7/25/12 Reds @ Astros

[Patrick Bateman]

Your opinion. But if others want to have that debate, that's their prerogative yes?

If you want to debate whether the OP was being hyperbolic, fine. I think it's splitting hairs and irrelevant to the real point.

He likely didn't believe that O is really the worst pitcher in baseball, it's just something you say in the heat of the moment to get the point across. It's semantics. He shouldn't be used in these types of games, that's all that matters, and I think a brief review of his numbers in comparison to the 5 alternatives makes that point difficult to argue against well.

[Brutus]

Let me set the record straight, as I need to make this clear:

I don't think Ondrusek is a great pitcher. I think he's an average reliever. And like I said in a previous response, I think he's an average reliever that's been forced into more innings because Madson and Massett got hurt and Chapman and Marshall can't pitch all the time. Arredondo has better stuff than Ondrusek, but he's (at times) dangerously wild.

I'm not a big believer in Ondrusek by any means, but I just don't think he's as bad as people are making it sound. And two separate reports now have said the Phillies apparently like him too, so it gives credence to the suggestion that he's in fact, not, "one of the worst relievers in baseball" as a lot of people are asserting.

[Crumbley]

Ondrusek is just a guy. We are incredibly lucky if he's the worst they can throw out.

[VR]

great game!

[kaldaniels]

Let me set the record straight, as I need to make this clear:

I don't think Ondrusek is a great pitcher. I think he's an average reliever. And like I said in a previous response, I think he's an average reliever that's been forced into more innings because Madson and Massett got hurt and Chapman and Marshall can't pitch all the time. Arredondo has better stuff than Ondrusek, but he's (at times) dangerously wild.

I'm not a big believer in Ondrusek by any means, but I just don't think he's as bad as people are making it sound. And two separate reports now have said the Phillies apparently like him too, so it gives credence to the suggestion that he's in fact, not, "one of the worst relievers in baseball" as a lot of people are asserting.

It is illogical to say that because Philly wants Ondrusek, he is not one of the worst relievers in baseball. (or gives credence, etc...)

[Patrick Bateman]

I don't think Ondrusek is a great pitcher. I think he's an average reliever. And like I said in a previous response, I think he's an average reliever that's been forced into more innings because Madson and Massett got hurt and Chapman and Marshall can't pitch all the time. Arredondo has better stuff than Ondrusek, but he's (at times) dangerously wild.

But what about Lecure/Simon? O has done nothing this season (or past seasons) to make him an obvious alternative to those guys. It could be argued that O should be in the mix, but of the top 3 guys used by Baker of Chaps, O, and Marshall, one thing just doesn't fit.

I'm not a big believer in Ondrusek by any means, but I just don't think he's as bad as people are making it sound. And two separate reports now have said the Phillies apparently like him too, so it gives credence to the suggestion that he's in fact, not, "one of the worst relievers in baseball" as a lot of people are asserting.

It's one team, just a rumour, we have no idea if it's even true. We have enough knowledge of O, and he's been that bad, that I just don't get how one little rumour that at face value and makes no sense to 95% of people here adds any more value than just looking at O's ugly stat page. Krivsky liked Majewski, it doesn't mean it was a good idea (and that's who O is currently reminding me of).

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Reds Freak replied "Worst reliever in baseball?"

And while that was not your original quote, you responded "do some research."

Then he again challenged you on that asking if you'd rather have Del Rosario, Cordero, etc. And you had the opportunity to back off the statement.

OK so technically it might not have been your quote, but you certainly didn't run from it when asked twice.

No, I corrected him over and over again that I didn't say he was the worst. He is ONE one of the worst. Nobody can argue that, no matter how many times the goalposts get moved.

And a little research shows he is what I said he was. One of worst. No real debate in that. And as far as Francisco and Del Rosario go, there is a reason they are no longer pitching in Cincinnati.

They are kind of weak examples to prove any point and I'm not sure what the point of bringing them up in the first place is, unless to move the goalposts.

[Brutus]

It is illogical to say that because Philly wants Ondrusek, he is not one of the worst relievers in baseball. (or gives credence, etc...)

Why is it illogical? Teams don't find trade value in one of the worst relievers in baseball. If they want someone that projects to be one of the worst, I'm sure they can go right down into their own farm system to find one of those replacements. There are dozens of guys that project as a 'replacement-level' player in any organization.

It doesn't make any sense to think Philadelphia would want to trade for someone that profiles as one of the worst relievers in baseball.

[Brutus]

No, I corrected him over and over again that I didn't say he was the worst. He is ONE one of the worst. Nobody can argue that, no matter how many times the goalposts get moved.

And a little research shows he is what I said he was. One of worst. No real debate in that. And as far as Francisco and Del Rosario go, there is a reason they are no longer pitching in Cincinnati.

They are kind of weak examples to prove any point and not sure what the point of bringing them up in the first place, unless it is to move the goalposts.

Actually your research didn't show it for one of the reasons I mentioned, because it is a selection bias.

Using only qualified relievers, your sample doesn't account for most of the bad relievers in baseball. The truly bad ones typically don't pitch enough to 'qualify' in these samples. All your research shows is that among the relievers that are used consistently, using peripherals, he has been toward the bottom of the pack.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Let me set the record straight, as I need to make this clear:

I don't think Ondrusek is a great pitcher. I think he's an average reliever.

But he's not average. He's below average and sub replacement-level.

Not a guy that should ever be pitching in any kind of a crucial situation unless a team is desperate, and/or that team is the worst team in baseball and has no choice (Astros).

This is kind of the point that is somehow being missed.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Actually your research didn't show it for one of the reasons I mentioned, because it is a selection bias.

Using only qualified relievers, your sample doesn't account for most of the bad relievers in baseball. The truly bad ones typically don't pitch enough to 'qualify' in these samples. All your research shows is that among the relievers that are used consistently, using peripherals, he has been toward the bottom of the pack.

Again splitting hairs. Even if I "select" all relievers (let's say that have pitched 10-20 innings in the last 2 years) he would still be one of the worst. He'd still be in the bottom 10% and not worthy of pitching in a crucial situation for a playoff caliber team.

[Brutus]

[QUOTE=BuckeyeRedleg;2677979]

Let me set the record straight, as I need to make this clear:

I don't think Ondrusek is a great pitcher. I think he's an average reliever./QUOTE]

But he's not average. He's below average and sub replacement-level.

Not a guy that should ever be pitching in any kind of a crucial situation unless a team is desperate, and/or that team is the worst team in baseball and has no choice (Astros).

This is kind of the point that is somehow being missed.

You say he isn't, I say he is. It's an opinion that's not going to be proven either way, so I'm just going to bow out at this point. I think he's an average reliever. You don't agree and others don't. C'est la vie.

[kaldaniels]

Why is it illogical? Teams don't find trade value in one of the worst relievers in baseball. If they want someone that projects to be one of the worst, I'm sure they can go right down into their own farm system to find one of those replacements. There are dozens of guys that project as a 'replacement-level' player in any organization.

It doesn't make any sense to think Philadelphia would want to trade for someone that profiles as one of the worst relievers in baseball.

So following your logic, any player who a team trades for, cannot be one of the worst players in the game? You probably don't want to give an inch here, but really, this is not the logical path to make for your case.

[Brutus]

So following your logic, any player who a team trades for, cannot be one of the worst players in the game?

The Phillies just won a World Series, what, three years ago? Two years ago they swept the Reds in a 3-game series. Teams that are successful like that typically aren't in the business of trading for the worst relievers in baseball.

The Phillies obviously don't think he's one of the worst relievers, right? If they did, they wouldn't be trying to acquire him.

I truly would like for you to explain how "logical" it is to suggest major league teams are in the habit of trading for the worst players in baseball at their position. How logical is that, really?

[BuckeyeRedleg]

You say he isn't, I say he is. It's an opinion that's not going to be proven either way, so I'm just going to bow out at this point. I think he's an average reliever. You don't agree and others don't. C'est la vie.

Fine, but he's not average. Anyone saying so is wrong. Good night.