Jump to content

Recommended Posts


They will probably make a move as teams start to finalize their rosters.  I do think that Jackson might be a serviceable 7th or 8th inning guy.  The smart play would be to just move Koehler to the 8th inning and give Edwin a rotation spot.  That would solidify the pen and when Edwin flops we can give Nicolino and company a shot. 

 

Or they could also give a rotation spot to Phelps and keep both Koehler and Edwin in the bullpen.  Either way, we are going to have to score a lot of runs this year.  You would think that the way good relievers are making bank these days that Koehler would rather be a bullpen stud rather than a mediocre #5 (I know he's our #3) starter.  Also, Nolasco is available??  Just saying... (ducking behind my desk)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yet again we are gonna have bullpen issues because we refuse to add cheap veterans for only a few million like just about every other team does.  When you rely solely on your own young guys stepping up and refusing to add cheaper veterans you're gonna ruin yet another season because we are going to be incredibly inconsistent yet again.

 

Name the last "cheap veteran" that has worked out for us. Todd Jones in 2005, maybe?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Name the last "cheap veteran" that has worked out for us. Todd Jones in 2005, maybe?

 

There are cheap bullpen arms available every year that at the very least could give us competent innings should one of our young guys like Barraclough or Ellington not perform (which they shouldn't have been expected to based on both of their track records).  Yet we will now turn to a bunch of different arms that shouldn't be in the bigs yet unless we make a move before the year.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
There are cheap bullpen arms available every year that at the very least could give us competent innings should one of our young guys like Barraclough or Ellington not perform (which they shouldn't have been expected to based on both of their track records).  Yet we will now turn to a bunch of different arms that shouldn't be in the bigs yet unless we make a move before the year.

 

Again, name the last "cheap veteran" that has worked out for us. Why spend millions on a failure?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, name the last "cheap veteran" that has worked out for us. Why spend millions on a failure?

 

You are making my point.  Finding cheap veteran bullpen arms isn't hard.  Yet we continue to rely year in and year out solely on arms from our system.  At the very least we should sign a few cheap bullpen arms each season so we can possibly get some value for them at the trade deadline.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
And to go along with Michaels question, please tell me how Morris Dunn Jackson Phelps and Breslow don't qualify as cheap veterans without bringing up Dunns salary.

 

I was more so referring to us relying on Barraclough and Ellington to be quality pieces in our bullpen based off small samples at the end of last year when neither of them were thought to be huge pieces for the future.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are making my point.  Finding cheap veteran bullpen arms isn't hard.  Yet we continue to rely year in and year out solely on arms from our system.  At the very least we should sign a few cheap bullpen arms each season so we can possibly get some value for them at the trade deadline.

 

How, in any way, shape, or form have I made your point? "Why spend millions on a failure" implied "why spend money on a veteran reliever who won't do well", not "why spend money on unproven arms".

 

And furthermore, if they're failures, THEY DON'T HAVE TRADE DEADLINE VALUE.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
How, in any way, shape, or form have I made your point? "Why spend millions on a failure" implied "why spend money on a veteran reliever who won't do well", not "why spend money on unproven arms".

 

And furthermore, if they're failures, THEY DON'T HAVE TRADE DEADLINE VALUE.

 

How many times do I have to say finding bullpen arms isn't hard?  Just because the marlins make it look incredibly difficult doesnt mean it is.  As a major league team we shouldn't be scared away from cheap bullpen arms just because they ask for a major league deal and not a minor league deal.  There are dozens of guys available for cheap each year that could help take some pressure off guys like Barracloguh and Ellington. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was more so referring to us relying on Barraclough and Ellington to be quality pieces in our bullpen based off small samples at the end of last year when neither of them were thought to be huge pieces for the future.

Now you're on a whole different point... We're not relying on Barraclough and Ellington anymore because they've been optioned down. But you wanted cheap veterans to be what replaces them on the roster?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
How many times do I have to say finding bullpen arms isn't hard?  Just because the marlins make it look incredibly difficult doesnt mean it is.  As a major league team we shouldn't be scared away from cheap bullpen arms just because they ask for a major league deal and not a minor league deal.  There are dozens of guys available for cheap each year that could help take some pressure off guys like Barracloguh and Ellington. 

 

And how many times do I have to say "name a cheap veteran that has worked out for us"?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore, if we sign all these "cheap veteran relievers" and they're all doing well enough to be considered trade pieces at the deadline, we're probably doing well and therefore won't trade them.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now you're on a whole different point... We're not relying on Barraclough and Ellington anymore because they've been optioned down. But you wanted cheap veterans to be what replaces them on the roster?

 

They were relying on them before they performed like shit in spring training.  Now we have no backup plans besides Mike fucking Dunn yet again and a bunch of unproven arms and non proven veteran arms.  

 

Guys like Matt Thornton as a very good lefty out of the bullpen got 2 million.  There are a bunch of guys who want cheap major league contracts every year and we refuse to offer anything but minor league deals.  Now I'm not saying I want a bullpen full of cheap veterans on major league contracts.  But to continue to rely on solely the same 3 guys we've had (Morris, Dunn, Ramos) and hoping guys whose ERA didn't accurately reflect their performance (Ellington, Barraclaugh) without having a quality backup plan besides more unproven arms is gonna yet again hurt us this season.  

 

You're supposed to build a pen using good young arms, and we have a few of them, but year after year we refuse to build any depth anywhere in our system because we refuse to spend money, specifically in our bullpen.  Its why teams like the cardinals can have a major injury seemingly every year and still make the playoffs yet we lose 1 for a month every year and we are starting Ichiro every day and we collapse.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
And how many times do I have to say "name a cheap veteran that has worked out for us"?

 

We haven't gone after any.  There are countless guys every year.  We used to have a couple guys every year who would pan out.  Major league teams don't shy away from building bullpen depth because they don't want to spend money.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact that you continue to think they had no interest in dealing Jose at all is laughable.

 

The only way there would have been interest is if the team receiving Jose was willing to make their team worse by acquiring Jose. So, no, there was no real interest in dealing Jose.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
The fact that you continue to think they had no interest in dealing Jose at all is laughable.

 

I see you still haven't figured out the difference between shopping a guy (what those "scoops" claimed) and answering phone calls and asking for a king's ransom to make it happen. I'll wait for you to buy that dictionary.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
We haven't gone after any.  There are countless guys every year.  We used to have a couple guys every year who would pan out.  Major league teams don't shy away from building bullpen depth because they don't want to spend money.

 

How do you know who they did and didn't go after?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I see you still haven't figured out the difference between shopping a guy (what those "scoops" claimed) and answering phone calls and asking for a king's ransom to make it happen. I'll wait for you to buy that dictionary.

 

You're literally arguing about semantics.  Everyone says that about their star players when they are trading them.  If anyone called the Nats or Angels about Trout or Harper there wouldn't be a "kings ransom" comment.  It would be immediately a hang up.  

 

You're literally ignoring everything besides things that helps your point.  To completely dismiss concerns about him in the clubhouse, his agent, and his pending free agency as if they don't matter at all is stupid.  How many different people had to report clubhouse issues before you give it any credence?  How many people have to talk about issues between the front office and Boras before you give it any credence?  We have no shot of re-signing him in a few years.  They would be stupid not to shop him.  

 

Especially given the franchise and ownership you are talking about it makes no sense to believe that they weren't at least a little interested in trading him.  No team trades anyone if they don't think it makes them significantly better, its literally just a bullshit excuse to explain why there might be reports as to why someone might be shopped. 

 

Ive literally heard David Samson say that exact line about about 20 different players.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
You're literally arguing about semantics.  Everyone says that about their star players when they are trading them.  If anyone called the Nats or Angels about Trout or Harper there wouldn't be a "kings ransom" comment.  It would be immediately a hang up.  

 

You're literally ignoring everything besides things that helps your point.  To completely dismiss concerns about him in the clubhouse, his agent, and his pending free agency as if they don't matter at all is stupid.  How many different people had to report clubhouse issues before you give it any credence?  How many people have to talk about issues between the front office and Boras before you give it any credence?  We have no shot of re-signing him in a few years.  They would be stupid not to shop him.  

 

Especially given the franchise and ownership you are talking about it makes no sense to believe that they weren't at least a little interested in trading him.  No team trades anyone if they don't think it makes them significantly better, its literally just a bullshit excuse to explain why there might be reports as to why someone might be shopped. 

 

Ive literally heard David Samson say that exact line about about 20 different players.

 

You like to say literally but being that you're incorrect on multiple points, its literally the wrong term.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you know who they did and didn't go after?

 

oh idk how about the last 5 or so years of building the bullpen the same way.  They have been doing this for a while now.  Relying solely on young guys and veterans hoping to reinvigorate their career for minor league deals.  Granted, building a bullpen solely on major league deals worth a couple million is incredibly inefficient in this day and age of baseball, but a few of them can really help and keep you afloat in the dog days of the year when we inevitably have injuries so we don't have to gonna have to call up guys like Flores, Renzo, MAzarro, Narveson, Hand etc.  Have you not noticed our bullpen every fucking August?  Its a shit show full of retreads from our system every year.  Granted we are already out of it at that point but the point is good teams build quality depth in the bullpen and aren't afraid to spend 5 million on bullpen arms given that they are, you know, actual major league teams.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...