Re: Reds Acquire Jonathan Broxton
Two other things that perplex me a bit...
1) People point out the 20 inning sample being small. That's completely fair. However, Broxton wasn't acquired until July 31. Some people were sure he would not be a very good addition. But yet it had to be known that kind of observation would be manifested through a small sample anyhow. I mean a reliever only spending the last two months on a roster is going to see a relatively low number of innings. So it seems like now that he has been a good addition, the small sample is a root cause but if the 20 innings had gone like the first four months, it would have been confirmation. The small sample is a possible issue, but it leads me to my next issue...
2) It's understandable to point out the small sample in his success, but some didn't mind saying, without any hesitation or uncertainty, that he was no longer a very good pitcher on the basis of his 35-inning sample in Kansas City. It seems pointing out his 20 innings now mitigates any basis on which he was considered to have not been a very good pitcher to begin with.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda