Phillies

Transactions & Such

Winter leagues

Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Beerleaguer for breakfast: Most improved player poll | Main | Poll: Phillies change the mix with several newcomers »

Monday, January 11, 2010

Comments

got to go Mathesion, in the bullpen.

Can "None of the Above" be an answer?

If I had to choose for this year, then I guess Escalona?

I went with Bastardo because he seems to have the most talent and (I think) he already has a defined spot in the bullpen?

I think Mathesion will have a nice year in the BP. He throws hard and Charley will onlky use him for an inning at a time to keep him healthy (hopefully). Heck, he could even turn into our closer if Lidge has troubles again.

I went with Kyle Drabek...


What do you mean he's no longer a Phillie...crap.


Mathieson.

"if Lidge has troubles again."

hah! "if".

A-Train: Whoaaa. I think you shouldn't count the eggs before they hatch.

Mathieson only pitched 32.1 innings in 22 games last year between Reading/Clearwater/Gulf Coast League to the tune of a 0.84.

Nice? Yes. Reason to think he can possibly contribute let alone CLOSE for us? No.

It is most likely he would be better than Lidge so I don't see why he could not "close".

Being better than Lidge does not mean one can close...just ask Ryan Madson.

euph.: Really? Wow. I really think you are eithier A.) a Troll or B.) Have no clue about baseball.

What about Scott Mathieson, a career long Clearwater/Reading Phillie pitcher makes you think he can all of a sudden step in and pitch?

Also, what about Lidge was hurt all last year, therefore the reason he struggled don't you grasp? His mechanics were off, his delivery timing was off, and he was "throwing" instead of "pitching" due to his injury.

I will take Lidge over Mathieson any day of the week.

There's a less than 1% chance of Mathieson closing this year. It would require 7 bullpen injuries.

I think the guy has a chance to make an impact in the pen this year, but I believe Bastardo has a greater chance of making an impact as our 2nd lefty.

NEPP: If Madson had about 25 DITHL looks last season, imagine what it would be for Mathieson (should he get to the show).

I'm not the one saying Mathieson will be a closer. I think he'll be an okay middle innings guy and maybe end up taking some of the load off Madson by having Ryan not appear in meaningless games.


If Mathieson is closing for us in 2010, some serious crap occurred with the rest of the bullpen.

Oh ok. I semi-agree with you about Mathieson. But I think for Mathieson to be part of the bullpen in the first place, about 5 other things need to happen. Starting with Moyer hanging it up.

I think this is the year that Tyler Green blossoms.

The only reason Lidge was even on the roster is because the FO f'ed up and gave him a enormous contract.

If they had looked at stats once in awhile maybe they would have seen that contract was a bad idea.

Lidge was worse that Replacement level last year. Think how bad that is.

***Oh ok. I semi-agree with you about Mathieson. But I think for Mathieson to be part of the bullpen in the first place, about 5 other things need to happen. Starting with Moyer hanging it up.***

All it takes is Moyer not being ready for the regular season and KK making the rotation as the 5th starter. At that point, he's the likely inhouse candidate for the final spot. I doubt they'd give it to Carpenter or Escalona (as we'd already have Bastardo as the 2nd lefty...no need for 3 LOOGYs)

mvptommyd: On the prior thread you said saves are a poor indicator of how a reliever did. I agree. For one thing, the saves rule has changed several times over the years. For another, you cannot compare today's 1-inning closer with the 3-inning closers of the 1970s and 1980s, who had way more blown saves because there are way more chances to blow one in the final 3 innings than in the final 1.

However, you said ERA is the best way to measure a reliever's performance and I disagree with that too for this reason: Many relievers pitcher 50-65 IP. If they have 3 bad games (out of 50 or 60) their ERA can be wrecked.

To really judge a reliever's season you have to look at game by game. How many games did he give up runs? How many games did he protect a lead?

Over a period of several seasons, however, I think ERA does become a good yardstick for bullpen guys. But for one season, it can be very misleading.

I'm not saying Mathieson should close, I'm saying that he'd likely be better than Lidge at it.

Which really isn't saying much considering Lidge was one of the worst pitchers in MLB last year.

I think "Inherited Runs" is the best measure of a reliever in a lot of cases.

"The only reason Lidge was even on the roster is because the FO f'ed up and gave him a enormous contract."

Wow, just wow. The reason he was on the roster is because in 2008 he basically won us a World Series! The guy had 7 freaking saves and a 0.96 ERA.

Also, my memory might be a little foggy but didn't Lidge save 3 HUGE games and win 1 for us in the playoffs last year?

Just checking. Thanks.

Well if you are going to overvalue saves, past performance and relief pitchers, then I can see how you would over value Lidge.

clout: Ok, thanks for clearing my statement up. I agree. For one season, it has to be a game-by-game basis. For multiple seasons, go to ERA.

NEPP: Good point on Mathieson over Carpenter/Escalona. I didn't take time to think about that.

I don't know what to say. I'm speechless.

clout just posted something in response to mvptommyd that didn't sound at all snide or insulting.

Is singing kumbaya next?

;-)

And anyway, Romero and Madson were both more important in the 2008 WS.

"Well if you are going to overvalue saves, past performance and relief pitchers,"

Who is overvaluing past performances and relief pitchers?

Simply look as the guys playoff game log from 2008 and 2009. He earned his spot on the roster due to his playoff performances in 2008 and showed again what he can do in the playoffs in 2009.

Also, Romero and Madson were good to us in 2008. Your right, BUT as we saw in 2009, the 9th inning is a whole different beast that not everyone can handle.

Voted for Matheison. Seems to have too much talent to not have 0 impact on this team. And since 0 is all he's given, he's got a lot of room to improve.

Voted for Hamels in last poll. A lot of people said his 08 and 09 skill stats are similiar. That may be true, but the majority of the problems I saw in Hamels was his inability to put away hitters. Not necessarily striking them out, but getting hitters to hit his pitch. there were countless times that batters(and a lot of times subpar batters) were able to stay alive by fouling pitches off and getting into better situations.

I was told on good authority that Ryan Madson was the next Mo Rivera...

yeah sure Lidge earned a spot to start 2009 but there is no reason he should have been on the roster in August and September and October.

Whatever. He is going to be "the closer" for 2 more years because the Phillies FO screwed up. Hopefully the rest of the team will be good enough to over come him.

Your right, BUT as we saw in 2009, the 9th inning is a whole different beast that not everyone can handle.

Yeah, Lidge could not handle it.

That is my point.

denny b - Nah. Return of Pat Combs.

clout: you're idea of looking at % of appearences w/ runs is a great idea. Ever since you mentioned it last year I have always taken a look when evaluating relievers. Im surprised a site hasn't(or has without me knowing) made that a sortable stat.

Giving up 5 runs in 2 appearences and 0 runs in 18 others is more valuable than someone who gives up a run in 10 appearences and 0 runs in another 10 - even tho both would have a 4.50 ERA in 20IPs.


" % of appearences w/ runs"

Or look for guys with low HR/9, low BB, high K and low BABIP. Which is about the same thing.

euph: Lidge's 2009 season was bad. If he comes back in 2010 with another outstanding year, dont you think that calling the contract a 'mistake' is way too premature?

I voted for Bastardo because I really want to see his fan club in the right field stands: The Filthy Bastardos.

euphronius: I'm not sure looking at BABIP can tell you anything predictive since that's largely out of their control. A pitcher with a better GB ratio likely has a better BABIP, but BABIP can fluctuate greatly from year to year.

BABIP can fluctuate sure, and is the least "important stat" of those I put up there.

I should probably have not included it.

euph: Lidge's 2009 season was bad. If he comes back in 2010 with another outstanding year, dont you think that calling the contract a 'mistake' is way too premature?

I know it is entirely possible he could learn a new pitch (how about a cutter?) or have a ridiculously lucky year like 2008.

But as I sit here now I don't see how an oft-injured pitcher with years of steadily declining skill stats is going to suddenly become good again.

Even if he did turn it around some I doubt he would be worth 12 million guaranteed. That is a s... load of money for reliever.

euphronius: I would include WHIP. The number of baserunners a reliever allows is probably as important as anything else.

Well, he's alternated good year, bad year for the last several years and he played hurt all last season. Its pretty plausible he could have a better year in 2010...and then reinjure his knee in another WS victory pile and suck in 2011.

I mean the best of the best relievers have WARs of 2 tops and the best starters and position players have WARs of 7 or 8. Hard to believe they are paying him 12 million for the upside of a 2 war (even though he had a negative WAR last year).

Yeah but WHIP includes BABIP.

but also there are other problems with LH/RH specialists like Romero who have inflated BB/9s because the pitch around people.

An elite closer can have a WAR around 3 (think Rivera in his prime). A WAR of 2 is considered very very good out of a closer.

BABIP isn't a statistic measuring performance, it is a predictor of success much like K/9, BB/9, etc. Telling someone that "Player X posted a BABIP of .234 in 2009" doesn't tell you anything about that player's actual year.

yeah you are right with 3 instead of 2. Sorry.

NEPP: "Telling someone that "Player X posted a BABIP of .234 in 2009" doesn't tell you anything about that player's actual year."

I disagree. While it doesn't tell you anything about how good the pitcher is by itself, what it DOES tell you is that his other stats like WHIP and ERA were probably fluky, and will be worse next year.
A great example is Brandon Lyon. If you don't know that BABIP exists, then you pay him based on his 2.86 ERA from last year, because you don't recognize that his luckily low .229 BABIP is skewing that.

Brian G: Right... BABIP can tell you something looking backward, but not nearly as much about looking forward. It's hard to look at any player's BABIP and say, "He had a low BABIP so he'll have a good year next year."

"A great example is Brandon Lyon. If you don't know that BABIP exists, then you pay him based on his 2.86 ERA from last year, because you don't recognize that his luckily low .229 BABIP is skewing that. "

Ruben wanted to give Lyon a lot of money don't you know.

Good thing the Phillies don't look at stats.

"Brian G: Right... BABIP can tell you something looking backward, but not nearly as much about looking forward. It's hard to look at any player's BABIP and say, "He had a low BABIP so he'll have a good year next year.""

No but you can say "he had a abnormally low HR/9, only 1.8 K/BB, a high 80% strand rate and a .222 Babip. He will probably not be "as good" next year.

euph: Lidge's career line:

122ERA+, 1.268 WHIP, 12.1K/9, 0.9HR/9

That includes some very good years and some very bad years, so why are you so determined that Lidge must be incredibly lucky to be a good closer?

Also you're reference to WAR values to closers is directly related to what posters were saying earlier... that the 9th inning is another beast. The reason why closer who post a WAR in the high 2s and above make $10+mil/yr is because the level of 'replacement' has be shown to be much much much less in the 9th inning with the game on the line than what your usual replacement level is.

Obviously your knowledge of DITHL needs to be expanded.

**** what it DOES tell you is that his other stats like WHIP and ERA were probably fluky, and will be worse next year.
****

Exactly...which is why its a predictive stat, not a measurement of success.

happy new year to my bl brethren (and sistren?).

early vegas line has phillies and red sox tied at second to win it all at 11 to 2 (yanks number 1 at 11 to 4). no one else really even close in the national league.

Im not impressed with the idea that some guys have the "moxie" to pitch the 9th or that the 9th is special. Lots of games are decided in the 7 or 8th. Also there are new sources for saves every year. Saves are totally overrated.

Even so, assuming DITHL effect exist, I know who had it last year more than anyone: Brad Lidge.


Don't care about Lidge's career stats at all as they include years where he was actually good.

Gary Sheffield has great career stats too but I know you could not start him in LF next year.

"Or look for guys with low HR/9, low BB, high K and low BABIP. Which is about the same thing."

And if a guy has a low ERA, that is a good sign too. You are missing the point I believe.

The positive of % of appearences w/ runs is the ability to throw out horrendous outings so they do not skew a season stat line. If a guy throws up 3 HRs in one inning, that will plague a very large portion of his HR/9 rate for the whole year.

I am not speaking for clout who probably has his own reasons for using this outlook, but my reason for liking it is that it lumps all "fail" scenarios together, instead of giving them all different magnitude. I think it is overkill to ding a guy's stats when he gives up 5 runs in a 1 run game. Once he gives up 1 run, its a "fail", so why bother adding the extra HR, BB, hits, etc. that contribute to the other 4 runs.

I would rather have a guy fail miserably rarely instead of a guy who fails moderately often. All the stats you included do not do that at all.

I mean, the Phillies of 2009 prove how overrated a "closer" is. They had literally one of the worst closers in the history of baseball and they STILL MADE THE WORLD SERIES.

How important could it be? Most games were won in innings 1-8, not bottom or top of the 9th.

Yo, new thread... with a new poll.

"Don't care about Lidge's career stats at all as they include years where he was actually good."

What!!! So you are going to pick and choose years to compare your point? So you are taking 2008 out of the mix since it was so good? You make ZERO sense.

AND....TO THE POST OF THE DAY

"I mean, the Phillies of 2009 prove how overrated a "closer" is....How important could it be? Most games were won in innings 1-8, not bottom or top of the 9th."

You are a dope.

This guy has to be a joke right?

The reason why the Phils won 90+ games and the NL East is because their division was awful and they had an incredible offense.

The reason (one of) why the Phillies made the World Series is because Brad Lidge pitched 4 scoreless innings between the NLDS and NLCS while almost every other closer in the 09 playoffs blew at least 1 game.

It sounds as though your main quarrell is with the idea of the closer role in general than it is your quarrel with Brad Lidge.

NEPP: "I think "Inherited Runs" is the best measure of a reliever in a lot of cases."

I agree. It basically boils down to doing the job you're supposed to do, whether it's stranding runners for a middle reliever or preserving the win for a closer.

Count me as the minority who voted for Big Mike!

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

SHOP CSN


Advertisements


Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG