Fredi Already On The Hot Seat?

[Bobbob1313]

So we missed the playoffs by not spending money on our third biggest need, even when we (and everyone else in baseball) have shown that unless you are willing to pony up elite bucks to fill that need, it's kind of a crapshoot?

There are tons of bullpen arms making good money who stink. I'll take the 'throw shit at the technique' we've opted for over the 'throw money at it' technique that works about as well. We have limited funds, it's not smart to use them on the guy who gets the last three outs of every 5th game if you have other glaring holes.

An innings eater and a third baseman were the things we were missing to make the playoffs last year. A league average third baseman probably gives us 4-6 more wins over the shit we got from 3B last year, and i'm not just talking boner. Cantu wasn't very good at 3rd last year either. We had the worst production in the league out of a pretty premium offensive position.

[Party]

You don't think 9 BS between Lindstrom and Nunez cost us games?

You don't think having everyone moved up a role in the bullpen cost us games?

You don't think going out and signing someone with some history to at least have more depth, fuck the closer position for a minute, cost us games?

There are tons of 3B that make money who stink. Yeah ok bullpen arms are more volatile. But let's look at it from the FO's prospective last offseason: if the FO thinks Boner is the starting 3B on a postseason team, shouldn't they have spent the "savings" from having a league minimum 3B on addressing other needs?

And hey, look where the "throw shit at the technique" has gotten us-- not the playoffs. And where exactly have I advocated a "throw money at the problem" technique? I'd be the last person to advocate throwing stupid money.
--------------------
Oh and hey, that limited resources argument doesn't fly with me. The Marlins are one of the more profitable teams in baseball when general fund money is taken into account. They can afford a reliever. They can afford a league average 3B AND a reliever. That argument is BS.
--------------------
In a league where teams like Arizona and Cleveland make/miss the playoffs and out/underperform their pyth record by a lot because of fantastic bullpens, I think you should reconsider your stance on the importance of spending on bullpen arms.

[Bobbob1313]

So who would you have liked them to spend money on? If it's so plainly obvious that the bullpen cost us the playoffs, then you must have a solution.

You keep playing the result on this one, but there really was no reason to expect the pen to be a gigantic weakness of this team last year going in. To say we missed the playoffs because they didn't spend money on a closer is silly. We didn't think we needed a closer, by most indications, we looked ok there.

The team deserves shit for not filling holes, but the bullpen was not a place that seemed like a giant hole. Ok, it turned out to be something of a hole, but it was still our 3rd biggest weakness. To say we missed the playoffs because we didn't spend on a closer ignores just about everything else that goes into a team.

Who is the guy(s) you wanted them to bring in last offseason to shore things up?

[Swifty]

I think Festa makes a great point that, historically the "Cinderella" team that just spits in the face of their pythagorean record does it almost completely because the bullpen steals them games.

Additionally, since the ultimate goal is to win a title, power 'pens rule in October. The last team to win a title without a legitimate double headed monster for the late innings of a close game was the '03 Marlins, and even then it was Urbina and Fox for us and we used whichever SP was on his throw day as our 'if needed' bridge. Hell, in the wild-card era, the only two championship teams that didn't have a dynamite bullpen were the '03 Marlins and '95 Braves. Seems history is strongly on your side if you say that any team with playoff aspirations needs a power pen at least 3 arms deep.

Over 162 games, offense brings you there, it's definitely the most critical piece (assuming passably competent starting pitching), but when you turn the calendar to the playoffs, it's all about the pitching, and if you "think" you're good enough for the playoffs, ignoring the pen is an egregious oversight.

[Party]

So who would you have liked them to spend money on? If it's so plainly obvious that the bullpen cost us the playoffs, then you must have a solution.

You keep playing the result on this one, but there really was no reason to expect the pen to be a gigantic weakness of this team last year going in. To say we missed the playoffs because they didn't spend money on a closer is silly. We didn't think we needed a closer, by most indications, we looked ok there.

The team deserves shit for not filling holes, but the bullpen was not a place that seemed like a giant hole. Ok, it turned out to be something of a hole, but it was still our 3rd biggest weakness. To say we missed the playoffs because we didn't spend on a closer ignores just about everything else that goes into a team.

Who is the guy(s) you wanted them to bring in last offseason to shore things up?

Going into last season the bullpen, and specifically the closer's role was our biggest question mark. We were content with the line-up and ok with the rotation because of the Big Three. To say the bullpen was our third biggest weakness is playing the result.

I would have taken my pick of Arthur Rhodes, Takashi Saito, Jeremy Affeldt and maybe even a Doug Brocail or Russ Springer.

Not all closers, but all have a history of being successful and an extra arm none the less. The only guy on that list that would have been a major gamble was Affeldt.
--------------------

I think Festa makes a great point that, historically the "Cinderella" team that just spits in the face of their pythagorean record does it almost completely because the bullpen steals them games.

Additionally, since the ultimate goal is to win a title, power 'pens rule in October. The last team to win a title without a legitimate double headed monster for the late innings of a close game was the '03 Marlins, and even then it was Urbina and Fox for us and we used whichever SP was on his throw day as our 'if needed' bridge. Hell, in the wild-card era, the only two championship teams that didn't have a dynamite bullpen were the '03 Marlins and '95 Braves. Seems history is strongly on your side if you say that any team with playoff aspirations needs a power pen at least 3 arms deep.

Over 162 games, offense brings you there, it's definitely the most critical piece (assuming passably competent starting pitching), but when you turn the calendar to the playoffs, it's all about the pitching, and if you "think" you're good enough for the playoffs, ignoring the pen is an egregious oversight.

Too add Urbina, who at the time was an above average closer, it was going to cost us Gonzalez or Stokes. Goes back to my point about spending money ahead of time to save ourselves the expense at the minor league level come the trade deadline. Granted, no one expected us to win 91 games in 2003.

[lou]

Going into last season the bullpen, and specifically the closer's role was our biggest question mark.

The biggest question mark was unarguably Bonifacio/Gaby Sanchez spring battle for a starting slot. And if we set the date to opening day roster, Bonifacio starting at 3B trumps anything and then some.

They brought in Leo coming off a great year. Lindstrom was solid. Kiko had a dominating spring. Pinto was coming back in his unspectacular-solid kind of way. There was hope in a youthful resurgence with Meyer and Penn, and Kensing wasn't a bad RP prospect for the back of the pen. This isn't ideal, but it also wasn't a bad lot overall to at least expect average production from. Adding 60 innings with a veteran wasn't pushing this unit drastically in another direction. Maybe you save 20 runs over the course of the year. And that's asking for a low 3 era and things to fall perfectly when free agent RP are extremely volatile and don't produce year to year. See Justin Speier. You can't just assume those 20 runs come in the 9th inning and produce +5 wins on all the blown save games. it would be a trickle down effect like you said, and maybe those runs saved come in Badenhop mop up work when we're already up/down 5 runs so the game doesn't matter. A RP would not make this team go from 87 to 92 wins.

There was no chance we were going to get production out of 3B the second EB won that job. There was nothing in our farm system. They were going to stick with him for months, unlike relievers who we routinely shuffle up and down. If they had got a league average .740+ OPS hitter or whatever right away, we'd have scored 30-40 runs more runs last season giving a much larger net effect to the team. Let alone, if the guy could play defense and that would have produced even more to our run differential. Let alone, if they got someone who was good. That would have made a lasting impact onto the team immediately.

I mean, this isn't even close.

[Bobbob1313]

Yeah, Lou said it.

If you want to bitch about them not making an addition, it's 3B and then a 180 inning league average SP. A bullpen arm is not a make or break kind of move.

[lou]

Too add Urbina, who at the time was an above average closer, it was going to cost us Gonzalez or Stokes. Goes back to my point about spending money ahead of time to save ourselves the expense at the minor league level come the trade deadline. Granted, no one expected us to win 91 games in 2003.

This isn't a strong argument because the counter of this is, the Marlins don't go anywhere without Chad Fox either and he was basically free. Yea, spending on RP can work out and cool. But you can get productive ones from nowhere. Urbina was a special case not the norm here.

Also, considering how Beinfest makes RP awesome for bursts (Gardner, Miller, Nelson, Waecther, Sanches), I'd say this is even less of a concern with his track record. Is anyone going to be shocked if McClung or MacDougal throw 70 awesome innings this year?

[Bobbob1313]

Going into last season the bullpen, and specifically the closer's role was our biggest question mark. We were content with the line-up and ok with the rotation because of the Big Three. To say the bullpen was our third biggest weakness is playing the result.

I would have taken my pick of Arthur Rhodes, Takashi Saito, Jeremy Affeldt and maybe even a Doug Brocail or Russ Springer.

Not all closers, but all have a history of being successful and an extra arm none the less. The only guy on that list that would have been a major gamble was Affeldt.

I think most people were far, far more content with Matt Lindstrom as the closer than Emilio Bonifacio. I don't think there was ever a point in time when we expected less from our closer than from our 3B.


Remember everyone bitching that we didn't want to give Joe Nelson 900k last year? We made the right move. Not spending money on relievers when you don't have the payroll (for whatever reason) is the right move. Relievers, unless they are elite, are pretty much a crap shoot.

[Party]

I love how lou and bob keep beating this dead horse of which move would have been more important when I am not arguing with that at all.
--------------------

I think most people were far, far more content with Matt Lindstrom as the closer than Emilio Bonifacio. I don't think there was ever a point in time when we expected less from our closer than from our 3B.

Remember everyone bitching that we didn't want to give Joe Nelson 900k last year? We made the right move. Not spending money on relievers when you don't have the payroll (for whatever reason) is the right move. Relievers, unless they are elite, are pretty much a crap shoot.

That is like comparing spoiled milk and gasoline. Third base wasn't a question mark it was a hole and that falls on the front office. We knew what it was going to be and were waiting for the FO to pull the plug before the season even started.
--------------------

Not spending money on relievers when you don't have the payroll (for whatever reason) is the right move.

If that reason is the Marlins reason, then yeah don't demand a playoff spot and blame it on the manager when it doesn't happen. Pretty sure that was my original point, but go ahead and argue why third base would have been more important than having a reliever so I can post a fourth time I'm not arguing that.

[Bobbob1313]

You said that if we had spent money on a closer we would have made the playoffs. This means you think that was the biggest thing keeping us out of the playoffs.

Given what you know about this team and how they spend money, there's no reason to think that a reliever was the best way to spend that money. You made the point that they "have" more money than they spend. That's not the point. They spend what they spend, regardless of what the holes are.

If they were to have spent money, a relief pitcher should have been the third thing they got after a SP and a 3B. Those two things absolutely kept us out of the playoffs more than a RP. You're talking ~350-400 ABs or 180 IPs from starter vs 60 from a reliever (Or in Rhodes' case, 40)

The bullpen was not the biggest concern going into the season. I don't see how anyone could say we were one reliever away from making the playoffs.

Also, we outperformed our pythag. record last year. Does the bullpen get no credit for this?

[Party]

My original post may have been an exaggeration to make a point about our inability to find the purse strings when it matters.

I forgot how you can get with verbose language.
--------------------
But yeah, the lack of bullpen depth was a factor in keeping us out of the playoffs.
--------------------

Also, we outperformed our pythag. record last year. Does the bullpen get no credit for this?

Sure, the offense in walk-off situations deserves credit for this too.

[Bobbob1313]

But yeah, the lack of bullpen depth was a factor in keeping us out of the playoffs.

A factor?

Sure.

"The bullpen", however, is not "a reliever", unless you think one $3 mil pitcher is the magical elixir.

Also, we finished 12th in the majors in bullpen ERA. 4 of the 11 teams that made the playoffs finished with a worse bullpen than us last season. Our pen was not that bad.

And it wasn't just our lack of "clutch" pitching in the pen, because the Dodgers led the league in Bullpen ERA last year but also had more blown saves than us and they made the playoffs.

[Beef]

Also, we finished 12th in the majors in bullpen ERA. 4 of the 11 teams that made the playoffs finished with a worse bullpen than us last season. Our pen was not that bad.

My head had an explosion

[Ralph]

Anyways I'd say Fredi has been on the hotseat ever since the Valentine courtship.