sk7326

They lost because they couldn't HIT ... the relief had little to do with it (ESPECIALLY in Oakland's case)

He had 9.2 scoreless innings ... Trevor Rosenthal had 11 scoreless innings. That sort of streak is not actually that rare among relievers. It is hard to win a World Series when any of your regulars performs poorly. It's even harder if your starters perform poorly. And if you wanted an answer to your question fwiw, 2001 Diamondbacks

The way Tampa has turned other team's trash into closer treasure should be evidence in my corner. Also, btw: Atlanta should be fielding offers on Craig Kimbrel right now.

Koji had an amazing season, value commesurate with a #3 starter more than with a reliever. But that was wildly, exceedingly, rare. By pooh poohing the closer, I am not dismissing Koji's work. I am pointing out that LOTS of terrific teams, teams that won titles, got WAY less out of that position and it didn't matter a lick.

He had an amazing run - there is no disputing that.

I waffle as to whether it is repeatable or not - although clearly some relievers are better than others. But I think what I wanted to convey was that clearly managements across the game have compensated that position more than other bullpen slots. However, that sort of compensation should be reserved for guys with the ability to take on higher leverage work than simply "3 outs to hold a lead". Uehara clearly delivered on that level of performance this past season. But I have been consistent in pointing out that expecting him to repeat it (or Tazawa or Breslow) is not something management should be doing - the bullpen is a place of constant churn. I think in 2006-2008 Papelbon was that sort of performer - stuff and results. But he faded since. Foulke had that sort of track record coming into his Boston tour and delivered (at least in 2004). So there is a difference in reliever quality, but that tier of reliever is a fairly small number.

Neither stat offers much aside from being on a team that plays a lot of close games.

Texas has some options. The big bet they are making is that Fielder had an off-year, and that he did not hit a decline as a 29 year old. Keith Law in his writeup noted that the line drive rates were still high last season, and the batted ball statistics were not indicative of a dude who lost bat speed. So there is at least some reason to think that last year was a hiccup. It's an expensive bet clearly. If they cannot find a better option than Moreland (Napoli is still a possibility there), you can keep Moreland, DH Fielder and then Profar-Andrus-Beltre around the horn. I think Profar is the sort of prospect (like Bogaerts is) who Tampa could see as a future star at SS, and locking down that position for a decade is worth a starting pitcher - shortstop is that important a position. It would take more than Profar (depending on their eval of him) but not MUCH more.

Here is the thing. I've railed about the "relief ace" idea. But we are a decade away at least from that getting traction. The groupthink behind closers -as well as the way that salary arbitrators use the statistics for compensation - the closer is going to be the best compensated reliever. Managers, even the Joe Maddon sorts, fall into line with this stuff - that the 9th is special etc. There is some risk aversion at work - the same things that prevent football coaches from going for it on 4th down when anybody who has played Madden knows better. Nobody wants the media or fans getting on their ass, easier to deflect to players than to take the bullet. SO, with that being said, closers now are essentially like how running backs have evolved in the NFL. You need a running back, but it doesn't matter as much who he is. He can be Stevan Ridley, Shane Vereen, whomever. The team structure is more important. Now there are a few RBs (like closers) who can do a heavier lift - THOSE guys, yeah, are real value adds. The Red Sox in their three title runs were blessed with true value-added closers, in Foulke, early Papelbon, and Uehara last year. Value-added closing is very hard to find, and Rivera was one of them. But Bobby Jenks wasn't, and Sergio Romo isn't, and 2006 Adam Wainwright wasn't.

Perhaps - although with a new CEO, using Profar to land David Price then signing Cano is on the table too - riskier, more expensive, but also the best available guys at 2 spots.

It is ... remember, the Dodgers, Tigers, Cardinals and Red Sox all made the semifinals without the closer they expected entering the season. Koji had a stupendously amazing season for any sort of reliever in the modern era. But teams have won with much much less at that position. (see 2012 Giants, 2011 Cardinals, 2006 Cardinals, 2005 White Sox, 2008 Phillies)

Cano I think is more of an idea for Texas, though if they just put Profar in at 2B, you could hardly blame them.

Oh I think Koji gets plenty of credit - hell, his leap into Salty's arms is the final image! He had a marvelous season, so marvelous that if he turns into a pumpkin this season (after the hardest season of his 38 year old life), I won't lose any sleep over it.

We discussed the dominoes falling ealier ... when Mark was asking when do you think the free agent frenzy will start in earnest. I think basically the market is waiting for 2 things ... 1) Cano as mentioned above and ... 2) The David Price sweepstakes The latter will help iron out the pitching market a lot. Ervin Santana and Ubaldo Jimenez are the best pure FA starters out there. But you can't justify either of them making Greinke money, though the market scarcity allows them to dream. But where Price goes can shift this a lot. To that end ... The Fielder trade gives both Detroit and Texas a lot of options. It definitely allows Texas to possibly put Profar in the center of a deal for Price AND make a real run at Cano. Detroit, if they wanted, could probably shuffle deck chairs too, move Kinsler to 3B., Miggy to 1B and possibly do something on the Cano front too, though I think they'd be less inclined.

This. You also look at the other 2 champions - there were the Eric Hinske's, the Bobby Kielty's, and obviously Dave Roberts. We were turning to basically fringe starters as our bench guys - which is a great luxury to have. Any spending on bullpen arms (not a ton on a guy, just signing a bunch of dudes) for this reason is ALWAYS a good idea, even if you think your pen is good.

Oh we need to make some moves to get to where we want to go. Moreover, we need the performance from the kids to achieve our true promise. I guess the way I look at is, Ben put together a pretty good team on paper last year - and between the fact that the team got to field it's "on paper" lineup far more often than in recent memory, along with the positive performances of Victorino, Uehara and Drew particularly, you get the best team in the majors from wire to wire. The team with a minimalist offseason is still a 90 win team or so with just some solid "typical" seasons from the guys. But you can't count on the injury good fortune - especially the fortune that resulted in basically 6 pitchers making virtually all of our starts. I just take issue with Fred's idea of "Ben put together players with amazing spirit" hooey - chemistry to me forms during the season. It comes when a group of guys is successful together, and each season you are starting from scratch there. It is hard to get that sort of team success when your players - especially your leaders - just cannot perform, and then when you add a manager who cannot fill in the gap, we see what happened. When that stuff starts to slip, and losing becomes all too regular - any set of professionals can let the bad vibes seep in.

All you need for a 5-15 stretch is a half a dozen one-run losses (and those games are basically coin flips) and a few injuries. The team came together last year and had remarkably little adversity. I do agree that our team won't collapse because we have leaders who are used to winning a lot. As long as the guys are healthy they will be some version of good.

I don't know necessarily - the trade is defensible on its merits, as Kinsler is arguably better than Fielder anyway. Kinsler's bat can play at 1B or LF or 2B, wherever they want to put him. There is shine here for both teams.

I think he is about 85% likely to come back. If the Red Sox meet him halfway (I am thinking 2 years with a reasonable vesting option for year 3 or something) he is back here. The Detroit-Texas deal was interesting for both sides. Rangers needed both a 1B and a way to stop jerking around Profar - Tigers gave them both.

Good players, solid guys ... Beltran (I disagree with signing him for baseball reasons) has been on a lot of good teams. He has had a lot of postseason experience, and whatever sample size that is, he has done well. I know you questioned his loyalty, because he had the temerity to go seek a living and take advantage of his free agency rights, but that is severely misreading what a professional is. Team spirit and chemistry are important, but the first thing is good baseball players and (as much as you can control) healthy ones. You can't lead from the training table, and any amount of good team spirit can be crushed by a bad losing streak. Now can the team spirit overcome the crushing injuries the way the 89-73 2010 squad did? Or will it collpase like it did in 2012. That is a matter of leadership - and Farrell has shown that unlike the guy who ran the ship in 2012, he is at least engaged.

Every prospect sounds like a superstar when you look them up on Soxprospects or wherever. Brentz will be entering his Age 25 season next year - if he was ticketed for stardom, he'd already have shown up. He is being protected, which is fine. But he is far more likely a "guy" than he is a "Guy!!" A strong clubhouse is important - but you generally can't build it. And if they can't play baseball, whatever chemistry you have will go down the toilet during your first 5-19 stretch. And if they got along, who cares at that point? I think re-signing Napoli is at the top of their list - but there are a lot of options out there, and they have the obligations to the fans who get the most demanded of them of any fan base, to do the best thing for the franchise.

Winter Meetings will be when the dialogue gets particularly hot and heavy normally - also at that point the trade targets start to figure prominently.

I would suspect in Hart's case we are looking at a 1-year deal with a low base and an 8-figure upside. Like Napoli's with more burden shifted towards the player. Beltran is a multi-year thing (2-3 I'd reckon) ... I don't think it's nearly enough bang for the buck considering the pick penalty.

Certainly that is what the notoriously cheap (well, cheap considering the biggest market on earth) Mets are hoping for. The market is slow with the top guys - which makes sense. Just a lot of waiting to see what happens with Cano, and then the rest of the dominoes can fall into place. Essentially Cano (easily the best player in this cohort) will set the market, so I think a lot of guys are waiting to see where he ends up.

It's not about ease - it's about how easy it is to learn. To get from 0 to acceptable, it's pretty simple. To get to elite requires something - but you can't take elite glove without a bad, or else you get 2012 James Loney, which is largely a waste of a lineup spot. Fielding is one of the things which can be taught, and often has to be taught at the professional level - instruction in fielding is just sorely lacking in high school and college levels. When Butterfield came over he had a reputation as a great fielding instructor. You take a good athlete, good coaching and a position which is not that physically demanding and you have to like your chances to get to "good enough".