What the A's and Cubs Have Taught Me...

[qwerty]

Your opinion is welcome.  I just don't like the fact that he doesn't perform well in most pressure situation.  Only 6 for 12 in save opportunities?  How well would he handle postseason pressure?

I believe he is right up there with hawkins as one of the lowest save percentages for a minimum 50 chances.

[hammerhead johnson]

You get sporting new? Because in one issue that said he was the third best reliever in all of baseball behind mota and farnsworth of all people. In another issue the numbers they predicted for him wer 79 innings, 12 saves, 6 blown saves, 2.27 era, 1.18 whip, and 90 strikeouts on the season.

 

What they said about him is this.

With a fastball in the mid 90's and pinpoint location, Marte has emerged as one o fthe top relievers in baseball. He saved double-digit games for the second consecutive season and limited opponents to a .185 average. Bottom line. A top set-up option, and he will get a shot at closing.

A .185 batting average allowed in 79 innings out of the pen...that is sure to get everyone's attention, throughout baseball. Just about every publication I read speculated that he would be the closer before long.

 

Who knows what happened...Marte may have been our single biggest disappointment this year when you consider all the hype that surrounded him in the offseason.

[qwerty]

A .185 batting average allowed in 79 innings out of the pen...that is sure to get everyone's attention, throughout baseball.  Just about every publication I read speculated that he would be the closer before long.

 

Who knows what happened...Marte may have been our single biggest disappointment this year when you consider all the hype that surrounded him in the offseason.

Now that you mentioned it he probally was the biggest disappointment. But we can't honestly expect him to have his era in the mid 1's or even low 2's. I know what his problem is. His his control sucked which resulted in all the homeruns he gave up (10). In the previous two season he only gave up a total of 8.

[witesoxfan]

Marte and Hawkins are very similar relievers...neither seems to handle pressure very well at all, but when put in set-up roles, the excel.

 

I think big time pressure like that gets to both those guys.

 

BTW...just an interesting tidbit. In 2001, the first year of this current streak for the Twins, they had probably the 3 hottest starters in baseball...Radke, Milton, and Mays...and they looked like they were going to take off and become a dominant team. Funny how that team didn't win the division due to its bullpen being very crappy. Also funny how that, the next year, when Romero, Hawkins, and Guardado all had huge years, the Twins won the division with ease...as they did last year...and this year, with Romero, Rincon, and Nathan, they again won the division with ease.

 

And you guys think that not having a good bullpen is not the most important thing. I will argue that the bullpen is the most important thing to a baseball team, and that if your bullpen is lights out, you'll be lights out. St. Louis won 100 games this year...think their bullpen had anything to do with it? The Sox got real hot down the stretch last year...think the fact that they had one of the better pens in the league was a factor? You can look at almost any team, and usually one of the reasons is a good bullpen.

[qwerty]

Marte and Hawkins are very similar relievers...neither seems to handle pressure very well at all, but when put in set-up roles, the excel.

 

I think big time pressure like that gets to both those guys.

 

BTW...just an interesting tidbit.  In 2001, the first year of this current streak for the Twins, they had probably the 3 hottest starters in baseball...Radke, Milton, and Mays...and they looked like they were going to take off and become a dominant team.  Funny how that team didn't win the division due to its bullpen being very crappy.  Also funny how that, the next year, when Romero, Hawkins, and Guardado all had huge years, the Twins won the division with ease...as they did last year...and this year, with Romero, Rincon, and Nathan, they again won the division with ease.

 

And you guys think that not having a good bullpen is not the most important thing.  I will argue that the bullpen is the most important thing to a baseball team, and that if your bullpen is lights out, you'll be lights out.  St. Louis won 100 games this year...think their bullpen had anything to do with it?  The Sox got real hot down the stretch last year...think the fact that they had one of the better pens in the league was a factor?  You can look at almost any team, and usually one of the reasons is a good bullpen.

I agree 100%. Like i said earlier in the thread if the expos had any offense watch out. They have one of the best bull pens in baseball and they all are very young. Their starting pitching is also capable of being pretty damn good when not all injured. But their offense on the other hand. :puke

[babybearhater]

Ha ha, thanks for the laugh.  I guess the middle of the season doesn't count?  Just 'down the stretch'.  How are those games more important?  You had injuries to aces on your staff (Cubs-Prior, A's-Hudson).  No matter which point in the season it happens, you still lose games.  Beginning, middle, end.

Houston- pettite, wade Miller

Yankees-mussina

Dodgers-Penny, Nomo, perez

Cardinals-carpenter

Angels-washburn, Sele

 

All pitcher injuries on playoff bound teams

 

WAH WAH WAH WAH, cubs fans can cry on another board. Every team has injuries, especially to their pitchers, just nobody cries like the tribune and the cubs fans. Face it, they just sucked, their bullpen sucks, their hitting is terrible, and their fans are idiots.

 

:fthecubs

[beck72]

Marte and Hawkins are very similar relievers...neither seems to handle pressure very well at all, but when put in set-up roles, the excel.

 

I think big time pressure like that gets to both those guys.

 

BTW...just an interesting tidbit.  In 2001, the first year of this current streak for the Twins, they had probably the 3 hottest starters in baseball...Radke, Milton, and Mays...and they looked like they were going to take off and become a dominant team.  Funny how that team didn't win the division due to its bullpen being very crappy.  Also funny how that, the next year, when Romero, Hawkins, and Guardado all had huge years, the Twins won the division with ease...as they did last year...and this year, with Romero, Rincon, and Nathan, they again won the division with ease.

 

And you guys think that not having a good bullpen is not the most important thing.  I will argue that the bullpen is the most important thing to a baseball team, and that if your bullpen is lights out, you'll be lights out.  St. Louis won 100 games this year...think their bullpen had anything to do with it?  The Sox got real hot down the stretch last year...think the fact that they had one of the better pens in the league was a factor?  You can look at almost any team, and usually one of the reasons is a good bullpen.

I'm another one who agrees about the need for the sox to get a dominant bullpen. Teams with great bullpens can handle injuries and poor performances from their SP's. Say a SP gets knocked around early and only lasts 3, 4 innings. A bullpen holds the other team from scoring more runs, and allows the team to get back into the game.

 

The playoff teams all have a minimum of good up to great bullpens--LA led the NL in lowest ERA, STL, Ana, Minn, NY with Flash and Rivera. Hou has the weakest and still has good arms there.

 

The sox need to upgrade here. Yet so far only 1 spot seems open. Adkins and Cotts should improve. But I don't see this pen being among the league leaders w/o filling more than 1 spot.

 

Now, if some rearranging was done, such as putting Garland in the pen, and the Sox added a closer to this mix, then the makeup of the pen would be strong.

 

BTW-I heard Hawk say that SS said he'd like to come back to the sox, even in the pen. I could see the sox sign a FA SP, have SS as the 5th starter, sign a closer or top set up man [Felix Rodriguez, and maybe Bob Wickman, Troy Percival] and put Garland in the pen. Now that would be solid

[3E8]

Houston- pettite, wade Miller

Yankees-mussina

Dodgers-Penny, Nomo, perez

Cardinals-carpenter

Angels-washburn, Sele

 

All pitcher injuries on playoff bound teams

 

WAH WAH WAH WAH, cubs fans can cry on another board.  Every team has injuries, especially to their pitchers, just nobody cries like the tribune and the cubs fans.  Face it, they just sucked, their bullpen sucks, their hitting is terrible, and their fans are idiots.

 

:fthecubs

Houston - Acquiring Carlos Beltran probably helped ease that pain.

 

Yankees - With that lineup, their starting rotation could've been 5 Juggs machines.

 

Dodgers - Penny missed what, all of two starts? The absence of Nomo's 8.25 ERA was more of an advantage. Perez? What the hell are you talking about? He had 31 starts. Buehrle had 35.

 

Cardinals - See Yankees.

 

Angels - Your only legitimate claim. Washburn and Sele aren't even that great this year, but they did miss about 20 starts combined.

[babybearhater]

Houston - Acquiring Carlos Beltran probably helped ease that pain.

 

Yankees - With that lineup, their starting rotation could've been 5 Juggs machines.

 

Dodgers - Penny missed what, all of two starts?  The absence of Nomo's 8.25 ERA was more of an advantage.  Perez?  What the hell are you talking about?  He had 31 starts.  Buehrle had 35.

 

Cardinals - See Yankees.

 

Angels - Your only legitimate claim.  Washburn and Sele aren't even that great this year, but they did miss about 20 starts combined.

 

WAH WAH WAH cubstalk is on another board. How many homeruns did the cubs hit this year?? Aquiring Nomar should have eased their pain???? But Houston lost 2 starting pitchers and aquired one player, who immediately pushed the team to a losing streak. And they dumped managers. Yet in the end, it was their bullpen and pitching along with some cluth END OF THE SEASON WINS that helped them take it. Its probably fun splitting hairs, but face it, the reason the cubs sucked was not their starting rotation being hurt. In fact Rusch was more effective than Prior and Clement.

 

And by the way Perez 15 day disabled list from July 17 through June 26. hmm seems like he was hurt to me. And penny only started 24 games, only 2 more than Kerry Wood, not to mention most of those were with FLA. He only started 3 with LA, pretty tough when he was brought it for that reason.

 

It was a nice try,but check out the facts. Bullpens win games and win playoffs, espeically wins games leading to the playoffs, which are much more imortant than the middle of the season, see: sox last year, cubs this year, oakland this year, and most of all HOUSTON.

 

heres a link so you can read something of espn.com, which would probably help you out even more on this subject.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/stor...ster&id=1890083

 

and one more for you

 

www.cubsbandwagon.com

 

 

OUT

[witesoxfan]

Yankees - With that lineup, their starting rotation could've been 5 Juggs machines.

 

Cardinals - See Yankees.

Great bullpens had a lot to do with both of these teams successes. Without Flash and Rivera in the 8th and 9th(and sometimes the 7th too), there is a chance they wouldn't have won the division...given, they still would have had a playoff berth, but you get the picture.

 

The Cards offense clicked and gelled right away...but that pen has been quite solid for them. Up and down that bullpen is solid relievers.

 

 

 

Let me just ask you this...do you think it is a coincidence that several teams with awful/shaky bullpens(Cubs, Athletics, Marlins, Giants, Indians and White Sox included) choked down the stretch and didn't make the playoffs? And do you think it was totally coincidental that almost every playoff team has atleast a solid bullpen, and in about 6 of the 8 cases, a great bullpen? Is it completely coincidental that the Twins, who had the better bullpen then us last year, won the division? And do you think it was completely coincidental that when Oakland lost a very good closer who could come in and be lights out that they started to struggle?

 

Bullpens have a huge, huge effect on teams, and if it isn't very good, you won't win. If you don't have a good bullpen, you either have to be fortunate enough to have it be just good enough, have your rotation be THE best, have an offense that shows up EVERY night, be a decent team in a s***ty division, or a little of everything to be able to make up for not having a solid pen. Almost every playoff team over the past 25 years has had a solid bullpen, at the very least.

 

 

 

 

BTW...my definition of a solid bullpen is one that comes in and gives you good innings...probably an ERA of around 3.50-4.00, a combined WHIP of around 1.20-1.30, atleast 1 guy who can get tough lefties out, and preferably two, and a good closer.

[babybearhater]

Great bullpens had a lot to do with both of these teams successes.  Without Flash and Rivera in the 8th and 9th(and sometimes the 7th too), there is a chance they wouldn't have won the division...given, they still would have had a playoff berth, but you get the picture.

 

The Cards offense clicked and gelled right away...but that pen has been quite solid for them.  Up and down that bullpen is solid relievers.

 

 

 

Let me just ask you this...do you think it is a coincidence that several teams with awful/shaky bullpens(Cubs, Athletics, Marlins, Giants, Indians and White Sox included) choked down the stretch and didn't make the playoffs?  And do you think it was totally coincidental that almost every playoff team has atleast a solid bullpen, and in about 6 of the 8 cases, a great bullpen?  Is it completely coincidental that the Twins, who had the better bullpen then us last year, won the division?  And do you think it was completely coincidental that when Oakland lost a very good closer who could come in and be lights out that they started to struggle?

 

Bullpens have a huge, huge effect on teams, and if it isn't very good, you won't win.  If you don't have a good bullpen, you either have to be fortunate enough to have it be just good enough, have your rotation be THE best, have an offense that shows up EVERY night, be a decent team in a s***ty division, or a little of everything to be able to make up for not having a solid pen.  Almost every playoff team over the past 25 years has had a solid bullpen, at the very least.

 

 

 

 

BTW...my definition of a solid bullpen is one that comes in and gives you good innings...probably an ERA of around 3.50-4.00, a combined WHIP of around 1.20-1.30, atleast 1 guy who can get tough lefties out, and preferably two, and a good closer.

my point exactly, thats why you are a HOF'ER

 

 

[jackie hayes]

As much as I agree that a good bullpen is a necessity, I still think 3E8 has a point in that the Sox should target a starter first. We just need a lot more "good innings", whether in the rotation or the bullpen. But I'd bet that we had a lot more bad innings from our fifth starters than from our bullpen.

 

The other problem is that I don't see too many good relievers coming up as fas. Except Williamson, and that depends on his health. Plus, it will be very expensive to trade for a good arm, since a lot of teams (including the Cubs) will be looking.

 

That said, I'll be disappointed if at the end of the offseason we haven't improved both areas.

[3E8]

This is my main point:

 

Every World Series winner had a great starting rotation.

 

Not every World Series winner had a great bullpen.

[witesoxfan]

This is my main point:

 

Every World Series winner had a great starting rotation.

 

Not every World Series winner had a great bullpen.

What was so great about Washburn-Ortiz-Appier in 2002? I would go as far as saying that rotation sucked ass.

 

Just so you know how I feel...I do think you need good SP in the playoffs. But you have to get to the playoffs before you can win the World Series, you know? Gotta catch the cat before you can skin it. It's a lot easier to get to the playoffs with a good bullpen then it is with a good rotation.

[3E8]

What was so great about Washburn-Ortiz-Appier in 2002?  I would go as far as saying that rotation sucked ass.

 

Just so you know how I feel...I do think you need good SP in the playoffs. But you have to get to the playoffs before you can win the World Series, you know?  Gotta catch the cat before you can skin it.  It's a lot easier to get to the playoffs with a good bullpen then it is with a good rotation.

 

All three of those pitchers had at least 14 wins AND ERA's under 4. Can any 2004 starting rotation in the majors say that for themselves? (The answer is 'no'). Lackey was 9-4 with a 3.66 ERA. I'll take Sele as fifth starter anyday. That rotation sucks ass? Come on, that's entirely not fair.

 

Also, I just can't agree with the last sentence of your statement. Are you saying a mediocre rotation+good bullpen has a better shot at the postseason than a good rotation+mediocre bullpen? I suppose it has a lot to do with the offense, wouldn't you agree?

[CWSGuy406]

 

All three of those pitchers had at least 14 wins AND ERA's under 4.  Can any 2004 starting rotation in the majors say that for themselves?  (The answer is 'no').  Lackey was 9-4 with a 3.66 ERA.  I'll take Sele as fifth starter anyday.  That rotation sucks ass?  Come on, that's entirely not fair.

 

Also, I just can't agree with the last sentence of your statement.  Are you saying a mediocre rotation+good bullpen has a better shot at the postseason than a good rotation+mediocre bullpen?  I suppose it has a lot to do with the offense, wouldn't you agree?

Well, of course it has to do with offense. Let's just say that this team we're making is like a recipe, with three ingredients (for this sake) - offense, bullpen, and rotation.

 

Ah, s***, this comparison is going no where.

 

I think what I'm trying to say is this. You need the good bullpen to get you into the playoffs. Once the playoffs hit, it totally depends - if you have a dominant rotation in the playoffs, you're pretty set - even without a good bullpen. But not many teams will even make the playoffs with - at the very least - a good bullpen.

 

This years teams seem to fit that mold:

 

-New York has Gordon and Rivera.

-Boston has Foulke - but they also have two of the more dominant pitchers, so the bullpen becomes less of a factor.

-Anahiem has a very good bullpen - with K-Rod to Percival.

-Minny with a very good bullpen, of Romero, Nathan, and the other righty who's name doesn't come to mind right now.

 

-LA - good bullpen.

-St Louis - awesome bullpen.

-Atlanta - solid bullpen.

-Houston - solid bullpen (at least, down the stretch. And Lidge is awesome.)

[3E8]

-Boston has Foulke - but they also have two of the more dominant pitchers, so the bullpen becomes less of a factor.

This is what I'm trying to say!!

 

I think you agree with me!

[The Beast]

If I were to tell you guys, that a teams with rotations of - Mulder, Zito, Hudson, Harden (His best year), Redmond, and Prior, Wood, Maddux, Zambrano, and Clement - and neither team would make the playoffs, I doubt a lot of you would believe me.

 

(OK - so that was a cheezy opening.  )

 

But anyways - what have both of these teams taught me?  That having solid rotations is not more important than having a solid bullpen.  We have four starters, right now, that can keep us close - go out, get that fifth guy (Odalis Perez should be targetted - probably the third ranked SP on the market this offseason, with arguably the best numbers) - but really, a *playoff caliber* team should have three-four guys who you can rely on late in a game.  We're halfway there - with Shingo and Marte (I'll give Marte a pass this year, considering his numbers are still pretty solid, and that he was, IMHO, overworked).  Now - we need two more pitchers in the bullpen - two reliable relievers.  We don't know what Shingo will do in year two if his stay in America, but I think he can at least provide us with a sub-four ERA.

 

I believe that if we do trade Konerko, one of the people we should be targetting as a return is a very, very good reliever.  Mota would be an excellent pickup.  I also think some guys under the radar, like Juan Cruz - someone like him - would also be a good pickup.

 

It's easier said than done, but we need at least four guys who we can rely on from the sixth-seventh inning on...

You read Money Ball with Bill James...didn't you

[CWSGuy406]

This is what I'm trying to say!!

 

I think you agree with me!

No, I don't agree with you - because they're the ONLY team in the playoffs with two dominant starters like Pedro and Schilling. It's not the norm.

 

Of course, if we had Randy Johnson and Carlos Zambrano, a good bullpen (in the playoffs) wouldn't be as important. But the fact is, we don't - we have Mark Buehrle and Freddy Garcia. Very good pitchers, but not dominant.

[CWSGuy406]

You read Money Ball with Bill James...didn't you

 

I did read Moneyball, and I liked it.

 

But that doesn't make me the total Billy Beane fanatic. I consider myself to be somewhat like Steve Stone (if I were to be a GM) - meaning, I pay attention to OBP, OPS stats like that - but I also pay attention to a guy being clutch, and unlike the Moneyball way, I think that sacrificing is a key part of baseball (not all of the time, though). Also, among other things, stuff like a guy's character and how he is in the clubhouse - intangibles like that.

 

Damn, I hope I can get into baseball when I'm older...

 

But I don't see the point of why you brought that up....?

[The Beast]

I did read Moneyball, and I liked it. 

 

But that doesn't make me the total Billy Beane fanatic.  I consider myself to be somewhat like Steve Stone (if I were to be a GM) - meaning, I pay attention to OBP, OPS stats like that - but I also pay attention to a guy being clutch, and unlike the Moneyball way, I think that sacrificing is a key part of baseball (not all of the time, though).  Also, among other things, stuff like a guy's character and how he is in the clubhouse - intangibles like that.

 

Damn, I hope I can get into baseball when I'm older...

 

But I don't see the point of why you brought that up....?

Your title of what the A's have taught me...and u mentioned the marquee pitching staff.

[Gene Honda Civic]

Bill James didn't write Moneyball. He wrote the historical baseball abstracts, and has nothing to do with Oakland. He is on the Red Sox payroll.

[CWSGuy406]

Bill James didn't write Moneyball.  He wrote the historical baseball abstracts, and has nothing to do with Oakland.  He is on the Red Sox payroll.

Michael Lewis wrote it, correct?

 

BTW - when did the BoSox hire James?

[witesoxfan]

Michael Lewis wrote it, correct?

 

BTW - when did the BoSox hire James?

Last year...around the time they hired Epstein as GM

[Gene Honda Civic]

Michael Lewis wrote it, correct?

 

BTW - when did the BoSox hire James?

I heard that James has some new defensive metric that he's been working on, and that it was the driving force behind getting Cabrera and Minkywhatshisname, but it's property of the Boston Red Sox, and no other teams will be able to get their hands on it.