Turn Off Ads?
Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 147

Thread: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

  1. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    #5 starters aren't that rare or difficult to pick up.....
    But good ones are.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #62
    Member Superdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,779

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    I'm kind of indifferent about this. I've never heard anything about Shafer's stuff, so while he was good last year, he probably won't be anything more than a decent middle reliever. Saarloos might be able to hold down the #5 spot or eat some innings in a mop up role next season, but I could say that about a lot of guys. His HR rate last year in pitcher friendly Oakland frightens me a little. Whatever Wayne. I'm getting to the point where as long as his mind boggling moves don't involve key organizational players, I'm happy.
    Last edited by Superdude; 01-23-2007 at 10:00 PM.

  4. #63
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by IslandRed View Post
    Now, I'm not all that impressed with Saarloos either, but I disagree with your premise here. Shafer's probably just as long a shot to be anything more than Just Another Bullpen Guy as Saarloos is to hold down a rotation spot on merit, and if I'm going to roll the dice, I'll take the starter at $1.2 million over the reliever at $400,000 every time. The marginal cost of finding starting pitchers is just so much higher.
    That's a fair point. But with Dumatrait out of options and guys like Ramirez and Belisle around with guys like Santos and Livingston also competing, keeping Saarloos will probably lead to losing another starter (maybe 2) by the time its all over. So the team loses a potentially useful bullpen guy it can stash at AAA for a while and basically swaps interchangeable parts for the rotation when whichever of these guys who Saarloos pushes aside is claimed on waivers or asks for his release.

    Personally, I think Belisle, Ramirez and Santos are all better options for the #5 slot and were already here w/o giving up Shafer.

    Some one suggested another move off of this one. I hope so, because by itself this move makes no sense to me.

  5. #64
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,678

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    But good ones are.

    right because good ones are called #3 starters....
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  6. #65
    Member paulrichjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Savannah, TN
    Posts
    2,881

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    right because good ones are called #3 starters....

    Actually in Cincy they are called number 1s
    Tim McCarver: Baseball Quotes
    I remember one time going out to the mound to talk with Bob Gibson. He told me to get back behind the batter, that the only thing I knew about pitching was that it was hard to hit.

  7. #66
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Last thing I'll say on the matter. In 2005 Saarloos had 159 IP. So he didn't have enough IP to qualify for awards and such. There were still only 34 pitchers who had more wins. Had he had enough IP to qualify he would have been 25th in ERA. This is in a 14 team league. Don't be fooled by the 2006 season. Pitching relief and starting are two completely different things. Saarloos is a damn good pitcher. The Reds needed a #3-5 starter and got him cheap.

  8. #67
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    Last thing I'll say on the matter. In 2005 Saarloos had 159 IP. So he didn't have enough IP to qualify for awards and such. There were still only 34 pitchers who had more wins. Had he had enough IP to qualify he would have been 25th in ERA. This is in a 14 team league. Don't be fooled by the 2006 season. Pitching relief and starting are two completely different things. Saarloos is a damn good pitcher. The Reds needed a #3-5 starter and got him cheap.
    He was ok in 2005 and his BABIP was .291 which was not exceptionally low. That is hopeful but 2005 looks like the unusual year not 2006. Pecota projects a 2007 ERA of 5.57 and that doesn't take going to Cincy's launching pad into consideration.

    I don't see an upgrade.

    Code:
    Name		ERA	K/9	BB/9	HR/9	WHIP	BABIP
    Saarloos	4.75	3.86	3.93	1.41	1.66	0.315
    Santos		5.70	6.32	3.28	1.25	1.66	0.362
    Ramirez		5.37	5.97	2.51	1.21	1.46	0.323
    Belisle		3.60	5.85	4.28	1.13	1.55	0.306

  9. #68
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,111

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    I like the move. I remember when Saarloos went against Gosling in the Pac-10 and I thought I was watching future major leaguers. Who would have thought they would be in Reds organization. Saarloos can pitch, and if he is healthy, he will earn fans' respect here.

  10. #69
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,840

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    #5 starters aren't that rare or difficult to pick up.....
    That's a tricky proposition. Based on numbers that have been posted by Cyclone, RMR and others, and just general observation, the #5 starter is largely a mythical creature. It's very easy to find a #5 starter if you're talking about the MLB average #5 starter, i.e. someone who puts up an ERA in the high fives or six-something and loses his job. Almost by definition, if a guy like Saarloos can pitch well enough to stay in the rotation, he's pitching closer to a #4. Those aren't so easy to find, at least not for $1.2 million and a middling prospect.
    Not all who wander are lost

  11. #70
    Porkchop Sandwiches DoogMinAmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Homebase, Ohio
    Posts
    2,540

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Sarloos seems like a stopgap to bide time until someone in the minors is ready. Then he will be flipped in a pitching starved market for propsects if the Reds are out, or for a hitter to put the Reds over the edge.
    "I'm a Cucumber, I'm a cucumber. I'm a cucumber, I'm a cucumber. I'm a cucumber, I'm a cucumber. Please don't send me to the pickle farm, bum." - Brak

    Record In Games Attended, 2007: 2-1 (1-0 GAB, 1-1 Jake)

  12. #71
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,840

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    That's a fair point. But with Dumatrait out of options and guys like Ramirez and Belisle around with guys like Santos and Livingston also competing, keeping Saarloos will probably lead to losing another starter (maybe 2) by the time its all over.
    Saarloos can pitch out of the pen, so I don't see the Reds as being locked into using him in the rotation. If someone outpitches him then go with that. As for losing guys, that will be unfortunate if it happens, but whether I care depends on which guy it is. :
    Not all who wander are lost

  13. #72
    Moderator Gallen5862's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wilmington,NC
    Posts
    6,432

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    This seems like a decent review of the trade.
    http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...int263178.html
    Reds Add Saarloos To Staff
    By Jim Callis
    January 23, 2007

    The Deal
    The Reds can use some help at the back of their rotation and in middle relief, and they found some Tuesday. Cincinnati acquired Kirk Saarloos from the Athletics in exchange for Double-A reliever David Shafer. Both teams also will receive a player to be named later.
    The Big Leaguers
    A 27-year-old righthander, Saarloos has split his big league career between starting and relieving. He served both roles for Oakland last year, going 7-7, 4.75 with two saves in 35 games (16 starts). Opponents batted .308 with 15 homers against him, and he had more walks (53) than strikeouts (52) in 121 innings of work. He's a finesse guy without a put-away pitch, and he has to throw strikes and keep the ball down to succeed. He avoided arbitration by signing a one-year, $1.2 million contract earlier this month.
    The Prospects
    Shafer, a 24-year-old righty, went in the 31st round in 2001 and signed as a draft-and-follow out of Central Arizona JC the following spring. He has an average fastball (88-92 mph) and slider, and he commands both pitches well. He spent 2006 as the closer at Double-A Chattanooga, going 1-2, 2.36 with 26 saves in 44 appearances. He had a 52-16 K-BB ratio and held hitters to a .204 average with two homers. He projects as a sixth/seventh-inning reliever in the majors.
    Quick Take
    Saarloos doesn't have a high ceiling, but he can eat some innings and didn't cost the Reds a top prospect.


    « Trade Central 2007

  14. #73
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by IslandRed View Post
    Saarloos can pitch out of the pen, so I don't see the Reds as being locked into using him in the rotation. If someone outpitches him then go with that. As for losing guys, that will be unfortunate if it happens, but whether I care depends on which guy it is. :
    Agree, but the pen is full of WK's other junk. I can't see Saarloos fitting there. I just don't understand trading Shafer to swap Saarloos for one of the others. I think this move makes most sense if Ramirez is more seriously hurt than advertised and Belisle's back is still a huge question, because as pitchers Belisle and Ramirez look better to me. In fact, Saarloos seems like he was Oakland's slightly older version of Belisle (wth a lot less stuff).

  15. #74
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,111

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Agree, but the pen is full of WK's other junk. I can't see Saarloos fitting there. I just don't understand trading Shafer to swap Saarloos for one of the others. I think this move makes most sense if Ramirez is more seriously hurt than advertised and Belisle's back is still a huge question, because as pitchers Belisle and Ramirez look better to me. In fact, Saarloos seems like he was Oakland's slightly older version of Belisle (wth a lot less stuff).
    Belisle is not an effective ML starter, his stuff is maximized in relief. I think you may be on to something regarding Ramirez, though. He must be diagnosed with a major arm injury.

  16. #75
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,840

    Re: Reds acquire Saarloos, sign Bellhorn

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Agree, but the pen is full of WK's other junk. I can't see Saarloos fitting there. I just don't understand trading Shafer to swap Saarloos for one of the others. I think this move makes most sense if Ramirez is more seriously hurt than advertised and Belisle's back is still a huge question, because as pitchers Belisle and Ramirez look better to me. In fact, Saarloos seems like he was Oakland's slightly older version of Belisle (wth a lot less stuff).
    Belisle's probably a decent comp for the role Saarloos is going for. Assuming the Reds carry a 12-man staff as usual, that means a seven-man bullpen. One of them is probably going to be a long-man type; the six guys that are probably locks barring trades (Stanton, Weathers, Coffey, Bray, Majewski, Cormier) don't fit that profile.

    Anyway, going back to the issue, Belisle and Ramirez and the other guys could hold down a rotation spot but the acquisition of Saarloos doesn't say much for the front office's confidence that they will. Maybe it's health-related, maybe something else, I don't know.
    Not all who wander are lost


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25