Reds Sign Ryan Madson

[Vottomatic]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

He might have gotten "'ace" like results, but he was no Ace.

But you didn't mention his W-L record.

If he pitches 200 innings with a record of 5-15, was he an Ace? But it would be unfair to look at one luck dependant stat like ERA and ignore another luck dependant stat like W-L record.

So, his 2.20 ERA may not have been particularly valuable if he didn't win games for his team.

Uh........I'm having visions of Mario Soto right now. Great pitcher with no run support. His W-L record wasn't always to great.

[AmarilloRed]

Will there be a option year? I recall reading the Reds were still negotiating with Madson to include one.

[Tom Servo]

Jimmy Pitchalot was the greatest pitcher of my generation.

[Superdude]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

He might have gotten "'ace" like results, but he was no Ace.

But you didn't mention his W-L record.

If he pitches 200 innings with a record of 5-15, was he an Ace? But it would be unfair to look at one luck dependant stat like ERA and ignore another luck dependant stat like W-L record.

So, his 2.20 ERA may not have been particularly valuable if he didn't win games for his team.

You people are hard to please.

Luck is a part of the game. It can be extracted out of the equation for more accurate talent evaluation, but it's still an inextricable part of a player's historical production. ERA, luck dependent or not, is what happened. If Madson puts up the exact same numbers as Cordero next year, but with a better FIP, we haven't added any additional production to the team.

[Superdude]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Jimmy Pitchalot was the greatest pitcher of my generation.

Truly one of the game's forgotten legends.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Superdude

You people are hard to please.

Luck is a part of the game. It can be extracted out of the equation for more accurate talent evaluation, but it's still an inextricable part of a player's historical production. ERA, luck dependent or not, is what happened. If Madson puts up the exact same numbers as Cordero next year, but with a better FIP, we haven't added any additional production to the team.

That is essentially true, it's just completely irrelevant.

[OnBaseMachine]

From Jayson Stark:

I'm hearing Ryan Madson's deal w #Reds includes mutual option for 2013 with a buyout. Enables team to push some of Madson's $ into next year

https://twitter.com/#!/jaysonst

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Plus Plus

RT @dpware Is Madson a one year thing: he does well and is too expensive, or does not and is not resigned?//Told there's an option

https://twitter.com/#!/johnfayman/st...19689292644352

Jayson Stark
I'm hearing Ryan Madson's deal w #Reds includes mutual option for 2013 with a buyout. Enables team to push some of Madson's $ into next year

[Roy Tucker]

I fully expected the Reds to be active in the off-season trading market. So the Latos and Marshall trades didn't surprise me.

But while I was barking and woofing about the Reds signing Madson, in my heart of hearts, I really didn't expect it to happen. Too many years of small-thinking front office behavior has made me feel like a kid with his nose pressed against the front window of the candy store.

To me, this is more of a signal that the Reds are serious about 2012 than any other move made so far.

[Tom Servo]

I like the option element, but let's face it: If Madson has a good year, he's declining his option and hoping for a big payday in free agency.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Superdude

You people are hard to please.

Luck is a part of the game. It can be extracted out of the equation for more accurate talent evaluation, but it's still an inextricable part of a player's historical production. ERA, luck dependent or not, is what happened. If Madson puts up the exact same numbers as Cordero next year, but with a better FIP, we haven't added any additional production to the team.

As I understand the theory, you are still getting better production from Madson for those things he can control. If the results are the same for the team, then its not on him.

Further, you still are begging the question with the term "production," because I don't think there has been any agreement on that term in the discussion. I would say that all a pitcher produces is what happens to the ball after he throws it, but only insofar as he controls what happens to the ball. A save may be a measurement (a very weak measurement, mind you) of production, but it is not what the pitcher is producing.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Superdude

You people are hard to please.

Luck is a part of the game. It can be extracted out of the equation for more accurate talent evaluation, but it's still an inextricable part of a player's historical production. ERA, luck dependent or not, is what happened. If Madson puts up the exact same numbers as Cordero next year, but with a better FIP, we haven't added any additional production to the team.

You missed the point.

If your pitcher has a 2.20 ERA (5.50 FIP) but goes 5-15, is he still a valuable pitcher?

If you are going to base it on results to determine value, don't you have to look at the bottom line, wins and losses?

You say who cares if he pitches poorly as long as he doesn't give up runs. If that is true, then who cares how many runs he gives up as long as he wins.

If you want to equate Cordero's perforamce last year with Madson's this year based on actual results, why look at ERA? Look at saves, blown saves and wins and loses. The ERA is irrelevant in any event.

[Superdude]

Originally Posted by traderumor

As I understand the theory, you are still getting better production from Madson for those things he can control. If the results are the same for the team, then its not on him.

We're on the same page pretty much. I'm not knocking Madson at all. It was an awesome signing, but there was this whole subgroup arguing that 2012 Madson was gonna be a gigantic upgrade over 2011 Cordero.

Originally Posted by traderumor

Further, you still are begging the question with the term "production," because I don't think there has been any agreement on that term in the discussion.

I was just using the term generically. WAR using ERA instead of FIP would probably best representation what I'm talking about. From the looks of it, Baseball-Reference uses ERA.

[Superdude]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

You missed the point.

If your pitcher has a 2.20 ERA (5.50 FIP) but goes 5-15, is he still a valuable pitcher?

If you are going to base it on results to determine value, don't you have to look at the bottom line, wins and losses?

You say who cares if he pitches poorly as long as he doesn't give up runs. If that is true, then who cares how many runs he gives up as long as he wins.

If you want to equate Cordero's perforamce last year with Madson's this year based on actual results, why look at ERA? Look at saves, blown saves and wins and loses. The ERA is irrelevant in any event.

Once again, I was just using ERA as a generic production statistic to make a point. Saves and blown saves or WAR would probably be a better example in the Cordero/Madson case.

[Ghosts of 1990]

Love the Madson signing. We might have a shot this year. Willingham would have made this the perfect offseason.