Cishek Blows Another Save As Marlins Lose to Giants 2-3

[HUGG]

Trending up slightly, but not terribly significantly. http://www.brooksbaseball.net/velo.p...ate=01/01/2016

Basically the same velocity he had last season. http://www.brooksbaseball.net/velo.p...ate=01/01/2013

I don't think his pre-injury velocity is coming back.


He's definitely been wildish, as Mainge put it. His career swing % outside of the zone is 32.3% and they're only swinging at 24.2% this season. But, his strike % is the same as always.

So to me that would indicate that when he's missing, he's missing badly.

[thatnewguy]

What it tells me is that with low velocity, wild tendencies, poor strikeout numbers, and the ever popular poor eye test, it tells me that I'm not out of line by at least being skeptical. If we're in July and he's still got a 3ish FIP and a sub-3 ERA, I'm in.

[HUGG]

I mean, he pitched fine last season at this velocity and his K rate is up from last year.

We're all just guessing, really. We'll see what happens. I think he'll be fine.

[Jay]

If that's the point, every front office is stupid.

Yes because we must do what every other front office does because we're followers and they must be right.

[HUGG]

Well, we certainly don't do what every other front office does.

[Erick]

Yes because we must do what every other front office does because we're followers and they must be right.

The front office has done a lot of weird things. Paying Cishek 6+ million this year wasn't one of them. Every front office does the same thing because high-leverage relievers are not as irrelevant as you make them seem.

Maybe Cishek should be given more than 11 innings, as well.

[Mainge]

If that's the point, every front office is stupid.

You do that thing a lot. Why does what everyone else do matter? $6.6 million isn't almost 10% of other teams payrolls.

[Jay]

You do that thing a lot. Why does what everyone else do matter? $6.6 million isn't almost 10% of other teams payrolls.

Some people still haven't figured out the answer to the old question: If all your friends jumped off a bridge then would you too?

[Erick]

K. So you guys trade Cishek this offseason because you don't want to spend $6 million on a closer. Who would've closed? It's not as if the organization had a bunch of depth in the bullpen that they could've given their best arm away for prospects in a season that they're clearly trying to contend.

For some reason, I'm guessing this isn't brought up if Cishek pitches the way he had pitched the past 3 years. And again, it's 11 innings. He had a stretch like this last year, and still ended up with a 2 fWAR. I don't see why we should be upset at the organization for this. It's not as if he's been Kevin Gregg/Leo Nunez in recent years and we're paying him because he's been racking up saves. Cishek has been one of the best relievers in baseball over the past 3 years. Why trade one of those away when you're trying to contend?

[HUGG]

well, to be fair, most of us have been calling for him to be traded since last July

wouldn't really call it playing the result

[Jay]

well, to be fair, most of us have been calling for him to be traded since last July

This.
Bullpen was the one area where there was depth coming into the season. I'm fine with handing the role to someone with no major league experience as long as they have decent stuff.

[Erick]

Fair enough. Was there an alternative in the organization to take over his role? Usually when a closer is traded, there's a replacement waiting in the wings/good depth in the rest of the bullpen.

As it stands, the team is still trying to contend and Cishek is probably still the best reliever on the team, small sample not included.

- - - - - - - - - -

This.
Bullpen was the one area where there was depth coming into the season. I'm fine with handing the role to someone with no major league experience as long as they have decent stuff.

I don't see why you'd be fine with that, but I guess it's a difference of opinion.

- - - - - - - - - -

Cishek just blew another game in my face, but I still think that statistically speaking, it's difficult to fault the organization for not trading him this offseason. We also don't know what we could've gotten in return for him. To be fair, a turd sandwich would be good value for him right about now.

[nny]

I am with Erick on this. 12th best RP by fWAR from 2011-2014, 18th by rWAR. Not top-of-the-line reliever, but in the next batch.

I was pro-trading him because I felt those funds would have better better spent elsewhere and we could get a solid return before he got too expensive.

But I also had no problem keeping him. On any other team, 6.65m for a reliever like Cishek is great. And eventually you want this team to be run like a real team.

[Bobbob1313]

On nearly any other team, Cishek is a steal at $6.7 million.

But spending 10% of your payroll on a closer is not smart. As long as they insist on running the team on a shoestring budget, he's a luxury they can't afford. The team has too many holes otherwise.