I'll be glad when this kind of thinking is gone, and it's about winning at the major league level now
Consistently winning MLB teams don't throw stupid money at free agent closers. When the Astros were consistently winning, they didn't sign free agent closers. The greatest closers in MLB history were groomed from within or they were converted (failed) starters... and in some cases, they eventually became starters after getting their feet wet as closers (Wainwright/Perez). Either way, I'll never be a fan of overpaying closers... even the best closers are going to blow a handful of games like Qualls did last year.
[rquoter]Comparing top RP free agents Andrew Miller, David Robertson Spoiler Age: They're essentially the same age, as Robertson is just a month and 12 days older than Miller. It's a wash. Throws R/L: Miller's a lefty while Robertson's a righty, so if you prefer one side, this one matters. Injury history: Miller had a brief bout of soreness in spring training in 2012, otherwise he's avoided arm injuries. A foot injury caused him to miss the final 73 games in 2013, but 2014 proved he's over that. Elbow stiffness caused Robertson to spend time on the DL in 2009, but just for the minimum 15 games. He missed several weeks in 2012 with an oblique issue and was day to day in 2013 with a shoulder issue. Like Miller, he's avoided major injury in his pro career. Closing experience? Miller has none, while Robertson took over for a legend and saved 39 games last season. Run prevention: Miller posted a 2.02 ERA and 1.51 FIP last season. Since his full-time conversion to reliever (the past three seasons), he has a 2.57 ERA and 2.37 FIP. Robertson last season had a 3.08 ERA, a dip from 2.04 in 2013. The FIP totals, 2.61 in 2013 and 2.68 in 2014 line up closely with his career mark of 2.74, so that's probably the range he should remain for the time being with ERA. Preventing baserunners: Miller allowed only 33 hits and 17 walks in 62 1/3 innings last season, good for an incredible 0.80 WHIP. Robertson gave up 45 hits and 23 walks in 64 1/3 innings (1.06 WHIP). They are similar in batted ball percentages, but Miller keeps it on the ground slightly better (46.9 percent to 44.2 percent). Missing bats: Miller struck out 103 in just 62 1/3 IP (14.9 K/9) last season while Robertson punched out 96 in 64 1/3 IP (13.4 K/9). In terms of the percentage of strikes that were put in play against each, opposing hitters managed to do so just 18.2 percent of the time against Miller while Robertson's figure was almost as stellar at 20.4 percent. The league average is 29.8 percent. For even more perspective, among relievers with at least 10 innings pitched, Miller ranked second behind Brad Boxberger. Robertson was sixth, with Wade Davis, Dellin Betances and Greg Holland third, fourth and fifth, respectively. Needless to say, Miller and Robertson are elite here. Splits: No worry here, as the lefty Miller held righties to a paltry .145/.245/.202 line last season against a .163/.206/.261 line for lefties. His career splits show that he's tougher on lefties, but again, a lot of that was from his starting days and it's still not a troublesome enough divide to believe he'll start forgetting how to retire right-handed hitters. Robertson had reverse splits last season, too, as the right-hander fared much better against lefties (.157/.225/.213 slash line) than righties (.234/.317/.449). His career numbers show a similar reverse, with right-handers slashing .238/.316/.380 while lefties hit .194/.283/.267. Given that most players are worse against same-handed pitchers, I don't see this as troubling in the least. It's actually encouraging that he's better against lefties, as far as I'm concerned. Raw stuff: Based upon the eye test, both are pretty nasty. Miller's wipeout slider would give me nightmares, especially since I batted lefty. Let's take a look, most notably at the action on the strikeout of Mike Moustakas (the final out in the video): [Video at link] Miller regularly keeps this out of the zone, down, and hitters can't lay off of it. Robertson's curveball is considered one of the best in baseball, too, a devastating 12-to-6 hammer. Check it out: [Video at link] Miller throws a bit harder, with a mid-90s fourseamer (averaging 95.05 mph per brooksbaseball.net last season) compared to 92.62 (Brooks) from Robertson on his cutter. Both work with primarily their two aforementioned pitches because that's all they really need for the most part. Working off the fastball with the devastating off-speed pitch in just an inning of work is plenty. Overall, we're talking about pretty similar pitchers here in terms of effectiveness at this juncture. Miller had the better season last year unless you unreasonably overrate the save as a stat, but Robertson has the more extensive track record as a reliever. Both are exceptional at missing bats due to superb stuff. Of course, if looking to sign a closer to a four-year deal, would you want to factor in closing experience? Surely it's part of the equation for some and might tilt the scales back a bit toward Robertson. Neither player is trending badly, though Miller's definitely on the rise while Robertson just had his worst ERA since 2010, albeit flukey in some cases. Finally, Robertson will cost draft compensation due to turning down a qualifying offer while Miller won't, as he was traded midseason. So, who will be the better signing? [/rquoter]
When the Astros were winning they didn't need to throw money at elite free agent closers. They had Wagner, then Lidge.
And they happily threw lots of money at Wagner when it was needed to retain him. The Astros paid him $8MM/yr in a much lower salary environment and only got rid of him when he burned a bunch of bridges with the organization. Good teams often find their own closers from within, but they happily pay them to retain them. I'm not sure why it matters if you found him yourself or signed him later if you're paying him either way.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Blue Jays have had trade discussions with Astros on Dexter Fowler. He is a switch-hitter; Jays would like to get more left-handed.</p>— Jon Morosi (@jonmorosi) <a href="https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/539966409523331072">December 3, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Because if you developed him, you've likely already had him for 3-5 years of really affordable high production... additionally, you have a much larger sample size to know that he's worth the big deal... lastly, there's reasons to keep homegrown stars beyond just wins/losses (namely developing a brand for the franchise... I still see Wagner/Lidge jerseys at games, but I doubt I'll ever see a Feldman or Robertson jersey over the next 3 years).
Yeah, that's what I said. You could even throw Dotel in there... while he wasn't a "great" closer, he was an elite bullpen pitcher that they fell into from being a converted failed starter... and he was a key piece of the Beltran trade.
interesting. if we trade with the jays, I doubt they'll give up much if anything worth while on their mlb roster. they're going all in so it would probably would be another haul of prospects. i'd like to keep fowler unless its a deal we really cant afford to pass up, especially after seeing the story on him and springer.
I agree on the marketing/branding side of it. But outside of that, from a financial perspective, it's no different going forward if the Astros sign their own prospect Billy Wagner to a $8MM/yr deal than if they sign a free agent Billy Wagner. Either way, you're getting the same player, and in the modern scouting/media world, you'd have just as much info on him. It might be different for a lesser player whose mechanics you might want to tweak, but if you're signing Billy Wagner, you probably don't want to change anything he does.
To me, signing a player to a big deal after you've already had him for 5+ years for cheap is much different than signing a free agent to his first big money deal. You're still coming out on top for the overall duration of his career, in terms of value based production... whereas you'd only be getting the high priced diminishing returns from the free agent (not to mention, the very likely probability that he's already had the best years in baseball he's going to have... like most free agents).
Could care less about who had him the last 5+ years I'm worried about 2015 and beyond, I don't want to continue to suck You can continue to worry about jimbos money if you want, what I care about is the team moving forward. It makes absolutely zero difference if it is a guy who WE have had the last 5 years cheaply, or if it is a guy another team has had the last 5 years cheaply...what matters is how they do from 2015 moving forward It's not ok to continue to suck . . maybe to you and a few others it might be, but to a majority of the fan base . . it's not ok
If they traded Fowler for Norris or Sanchez and there wasn't another corresponding move, I'd be pretty upset that they were again wiling to sacrifice the present for more prospects hoarding. If they used the savings to sign a $10m+ position player like Headley I'd be okay with it.
