sk7326

Depends on your definition of immediately. Pedroia had a robust .182/.308/.236 in April 2007. Bradley in his cup of coffee had .189/.280/.337. Nothing to brag about, but the OBP skills are there - just need to strike out a little less (like back to his norms - and he shows every indication that he will strike out a good deal) and he'll be fine.

His 2013 UZR has to be taken with a giant bale of salt given the playing out of position. In most contexts he is ok. As far as Bradley goes - competition is healthy, but then so is being decisive, especially in this market. After all, in 2006 Pedroia was hoplessly overmatched. And he got off to a bad start in 2007 too - there was every reason to pull the plug but the team stuck with its evaluation. Pedroia had the big May and suddenly life got better. Both Middlebrooks and Bradley were victims of some extreme small sample size shocks causing hysteria. Middlebrooks that hot streak coming up from Pawtucket, and Bradley with that amazing spring despite almost no performance history above Single A. The injury and the lost reps clearly affected Middlebrooks and he basically lost a year of experience, I still like him because the talent is there and great athletes are good guys to bet on. Bradley, if you look at what he has accomplished at every level of baseball for his age - while it is not as extraordinary as Bogaerts (and guys with Bogaerts' progress through a system almost never "FAIL") - he is very much on track to be a really effective starting CF. I think his approach and secondary skills are good enough for him to figure out big league pitching on the job while not being an automatic out - as long as the team is patient. The thing he has to learn (how to hit grown man breaking stuff) can only come up in the show.

I like Choo's on-base skills, but do not like his age and increasingly problematic splits.

Young to Mets made sense, read Sox were in on him - but at the end of the day a guy like him needs reps. I liked him as a backup with upside, but I am sure he thinks he needs some guarantee of PAs to rebuild his market value. Maybe the next option is a Rajai Davis - alternatively just keep things in house. Beltran at a 3-year hitch is hard to swallow as a matter of business case.

Papelbon probably was ... in 2007.

I agree mostly, although if Profar gives them a shot at David Price, you have to wonder. There is a CEO waiting to make a splash possibly.

There has never been a player in the history of spring training quotes who wasn't in the best shape of his life or who did not think the team had something special inside of them.

A closer who pitched 140 innings that season!!!

The offense had poor batting averages but got on base - and it has to be noted just how many pitcher-friendly parks they played in. The position players remained solid throughout on defense and the starters ranged from outstanding to good enough.

The "who won with poor closing" question is a bit of a red herring. Shoddy relief pitching will kill you in any short series. It is not the magical 9th inning. The more important question is who has won with "non-special" closing, and the answer is "a lot".

Fielder had an off year, but he is 29, and if you look at the batted-ball stats, his line drive rate was actually a lot better than it was his last 2 seasons in Milwaukee. There is some good evidence that the bat speed is not diminishing. There is a huge risk taking on that sort of money - but the deal makes all sorts of sense for the Rangers in the short term. $30 million bucks, an upgrade at 1B, an even bigger upgrade at DH if they go that direction with Prince (and they really ought to), and finally giving them some options with Jurickson Profar. Detroit it improves their defense a lot, by shifting Miguel Cabrera to 1B and putting Castellanos at 3B. Also frees up money to extend Scherzer. Kinsler's bat should be fine at 2B, though the plunge in power the last two years raises eyebrows but at least cheaper eyebrow raises than Fielder's.

I think in both those cases it is a lot more complex than that - Tampa gets a lot of mileage out of their offense with approach. And both of the teams (like Boston does) built teams to their home ballparks - both play in extreme pitchers parks, and they gear to it. And Oakland did not have Justin Verlander - or the best baseball team of the last 20 years. Tampa lost to the wire to wire best team in the sport. What horrible mismanagement.

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.