Santos is no better (and probably worse) then Weathers, and made even Stanton.

redsupport
05-05-2007, 12:34 AM
are you the oracle of delphi. If you are let me know how the stock market is going to do on Monday

reds44
05-05-2007, 12:42 AM
are you the oracle of delphi. If you are let me know how the stock market is going to do on Monday
It doesn't take the oracle of delphi to know Victor Santos is a bad pitcher.

RedRage
05-05-2007, 12:43 AM
are you the oracle of delphi. If you are let me know how the stock market is going to do on Monday

Judging by past trends it will go up.
Judging by Santos' past trends so will his ERA.

flyer85
05-05-2007, 12:54 AM
Santos is basically Weathers 7-8 years ago. A failed starter he will likely turn into a decent middle reliever. Might as well go with the younger guys as opposed to the Sunshine Boys.

Razor Shines
05-05-2007, 01:01 AM
are you the oracle of delphi. If you are let me know how the stock market is going to do on Monday

Well here's their career numbers:

Santos: ERA 5.07, WHIP 1.57, K/9 6.25

Saarloos: ERA 4.78, WHIP 1.50, K/9 6.28

Majewski: ERA 3.70, WHIP 1.45, K/9 5.33

Weathers: 4.35, 1.50, 6.52

Stanton: 3.84, 1.34, 7.28

Why doesn't Santos belong in that group? Maybe because his numbers are the worst? Granted the only reason Weathers and Stanton's numbers are better are because their best days are far behind them.

I don't see anyone claiming that theses guys are good, it's just that Santos isn't the answer for this pen either.

I'd rather see Coffey, Salmon and some other AAA guys at this point.

flyer85
05-05-2007, 01:04 AM
Well here's their career numbers:

Santos: ERA 5.07, WHIP 1.57, K/9 6.25

Saarloos: ERA 4.78, WHIP 1.50, K/9 6.28

Majewski: ERA 3.70, WHIP 1.45, K/9 5.33

Weathers: 4.35, 1.50, 6.52

Stanton: 3.84, 1.34, 7.28
and what do they have in common?

They are middle relievers on their best day and should only pitch in low leverage situations. The problems is that when you have a pen full of those types somebody has to pitch the high leverage innings and at this point in their careers, Stanton and Weathers are really poor bets.

Santos still has an inflated ERA from pitching a lot of his innings a a starter.

Marge'sMullet
05-05-2007, 01:11 AM
Well here's their career numbers:

Santos: ERA 5.07, WHIP 1.57, K/9 6.25

Saarloos: ERA 4.78, WHIP 1.50, K/9 6.28

Majewski: ERA 3.70, WHIP 1.45, K/9 5.33

Weathers: 4.35, 1.50, 6.52

Stanton: 3.84, 1.34, 7.28



Wow that a bad pen. It can't be this bad can it?

Patrick Bateman
05-05-2007, 02:42 AM
Santos is more of the same. He could probably get his ERA in the 4.50 type of range as a reliever, but that's about it.

He has been a abelow average pitcher his entire career, and other than a string of fortunate luck he has been a below average reliever since joining the Reds IMO.

You are kidding yourself if you think Santos is the answer in stabilizing the back end of the bullpen.

Guacarock
05-05-2007, 05:29 AM
Stabilizing the backend of the bullpen is really what's keeping us from being a stronger, contending team. We're simply losing too many late and close heartbreakers.

The stats tell the tale of the tape.

Our hurlers so far in 2007 have posted a cumulative 3.82 ERA, 10th best among all 30 teams. We have given up a stingy 75 walks, the lowest total for any squad. We have surrendered only 19 HRs, which is just amazing considering we play in a homerun haven and still have Eric Milton assigned to starting duties. The only NL squads that have allowed fewer home runs -- Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco -- play in caverns instead of band boxes.

So, why, with our overall pitching performance having improved so markedly from past years, are we still coming up short, posting a frustrating 13-15 record?

Beyond the usual flukes, injuries and statistical variations, you have to finger the bullpen. Our pitchers have a cumulative 3.48 ERA over the first 6 innings of play, good enough for 5th best among the 30 teams. But starting from the 7th inning on, the ERA mushrooms to 4.52, knocking us down to 22nd, meaning only 8 teams are doing worse.

Get even deeper into the games and we deteriorate further. The Reds now have collected five saves, same as the Nationals. Only the Yankees have fewer saves -- three.

The lessons to be drawn from this.

1. Probably wasn't a wise decision to enter the season without a designated closer.

2. It's likely asking too much to rely on Weathers and Stanton for high-pressure situations, either closing out games or setting up same. Their experience suggests they can be reliable middle relievers, but their lack of juice warrants keeping them out of the kitchen when it's the hottest.

3. If they can't do it, who can? Should we bring on the kids for tryouts, or else hope either Bray or Majewski can return to form and good health, or Guardado is bionic, or Coffey isn't too snakebit from being overly stretched and used as elastically as Scott Sullivan used to be?

Krivsky, for all his prowess elsewhere, hasn't succeeded yet in placing this last puzzle piece. And Narron, I suspect, is just too enamored with his quest to find interchangeable, one-size-fits-all players. I don't understand his reluctance to assign specific roles for each reliever, just as I can't make heads or cents out of his ever-evolving lineup cards.

Don't get me wrong. Overall, I see some signs of hope for the team's future, which is saying something considering how many years we have been churning, and toiling in the wilderness, and losing, losing, flat-out losing.

Still, having been spoiled by Franco, Dibble, Shaw, Charlton, Murphy, Granger and company, it's frustrating to see the bullpen become our Achilles heel. How could our base of strength become such a sore point and weakness so quickly?

Chip R
05-05-2007, 09:09 AM
3. If they can't do it, who can? Should we bring on the kids for tryouts, or else hope either Bray or Majewski can return to form and good health, or Guardado is bionic, or Coffey isn't too snakebit from being overly stretched and used as elastically as Scott Sullivan used to be?


Naw, we can't use the kids in pressure situations. They might walk guys and give up hits. :rolleyes:

storrs19
05-05-2007, 11:22 AM
Yes. Again the bullpen is the same old dreck we saw last season. I am so damned sick of seing them lose games for us. The Reds are 13-16 and 7 of those 16 losses can be hanged on the bullpen and in only 2 of those 7 was the game tied, in the rest we had the lead and some of those leads were rather large. Why they continue to resign them is beyond me. All you have to do is look at the track record for last year and see what happened then.

flyer85
05-05-2007, 01:06 PM
The pen is about power arms, not the crafty geriatric types.

Ken Williams in Chicago(Jenks, McDougal, Aardsma, Thornton, Sisco) has built his pen with those types while giving up next to nothing, certainly not everyday players.

Same is true of SD and they acquisistions of Linebrink and Bell, either of whom coukd close for the Reds.

jmac
05-05-2007, 01:41 PM
The pen is about power arms, not the crafty geriatric types.

Ken Williams in Chicago(Jenks, McDougal, Aardsma, Thornton, Sisco) has built his pen with those types while giving up next to nothing, certainly not everyday players.

Same is true of SD and they acquisistions of Linebrink and Bell, either of whom coukd close for the Reds.
As you said..this team doesnt have the power arms you mentioned or remotely close imo.
Stanton...Weathers...Sarloos..and even Coffey are guys that are going to have ERA's close to 3 or above which isnt that good for your back-end relievers.
Though they will get the outs quite often they will also have their nights when they get hit.
Problem is when you start going to them in the 7th inning...you have to hope they "all" are on because if just one is off then you have a loss on your hands.

flyer85
05-05-2007, 01:54 PM
I would qualify Coffey and Salmon as power arms(they can hit the mid 90s), the others "not so much".

jmac
05-05-2007, 02:04 PM
I would qualify Coffey and Salmon as power arms(they can hit the mid 90s), the others "not so much".
Coffey may qualify as a power arm but I am not sold on him being in the same class as the guys you mentioned (Linebrink,Jenks etc)

AmarilloRed
05-05-2007, 04:01 PM
Why not see what the kids can do?. They may be pretty bad but not as bad as the others you have listed are doing. It seems to me it would be worth a try at this point.

reds44
05-05-2007, 04:30 PM
The pen is about power arms, not the crafty geriatric types.

Ken Williams in Chicago(Jenks, McDougal, Aardsma, Thornton, Sisco) has built his pen with those types while giving up next to nothing, certainly not everyday players.

Yep, that's what I was saying in the gamethread last night. The Sox traded next to nothing for those guys, and used their coaching staff to polish off their power arms.

The Reds doing have some above average arms in the minors that are/are close to ready. I would bring them up.

reds44
05-05-2007, 04:30 PM
I would qualify Coffey and Salmon as power arms(they can hit the mid 90s), the others "not so much".
McBeth and Medlock are both power arms, so to speak.

reds44
05-05-2007, 11:31 PM
are you the oracle of delphi. If you are let me know how the stock market is going to do on Monday
You want stock market tips now?

I'll bet it does better then Santos.

Falls City Beer
05-06-2007, 11:12 AM
Saarloos has been, by far, the bright spot in the bullpen. He's allowed a minuscule OPSA, and has the ability to pitch multiple innings.

(Somebody predicted that, but I'm not sure who....:beerme: )

mth123
05-06-2007, 11:32 AM
Saarloos has been, by far, the bright spot in the bullpen. He's allowed a minuscule OPSA, and has the ability to pitch multiple innings.

(Somebody predicted that, but I'm not sure who....:beerme: )

BABIP of .228 and FIP of 4.18. I'm sure that was anticipated as well.

Seriously, his K Rate has been respectable in the pen and his HR rate has been good so far. He still walks too many for his pedestrian stuff and I wonder if his HR Rate is the beneficiary of the unusually cold first 3 weeks of the season. He is much better suited for the pen where his K Rates are way better for some reason than he is the rotation. If that holds he's a decent 10th or 11th pitcher that can give a different look than the average power guy, get ground balls and pitch multiple innings. Too bad this team is filled with soft tossers and the different look he provides is just more of the same in Cincy.

Falls City Beer
05-06-2007, 12:41 PM
BABIP of .228 and FIP of 4.18. I'm sure that was anticipated as well.

Seriously, his K Rate has been respectable in the pen and his HR rate has been good so far. He still walks too many for his pedestrian stuff and I wonder if his HR Rate is the beneficiary of the unusually cold first 3 weeks of the season. He is much better suited for the pen where his K Rates are way better for some reason than he is the rotation. If that holds he's a decent 10th or 11th pitcher that can give a different look than the average power guy, get ground balls and pitch multiple innings. Too bad this team is filled with soft tossers and the different look he provides is just more of the same in Cincy.

As I said at the time, when you trade nothing (Schafer) for someone who can go a couple of innings out of the pen (a MLB pen), you've made a stride, however small.

It beats taking several steps back (Stanton).

My guess on the small-sample BABIP is that it is the natural side-benefit of having stuff that's not terribly easy to get solid contact on.

Saarloos isn't great (and neither was Hancock), but both can help for very little payroll--that's a very important thing to remember.

By the way, you're preaching to the original member of the "too many soft-tossers in this bullpen" choir. Yet that doesn't mean you should chuck EVERY soft-tosser, and certainly not the one that's most skilled.

mth123
05-06-2007, 02:53 PM
As I said at the time, when you trade nothing (Schafer) for someone who can go a couple of innings out of the pen (a MLB pen), you've made a stride, however small.

It beats taking several steps back (Stanton).

My guess on the small-sample BABIP is that it is the natural side-benefit of having stuff that's not terribly easy to get solid contact on.

Saarloos isn't great (and neither was Hancock), but both can help for very little payroll--that's a very important thing to remember.

By the way, you're preaching to the original member of the "too many soft-tossers in this bullpen" choir. Yet that doesn't mean you should chuck EVERY soft-tosser, and certainly not the one that's most skilled.

And I said at the time that getting Saarloos would have been a good idea had the team not signed Weathers and Stanton so we're on the same page about it being ok to have a soft tosser or two as some variety.

Still, I also say, if his K rates hold to what he has done as a reliever he can be an option as the 10th or 11th pitcher.

On the other hand, if his K rates revert to his career numbers, he's a AAAA pitcher who gets by from fooling guys who are easily fooled. I still think that HR rate will climb now that the warmer weather is on its way.

Either way, he may be cheap but he's still more expensive than he's worth at $1.2 Million. The A's knew that and dumped him.