What is gridlock?
1. A high OBP lineup loading the bases
2. the U.S. Congress
3. Redszone discussing the aftermath of a trade
Homer, what I think we can say was wrong was the take that Broxton was a longshot with little chance of working out. He was, at absolute worst, a medium shot and he's clearly got some things working for him (I'll bet the Reds liked that he was keeping the ball in the park).
If someone's take was that he's a middling arm and not necessarily someone you want on the mound in critical situations, then I'd say that door is still open. Though that also describes most relievers. Very few are sure things. So that doesn't really count as useful insight that argues for or against the deal.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Man, some of you are tough. If you'd take away what Broxton has done to get us a double digit lead based on what he does in the post season then I'd have to say I disagree. Let's give Walt his kudos with the understanding that anything can happen in the playoffs.
When you acquire a rental then 20 innings is everything. That's all you acquired him to do. I don't understand the sample size argument where a rental is concerned
If you read my earlier post, you'll see that I did say I was completely open to the possibility that the Reds were acting on information not available to the general public.
But to perhaps adjust the analogy, poker may be the better comparison. It's not that the overall odds of success were great. Rather, it's that the pot odds were in the Reds favor. That is, the benefit from winning the hand (a healthy step towards securing a playoff spot) were high enough compared to the cost that it justified the risk that he could return to his previous talent level.
Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.
So is it so stunning that Broxton is doing this? He's done it before. Some of you wanted to simply ignore the fact that he was coming off an injury and maybe wasn't 100% yet. So I don't think it's fair to say "this turnaround was absolutely unpredictable," because that simply isn't true. Broxton has been a high-leverage arm before. So I don't know why it's so surprising he's had this level of success. It's similar to the Marshall and Rolen deals. Everyone wants to scream about all the great prospects we gave up. When in reality, Walt has an amazing track record of giving up chump change for marquee players.
I agree that it's difficult for us to predict relief pitchers, but I think saying it is a coin flip is pushing it.
Whatever method Walt uses to pick relief pitchers, he seems to have an above average success rate compared to his peers.
We can pour over video and numbers at the time of the trade and form our own opinions, but in the end, it's Walt's job to get results.
I don't know what he saw in Simon, for example. I also don't know what he saw in Hoover (Atlanta didn't really seem to value him highly, neither did much of the publications).. but Walt has gotten great results, and I expect him to continue to get results.
[Phil ] Castellini celebrated the team's farm system and noted the team had promising prospects who would one day be great Reds -- and then joke then they'd be ex-Reds, saying "of course we're going to lose them". #SellTheTeamBob
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
Respectfully, that's not true. Here are some of my posts from July 31, and there were many others that agreed with this. My final post her listed specifically states I thought he could get back to striking out 8-10 guys per nine innings:
"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
He was a nice addition. But I guess what should have been said, though I figured it was implied, was that if Jonathan Broxton comes to the Reds and has the same walk rate and strikeout rate he had in Kansas City, he isn't going to help this team. And he wouldn't have. But he doesn't have anywhere near those things. He has gone from below average in both, to incredibly above average in one and above average in the other.
If I were advising Walt, I would have said, "His numbers aren't that good despite his shiny ERA. If he comes over to our side and walks that many guys and strikes out so few guys, he isn't going to be an asset to us. Do our scouts/pitching coach see something in the video that suggests he can cut down on the walks or raise his strikeout rate?" and then the conversation would have progressed from there depending on the answer.
Last edited by dougdirt; 09-26-2012 at 05:15 PM. Reason: typo
No offense, but I have seen this analogy many times to justify someone's prediction.. This is not an "I told you so" post, so please don't take it that way, but it's a poor analogy.
Very few trade decisions are a no brainer like your analogy.
Maybe Walt had information that Redszone didn't know about.
Or maybe the people that disliked the Broxton trade were using the information in a flawed manner to arrive at a wrong conclusion.
I guess my thought at the time was that the minor leaguers we gave up were fodder that are longshots to stick at the major leagues (much less be an impact). I didn't see a lot of Broxton before the trade, but the skills were there.
Maybe the numbers didn't show it, but when that Baseball writer implied that Joseph > Broxton right now.. well, that was just silly and closed minded thinking. I'm sure that writer that said that will say that Broxton just got lucky or the blind squirrel found a nut or whatever, but Broxton has pitched extremely well since arriving. He's got to be one of the best trade deadline deals in terms of results vs talent surrendered..
The sabermatic analysis of Broxton at the time of the trade was certainly interesting.. I am not saying that it was bad/wrong.. just saying, the blackjack analogy doesn't fit in baseball trades.
[Phil ] Castellini celebrated the team's farm system and noted the team had promising prospects who would one day be great Reds -- and then joke then they'd be ex-Reds, saying "of course we're going to lose them". #SellTheTeamBob
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
Broxton has never shown anywhere near this ability to keep guys from walking. He is literally at half of his previous career low. So no, he hasn't done this before. And his stuff today, isn't close to what it was when he was "doing it before". When he was in LA and dominating, here is what he was doing:
Average FB Velocity: 97.05 MPH (94.8 today)
Fastball value per 100 thrown: 1.39 (1.17 today)
Slider value per 100 thrown: 2.97 (-0.85 today)
So yes, he has done it before. But what he was before was a pitcher with elite velocity and a wipe out slider.
Today, he is a pitcher with very good velocity and a below average slider.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug, here is what you said about obtaining Broxton:
dougdirt:
Oh joy, we might use a guy who walks a bunch of guys and can't strike guys out as a set up man and closer. Watch out NL. Watch. Out.
__________________
Do you really wonder why no one got the "implied" part of your post?
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. |