PDA

View Full Version : Marshall named Reds' Closer



mattfeet
04-02-2012, 10:22 PM
Not sure if this has been posted anywhere yet.

LHP Sean Marshall will serve as the Reds' closer, manager Dusty Baker announced. The job was open this spring after RHP Ryan Madson suffered a season-ending elbow injury. Marshall, 29, was acquired by the Reds from the Cubs in a December trade. In six big-league seasons, all with Chicago, he has a total of seven saves -- five of them coming last year. For his career, he is 32-40 with a 3.96 ERA in 292 appearances (59 starts).

(Yahoo! Sports)

brad1176
04-02-2012, 10:29 PM
Not surprised, he was the most logical choice to take the job. The interesting part will be how Baker uses the rest of the bullpen.

Vottomatic
04-02-2012, 11:03 PM
I really thought they'd give it to Josh Judy.

Big Klu
04-02-2012, 11:33 PM
I really thought they'd give it to Josh Judy.

As Tom Lasorda said in those playoff commercials three or four years ago, "It's your duty, Judy!"

RedlegJake
04-03-2012, 12:31 AM
And I thought the first logical shot should go to Arredondo. Not that I don't think Marshall can do the job, quite the contrary - I'm just not sold that the closer is the most important role in the pen anymore, really, in the limited way it is used, winning only, 3 runs or less. Seems to me a slam dunk set up man is maybe even more valuable since he doesn't work under the same severe restrictions (which are artificial but Baker is a particular adherent) and is therefore available in more situations.

Blitz Dorsey
04-03-2012, 03:37 AM
I really thought they'd give it to Josh Judy.

Judge Judy had a better shot. (Too easy, I know.)

AtomicDumpling
04-03-2012, 05:52 AM
And I thought the first logical shot should go to Arredondo. Not that I don't think Marshall can do the job, quite the contrary - I'm just not sold that the closer is the most important role in the pen anymore, really, in the limited way it is used, winning only, 3 runs or less. Seems to me a slam dunk set up man is maybe even more valuable since he doesn't work under the same severe restrictions (which are artificial but Baker is a particular adherent) and is therefore available in more situations.

Agreed 100%.

Marshall would best be used in whichever late inning the opponent's best LH hitters come to the plate.

membengal
04-03-2012, 07:48 AM
Good luck to Marshall. I suspect if he falters at some point or what not, that Arredondo is the next man up.

traderumor
04-03-2012, 12:07 PM
I'm not following the "Vote for Arredondo" movement for the 9th inning. It surely can't be based on last year's performance. He was too frequently wild for me to want him to come into the 9th inning of a close game. As we learned from Coco, walks in a close game kill you and open the door to blowing leads.

Gimme a year of shutdown setup guy and I might trust him that late in the game on a regular basis.

And if that is a good criteria, than we have the right man. Marshall has two shutdown years under his belt in setup already. And he is not a lefty only reliever anymore than Billy Wagner was. Nick Massett can get lefties out better than he does righties, as can Ondrusek. Bill Bray can get righties out better than he does lefties. The continued myth of handedness in bullpen setup is a mystery in the information era.

membengal
04-03-2012, 12:11 PM
I am guessing a year further removed from tj surgery he looks more like stud he was with the angels. It is possible to look beyond years a guy is with the reds...

mth123
04-03-2012, 08:47 PM
I'm not following the "Vote for Arredondo" movement for the 9th inning. It surely can't be based on last year's performance. He was too frequently wild for me to want him to come into the 9th inning of a close game. As we learned from Coco, walks in a close game kill you and open the door to blowing leads.

Gimme a year of shutdown setup guy and I might trust him that late in the game on a regular basis.

And if that is a good criteria, than we have the right man. Marshall has two shutdown years under his belt in setup already. And he is not a lefty only reliever anymore than Billy Wagner was. Nick Massett can get lefties out better than he does righties, as can Ondrusek. Bill Bray can get righties out better than he does lefties. The continued myth of handedness in bullpen setup is a mystery in the information era.

I was for Arredondo in the 9th, but its mostly because I wanted Marshall available any time in the game when more important situations arise. Not really wanting to waste Marshall to get three outs against the bottom of the order in the 9th with a 2 run lead. I'd rather he be free to pitch the inning earlier when the middle of the order comes up.

Now, if the 9th inning ends up being when the biggest situation was coming, than I'd gladly let him close. The closer merely needs to be competent (and Arredondo is that at a minimum). I don't want the shut down reliever limited to solely the 9th inning

traderumor
04-03-2012, 09:08 PM
I am guessing a year further removed from tj surgery he looks more like stud he was with the angels. It is possible to look beyond years a guy is with the reds...But then, there was that whole tj thing that makes it hard to use that history as a point of reference since maybe the previous effectiveness/nastiness led to the need for the tj surgery. The fact remains that his most recent performance and post tj arm happens to be with the Reds. So, the snide remark is just wasted snark, n/a in this case. We don't have pre-surgery Arredondo. We have a reliever who was average last year with a bit of wildness. Just because there are tj success stories, does that mean that in all cases they return to their pre-surgery performance? Of course not, an awfully big assumption has to be made on your part to make your snarky remark accurate.

fearofpopvol1
04-03-2012, 09:13 PM
And I thought the first logical shot should go to Arredondo. Not that I don't think Marshall can do the job, quite the contrary - I'm just not sold that the closer is the most important role in the pen anymore, really, in the limited way it is used, winning only, 3 runs or less. Seems to me a slam dunk set up man is maybe even more valuable since he doesn't work under the same severe restrictions (which are artificial but Baker is a particular adherent) and is therefore available in more situations.

I don't know if I trust Arredondo to close games, but I do believe in your logic here for have Marshall pitching before the 9th. I think I'd stick Ondrusek in the closer role. In reality, it should be closer by committee, but we know that idea won't be embraced.

traderumor
04-03-2012, 09:27 PM
I was for Arredondo in the 9th, but its mostly because I wanted Marshall available any time in the game when more important situations arise. Not really wanting to waste Marshall to get three outs against the bottom of the order in the 9th with a 2 run lead. I'd rather he be free to pitch the inning earlier when the middle of the order comes up.

Now, if the 9th inning ends up being when the biggest situation was coming, than I'd gladly let him close. The closer merely needs to be competent (and Arredondo is that at a minimum). I don't want the shut down reliever limited to solely the 9th inningThat is a different bullpen philosophy than is employed by our manager, and really any manager in the game today. I would agree with you in principal, that would be my preferred prevailing strategy for bullpen usage also, but then I also get that if they get to your closer early, you still have innings to cover with inferior relievers. If Dusty would just use his closer in the 8th occasionally, it would help with what you are talking about. Since he doesn't, a close game in the 9th is best suited for Marshall out of the available arms.

And I don't agree that current bullpen usage is a slave to the save stat. But a save is the definition of a close game in the 9th. A three run lead can disappear pretty fast. A reliable, consistent performer in that spot is a good strategy. Is it optimal? I'll leave that subject for SABR essays.

membengal
04-03-2012, 09:30 PM
But then, there was that whole tj thing that makes it hard to use that history as a point of reference since maybe the previous effectiveness/nastiness led to the need for the tj surgery. The fact remains that his most recent performance and post tj arm happens to be with the Reds. So, the snide remark is just wasted snark, n/a in this case. We don't have pre-surgery Arredondo. We have a reliever who was average last year with a bit of wildness. Just because there are tj success stories, does that mean that in all cases they return to their pre-surgery performance? Of course not, an awfully big assumption has to be made on your part to make your snarky remark accurate.

It wasn't snark. I was pointing out he has more of a history than that which you referenced.

On top of that, I am not sure where your anger is coming from. I apologize for mentioning, I guess, that I think he is worth a look if Marshall were to falter. He's looked good this spring with good command...in short, a lot like he looked pre-TJ surgery. If that were to continue, and Marshall faltered, I wouldn't mind him.

Not sure why you are so angry.

traderumor
04-03-2012, 09:38 PM
It wasn't snark. I was pointing out he has more of a history than that which you referenced.

On top of that, I am not sure where your anger is coming from. I apologize for mentioning, I guess, that I think he is worth a look if Marshall were to falter. He's looked good this spring with good command...in short, a lot like he looked pre-TJ surgery. If that were to continue, and Marshall faltered, I wouldn't mind him.

Not sure why you are so angry.I'm not angry, but I did not appreciate the condescending tone of your closing remark. Surely you jest that it was not a smart alec remark.

Regardless, I explained my reasoning, which I think that you and I have been around enough to know that I understand some Reds players have pasts with other teams that can be considered.

RedlegJake
04-04-2012, 01:52 AM
I didn't take it as snark. I can also defend my attitude toward Arredondo. He has been lights out except for 1 appearance this spring. He is another year, the key year according to most medical experts, removed from TJ surgery, and he was effective when he wasn't wild -an effect, imo, of TJ comeback in his first year back. He was deadly with Angels before surgery. I think he'll be the same this year. All the signs are there. I find nothing remarkable about this observation or the belief that after Marshall he is the best pitcher in the pen.

membengal
04-04-2012, 07:15 AM
I'm not angry, but I did not appreciate the condescending tone of your closing remark. Surely you jest that it was not a smart alec remark.

Regardless, I explained my reasoning, which I think that you and I have been around enough to know that I understand some Reds players have pasts with other teams that can be considered.


I give up. It's this kind of response that has made this board really unfun for me for awhile now.

It's cool that you think Arredondo is what he was last year and that's it. I think there are signs its different and base that for the reasons I laid out and Redlegjake made even more clear.

My quick note, and that's all it was, was that IF Marshall faltered, I wouldn't mind them looking there. I have no idea what you meant about a "movement" or whatever, as I guess I haven't seen those threads.

In any event, thanks for the reminder about why I read more than post anymore.

traderumor
04-04-2012, 12:34 PM
I give up. It's this kind of response that has made this board really unfun for me for awhile now.

It's cool that you think Arredondo is what he was last year and that's it. I think there are signs its different and base that for the reasons I laid out and Redlegjake made even more clear.

My quick note, and that's all it was, was that IF Marshall faltered, I wouldn't mind them looking there. I have no idea what you meant about a "movement" or whatever, as I guess I haven't seen those threads.

In any event, thanks for the reminder about why I read more than post anymore.There has been quite a bit of "Arredondo for closer" discussion throughout the offseason, that is all I was referring to. The rest, all I was referring to was pointing me to the fact that there is more to evaluating a player than their Reds' tenure. It is hard to understand how that could not be taken as an insult, but moving on...