Reds trade for A's pitcher Saarloos

[registerthis]

As jojo pointed out, we had one. His name was Jason Johnson. That didn't work out too well.

With only 8.2 IP for us, I'd hardly say that amounts to a valid comparison.

[blumj]

With only 8.2 IP for us, I'd hardly say that amounts to a valid comparison.

Well, it worked out pretty badly for several of the teams who had Johnson before the Reds, too. You know how they say a pitcher's washed up when he makes his pitch and gets hit anyway? I think that might be where Johnson's at these days. I don't know if Saarloos is going to be much better, but the fact that he is quite a bit younger probably makes it more likely.

[Will M]

I believe Krisky feels that a pitcher who has had some success at the major league level has value. Especially if they are cheap.
There is a HUGE leap from AA to the majors.

Shafer may develop into a solid reliever or be the next Brian Reith.
Saarloss may improve on what he has shown in his first 3 years ( or not ).
A key ( IMO ) is that Saarloos is young and cheap.

Cheap guys like Majik or Saarloos or EZ who have shown some success in the bigs are more valuable than a middling prospect.

[TRF]

Over his career Cormier has been a good pitcher. He has a lifetime 4.02 ERA in over 1,200 innings with a WHIP of 1.28. He had a bad second half last year. He had a good first half.

He is older now and who knows how well he will do next year, certainly I don't. I just don't think the Reds would be better off with David Shafer in the bullpen and I'm glad they made the trade yesterday, that's all.

I can live with trading any of Salmon, Shafer, Medlock or Coutlangus if it means a better pitcher comes along.

Whof of the 4-5 candidates the Reds already have for the #5 rotation spot is Saarloos better than? Who is he better than in the pen.

As for Cormier, I see no reason to believe the 34 ip in philadelphia are more real than the 48 in 2005. I think he had a nice hot streak to start the year in 2006. His K rates were abysmal all of 2006, half what they were in 2005 which wasn't a great year for him at all. I'd say he was BABIP lucky in the first half of 2006.

[Johnny Footstool]

With only 8.2 IP for us, I'd hardly say that amounts to a valid comparison.

The point is, getting a groundball pitcher is one thing. Getting a good one is another.

You need more than just a good GB/FB ratio to be successful. Unfortunately, Saarloos doesn't have much more than that.

[Danny Serafini]

Saarloos is the guy that forces Brad Salmon to repeat AAA.

Salmon was already ticketed for AAA before Saarloos came over. He's got Weathers, Stanton, Cormier, Majewski, Bray, Coffey and Belisle ahead of him in the pecking order. Barring a trade or injury there isn't room in the pen right now.

[TRF]

Salmon was already ticketed for AAA before Saarloos came over. He's got Weathers, Stanton, Cormier, Majewski, Bray, Coffey and Belisle ahead of him in the pecking order. Barring a trade or injury there isn't room in the pen right now.

Probably, but then that goes to the larger point: Did this trade make the Reds a better team? I don't think so. Does Cormier make the Reds better than Salmon would? IMO no, he does not. Is Majewski a better option than Salmon? IMO no, he is not. Is Saarloos a better option than EZ, Belisle, or even Santos? Again, IMO no.

So what then was the point? Another trade for the sake of making a trade. Krivsky's most astute move since April has been to offer Arb to Aurilia and Schoeneweiss knowing they'd refuse.

Most everything else has been a real head scratcher.

[Eric_Davis]

Shafer put up good numbers every year. I liked him, but this reminds me of the A's grabbing Mike Neu from the Reds.

I don't expect anything from Saarloos though. He is a poor man's Jake Westbrook.

To receive a player of Saarloos' age with the number of innings he's pitched in the Majors so far, the ONLY scenario for making the trade if you're giving away younger talent is that the upside of the younger player must be better than the Major Leaguer, and the upside must be progressively better the younger the player is as his chances of reaching the Majors diminishes the further away that he is from being there.

[gonelong]

You can't turn a double play unless the pitcher has already allowed a guy to reach first base. Allowing baserunners is bad. And with Saarloos' high HR rate, it could be really bad.

No doubt, but I was trying to answer why this might be the case ...

Saarloos is better with runners on than with the bases empty. Not just a little better, a lot better. That's not normal at all.
...

Getting two outs at a time can clean up a self-created mess in a hurry.

GL

[Eric_Davis]

If we get the Kirk Saarloos of 2005, then he instantly becomes the 3rd best starter on this staff. If we get the Kirk Saarloos of 2006, then we'll lose more games than we win when he's out there pitching.

I love the potential.

[Eric_Davis]

Ultra low K Rate, high HR Rate (while pitching in a good park to suppress HR), high Walk Rate and tons of baserunners. Guys who strike out fewer hitters while walking more and giving up more home runs are generally worse pitchers no matter what the ERA may say.

All three miss a lot more bats than Saarloos and allow fewer HR and Santos and Ramirez both have much better control.

None of these guys are studs. I just don't see how a team can give up anything remotely useful for a guy like Saarloos. I like that Shafer had options and could be stashed. That alone gives him more value than Saarloos given the Reds roster glut. The Reds are going to lose some other pitchers when the roster is pared to 25. As I see it, those pitchers are at least as likely to be effective as Saarloos is and it wouldn't have cost Shafer to keep one of those instead. Another move (say Lohse or Milton traded for something) would also make this move look better.

As I posted earlier in one of these threads, if injuries to the current guys are worse than advertised then this move make more sense.

I don't like this move, but its still WK's best move of the offseason.

None of the pitchers on this staff, with the exception of Arroyo and Harang, have put up as good of numbers as Saarloos did in 2005. They don't have his potential, and giving up Shafer for that potential was a very fair deal, one which we needed to make.

[Eric_Davis]

Somebody has to pitch the 7th or 8th inning. Seems like WK spent over $7 Million of this year's payroll on three old guys who have the same profile and traded two of his better offensive players for 2 others.

Why not keep the cheaper younger option and use the money to acquire a real upgrade. Instead, the cheaper younger option is traded for junk, lots of other resources are expended to fill the 7th or 8th inning role that no one seems to value (except the guy expending all of those resources), and we hear that the rotation can't be upgraded because its too costly and the team doesn't have the resources (I wonder where they went).

Absolutely ridiculous. Saarloos in not junk. Don't use adjectives so loosely. His 2005 season was one I'd like to have for 3/4th's of the current REDS's staff.

[Johnny Footstool]

No doubt, but I was trying to answer why this might be the case ...



Getting two outs at a time can clean up a self-created mess in a hurry.

GL

That makes sense.

[TRF]

Absolutely ridiculous. Saarloos in not junk. Don't use adjectives so loosely. His 2005 season was one I'd like to have for 3/4th's of the current REDS's staff.

I'd take EZ's 2006 over Saarloos 2005 in GAB any day of the week.

EZ K's more batters, walks fewer batters, has better overall control and is four years younger.

EZ is better than Saarloos.

[Eric_Davis]

Could someone explain in detail what WHIP means? I forgot if I ever knew that is.
P.S. Good post Island Red.

In the Mid-70's during a RED's broadcast on Saturday morning, Curt Gowdy commented that one of the secrets to Don Gullett's success is that he allows fewer runners to reach base than the average pitcher. Gullett's response to that was, "If they can't get on they can't score".

Later on, the WHIP stat came out, but managers always knew which pitchers allowed baserunners and which ones didn't.