I'm not sure how many of these games the Astros ultimately lost or if these are all 9th inning saves, but ESPN says the Astros blew 26 saves last year (leading MLB): http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/team/_/stat/pitching/sort/blownSaves/type/expanded/order/true Assuming the Astros still won some of those games and that several were blown before the 9th inning, an elite closer could still be an 8-10 win improvement. I think they'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere else to spend $13MM on that would accomplish that, especially with the way salaries are escalating. And if they hope to make next year the year they are trying to move into potential wild card contention, now might be the time to finally end the bullpen revolving door.
First of all, no elite closer (whether they are cheap or highly paid) is going to save every single 9th inning save opportunity, nor are they going to even get the ball every 9th inning save opportunity. And yes, the vast majority of those 26 blown saves were either not in the 9th inning or was still during the time where Porter was experimenting with his closers (and experimenting badly). Secondly, the vast majority of teams with extended success in this era have developed their closers from within (in some cases, teams like St. Louis and the Rangers eventually transitioned their closers into starters)... combining the glutton of young arms the Astros have in the minors both as possible starters and most likely relievers, theres a strong possibility they'd run into a guy that could close games at a high level. I'd re-appropriate that $40 million dollars to another starter or sweeten Springer's extension offer.
Completely agree. The rebuild has been going on so long that some fans no longer think about winning now, it's all about the younguns and just keep building "the system" We really really need a solid closer, and there are no in house candidates ready at all
Completely agree, the winning at the mlb level has to start now. Even with the great improvement last year, thinking in normal terms...we were still awful Continue to put money and resources into the farm, but spend some dang money on making the mlb team better too, and now!
Billy Wagner and Brad Lidge would scoff at your assessment of when a player can be "ready" to be a closer. Either they have the stuff that's effective in the late innings, or they don't... and you don't know about the mental aspect till they're actually put into the situation. Again, I'd consider letting Appel close as his "residency" to MLB pitching, much like Wainwright broke in with the Cardinals. I'd also consider Folty if he can get that second pitch improved along with improving some of that control. Worst comes to worst, you still have Fields/Sipp/Qualls who did start to put together some consistent outings once this team was getting more than one save opportunity/week.
1) They aren't gonna make Appel a closer, so really that's not worth discussing 2) Folty gave up runs in 6 of 16 outings. I love his potential, but I don't love going into next season with him as our closer and just "hoping" it works out 3) I'm not in to worst comes to worst anymore, so no thanks on that group. This is where we differ, you seem to be ok with another year or two of just taking whatever we get and being happy that we have a great farm system. I go to a LOT of games at MMP, i'm a fan of the HOUSTON Astros, i'm ready for us to try and win in HOUSTON again. I also don't really care if jimbo spends $39 million of his dollars, if it gives us a chance to be better, i'm thinking ole jimbo can get by without $39 million more profit
Wainwright was made the closer when Luhnow was running their farm.... if the rotation is shored up, and he's got little to nothing to improve at AAA, its not unprecedented to promote him within that role. Folty's debut was essentially a waste of time with appearances once every 5-6 games... there was no plan there. What's his role for next year? If its the same thing, they might as well send him back to AAA. Once Fields/Sipp/Qualls got their roles defined, they were all pretty darn good.... bringing in a high priced closer doesn't necessarily yield that many more wins/saves/improvement simply because they're high priced. Sure, in an ideal world, they should have a big-name salary guy at every important position... but we know they won't, and we also know there are guys they need to lock into extensions (Springer, Fowler) that mean more to this club (short term and long term) than the closer.
Exactly. It's not as if "a team in our current state shouldn't be allocating funds like this to a closer/closers are a luxury for good teams" are things that have never crossed the minds of the nerds in our front office. These aren't novel thoughts, folks. If you have heard those adages, I guarantee you the Astros executives are aware of them as well. It's ok to trust them implicitly on this one. It's safe to assume that they aren't going to shell out this money on him at the expense of any future FA signings. They aren't idiots. Nobody should really give a crap how much they are spending on the guy. He improves the team, and it's a surefire sign that the FO believes we are on the precipice of contention.
That's true. But Qualls, their "good" closer, had 19 saves to 6 blown saves. Robertson last year had 39 saves to 5 blown saves. If Qualls had the same number of opportunities, that's about an additional 5 blown saves. And when you add an elite closer, then you have everyone else moving down a rung, reducing your blown saves in the 7th and 8th innings too. The Astros' bullpen was a disaster last year. They can either address it with proven talent or they hope and pray - or go with cheaper, riskier options like they tried last year with guys like Crain. If it doesn't work out, it destroys your season. That's true, but there's no particular reason it has to be that way. Every team that has sustained success also tends to have a reliable back of a bullpen. Whether you generate RPs from within or sign free agents, you still need good ones. And the great ones are ultimately do get paid. The Yankees developing Mariano Rivera saved them money for the first 5 years, but they still had to pay him for the next 15 or whatever. I agree they could probably find one in their glut of young pitching arms - but they could also put those guys in the 6th and 7th inning roles and use them to create a deeper bullpen. Having a couple of proven guys in Qualls and Robertson would make it far easier for everyone else. There's nothing that suggests any of this is mutually exclusive. The Astros have a ton of payroll flexibility at this point. A 3 year deal is not going to cripple them and unless they go on a really crazy spending spree they aren't likely to get up against any kind of payroll limits in the next year or two.
Just from a common sense standpoint this cannot be true. 8-10 wins improvement is vast. Even if the Astros trade Fowler for Trout tomorrow, that may not be an 8-10 win improvement. You are severely overestimating the number of wins adding a closer can get you, even assuming that we had the worst closers in the major last year. Add to that whether Robertson is an elite closer, and add to that how many close games we'll be in next year, and the volatility that is the closer position, and, well, sinking in big bucks at that position better be worth it.
While 8-10 might be an overestimate, I don't think you appreciate how bad our pen has been. Our pen ERA last year was 4.80, the Rockies had a 4.79 ERA, the next closest was 4.38 nearly half a run better. It's not just about how good he would be, you also have to account for the level of terrible he will be replacing. Over the last 4 years Robertson has averaged about 16 ER in 65 Innings, the scrubs he will be evicting from the pen had an ERA up around 6, which equates to about 43 runs over the same 65 innings. That's a 23 run difference which is huge over the course of a season.
They said that, but Folty's inning counts: 2011: 134 IP 2012: 152 IP 2013: 129.1 IP 2014: 121.1 IP The lowest of his 4 full seasons.
Amazing that he accomplished that. Something Rivera, Hoffman, Wagner, Kimbrel, Chapman, & Eckersley never did. Instead Brad Lidge and Jose Valverde have managed it.
Indeed he does... and even then, he wasn't going to be getting $13 million a year. I don't care if this team has a $200 million dollar payroll, and they're using $100 bills as toilet paper at MMP... unless you're resigning your own/proven elite future HOF closer... teams should develop them within. Or more importantly, build a team that has a lead after the 8th inning more often than not.... which is still not the case with this team, elite closers/bullpen or not.
To start the season, yes... when they had an inept manager who had no idea how to construct/cultivate/utilize a bullpen, yes. However, Fields/Sipp/Qualls settled into a groove, and it happened to coincide when the team started playing better to get more save opportunities. Of course, Porter still tried to save a game with Jerome Williams. I'm not saying to go into the season with just them again... but to say they're in dire need of a closer (and that going the expensive free agent route is the "best" way to get it) is being pretty narrow-minded. Nothing will ever be publicly said.... but there's ALWAYS a budget. If they spend $40 million on a closer, they're going to be reluctant to take on excess payroll via trades, they're going to be priced out of other free agents, and it could hamper the potential extension offers to pre-arb players like Springer.
If Qualls didn't blow 4 saves against Oakland, he'd have been as good as any of the FA relievers. I'm for spending money on a closer, but I'm not for spending big money and losing a draft pick on one that isn't Kimbrel (who is on a path to being the GOAT) or Chapman. I like Robertson, but I also like Andrew Miller and Sergio Romo. Using MLBTR estimates, you could sign Miller & Romo for an average annual value of $15M, compared to $13 for just Robertson. Robertson = $50M+/4 years Miller = 32M/4 years Romo = 21M/3 years Granted, I think Miller will cost more than that (4/$40M).
