ESPN Power Rankings: Nationals, Reds 1-2

[REDREAD]

That said, I think it is also "within reason" for the most savvy front offices to save money by approaching bullpen construction in a different manner. And why not ask for perfection?

I think it's worth spending a little more on some bullpen guys to get a track record.
Obviously, every bullpen guy can't be making 7 million.

What happens if Broxton is not signed and then Hoover gets hurt or ineffective? We get a closer from Logan/Arrondo/Lecure/Simon .. no thanks.

We have plenty of wildcards in the bullpen that might or might not be good. Broxton is a good sign for some stablity. He makes the entire pen better (Part of that is allowing Marshall to stay in the setup role which he performs better in).

Maybe I'm nuts, but given the choice of Broxton/Stubbs or No Broxton/Choo.. I would seriously have to think about which one I'd prefer.

[RedEye]

I think it's worth spending a little more on some bullpen guys to get a track record. Obviously, every bullpen guy can't be making 7 million.

I don't have the stats right now to back this up, but for my money bullpen pitching is the most volatile position in the majors. Very few closers maintain performance for a long period time and every year there are unexpected meltdowns (see Lidge, Brad or Williams, Mitch) and surprisingly dominant guys culled from elsewhere--maybe the minors or from other parts of pitching staffs.

It's not that I have a problem with Broxton per se, and overall I like the way the bullpen is headed in terms of sheer numbers and arms. What I don't like is allocating extra cash to a pitcher who most likely won't be too much better than someone who makes much less.

[REDREAD]

I don't have the stats right now to back this up, but for my money bullpen pitching is the most volatile position in the majors. Very few closers maintain performance for a long period time and every year there are unexpected meltdowns (see Lidge, Brad or Williams, Mitch) and surprisingly dominant guys culled from elsewhere--maybe the minors or from other parts of pitching staffs.

It's not that I have a problem with Broxton per se, and overall I like the way the bullpen is headed in terms of sheer numbers and arms. What I don't like is allocating extra cash to a pitcher who most likely won't be too much better than someone who makes much less.

Well, that's a good point as well. Relief pitching is volatile.. I guess my approach says that due to the typical reliver being volatile, guys like Marshall, Broxton, Chapman (in the pen) are even more valuable. It's different ways of looking at the same problem. The Reds were able to dig up Hoover and Simon last year for almost nothing, which supports your argument that decent relievers are available. Not sure how those guys will do next year though. I have more hope for Hoover than Simon.. Honestly, if you lined up Simon, Arrendondo, Masset, and Ondrusek.. it would be hard to predict which one will be the best reliever in 2013.. Hoover and LeCure are a step up from those guys, but I don't want either of them closing.

[RedEye]

Well, that's a good point as well. Relief pitching is volatile.. I guess my approach says that due to the typical reliver being volatile, guys like Marshall, Broxton, Chapman (in the pen) are even more valuable. It's different ways of looking at the same problem. The Reds were able to dig up Hoover and Simon last year for almost nothing, which supports your argument that decent relievers are available. Not sure how those guys will do next year though. I have more hope for Hoover than Simon.. Honestly, if you lined up Simon, Arrendondo, Masset, and Ondrusek.. it would be hard to predict which one will be the best reliever in 2013.. Hoover and LeCure are a step up from those guys, but I don't want either of them closing.

I guess what we are circling back to here are the questions of whether Broxton is actually that dependable. Marshall, I think, had a darn good track record coming in, and the sort of longevity that merits a little extra moola. Broxton's numbers have been, well, more volatile over the past few years due to injury and ineffectiveness. Not sure whether he's worth a $21 million bet... and trying out Marshall or Hoover in the role makes more sense to me.

[REDREAD]

I guess what we are circling back to here are the questions of whether Broxton is actually that dependable. Marshall, I think, had a darn good track record coming in, and the sort of longevity that merits a little extra moola. Broxton's numbers have been, well, more volatile over the past few years due to injury and ineffectiveness. Not sure whether he's worth a $21 million bet... and trying out Marshall or Hoover in the role makes more sense to me.

Well, that's a fair comment... I guess when I see what the price has been for some other relievers, I'm really happy with Broxton.

Is Marshall a better pitcher overall? Yes, I agree. But it's nice to have the luxury to keep him in the setup role. I have high hopes for Hoover, but I don't want to lack of BP depth to sink us in 2013. I guess I am ok with some slight overpayments. I mean, the same arguement could be made that the Reds "should" be able to find a passable LF for less money than Ludwick.
In the end, 2013 is about winning, not getting bang for the buck and I'm thankful Walt was able to fit Ludwick, Hannaran, Broxton and Choo in.
Maybe that costs us the 2nd LH reliever? I guess I don't really see any other physical cost to his (Although I guess it's feasible to say maybe we could've held on to Didi and addressed CF another way if we didn't pay those guys).

[*BaseClogger*]

Why so much Giants love? Where did they improve?

[MikeThierry]

Why so much Giants love? Where did they improve?

They won the WS. I personally always give the benefit of doubt to the champs because they at least deserve that respect. Plus they didn't really lose anyone and they're a good solid team.

[RedEye]

(Although I guess it's feasible to say maybe we could've held on to Didi and addressed CF another way if we didn't pay those guys).

This is my gripe. I realize it's just that -- a gripe -- but I love my Reds, and I want them to maximize every dollar. I suppose that's my role as a fan, is it not?

In any case, as I said, these are quibbles. All in all, I'm very happy with what Walt has done this offseason. And, as you mention, the Broxton signing does add a certain intangible confidence to the team -- which in "win now" mode may be the most important of all. They've already got the pieces they need for the most part. Now they just need to put it all on the field.

[REDREAD]

This is my gripe. I realize it's just that -- a gripe -- but I love my Reds, and I want them to maximize every dollar. I suppose that's my role as a fan, is it not?

In any case, as I said, these are quibbles. All in all, I'm very happy with what Walt has done this offseason. And, as you mention, the Broxton signing does add a certain intangible confidence to the team -- which in "win now" mode may be the most important of all. They've already got the pieces they need for the most part. Now they just need to put it all on the field.

Yea, I know you aren't exactly fuming about signing Broxton
Man, I can't wait for the season to start. I'm even more excited than I was last year.

[smith288]

Projections to true talent level. Guys with a .375 BABIP are going to regress. Guys with a .250 BABIP are likely to step forward. Players coming back from injuries. Age progression (guys under 28 are likely to take a step forward, guys over 28 are likely to take a step back - hitters).

Again. This was done by a national sports writer who's not going to go to te level as a die hard team fan will.

I think his method is fine for its purpose.

[Brutus]

Projections to true talent level. Guys with a .375 BABIP are going to regress. Guys with a .250 BABIP are likely to step forward. Players coming back from injuries. Age progression (guys under 28 are likely to take a step forward, guys over 28 are likely to take a step back - hitters).

Doug, it's been researched thoroughly that guys typically maintain 'peak' production until 32. So someone isn't likely to "take a step back" until around 32ish.