Jump to content

Zach Britton - No need for a closer


brianod

Recommended Posts

Today, he was everything you want from a closer. Throwing a 99 mph fastball and unhittable sinkers. We could have signed Rodney but didn't. Great decision. Rodney looked like a Britton wanna be. If we are to add to the bullpen, it should be someone who comes very cheaply. Another setup man. We have our closer imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Based on the Rays and A's paying for closers, it may be smart to pay for a closer. Britton will become expensive in arbitration once he racks up a bunch of saves. If you pay for a closer, you have that guy in the 9th, you keep Britton in the 8th, and you push back everyone else, essentially for the same price after a few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the Rays and A's paying for closers, it may be smart to pay for a closer. Britton will become expensive in arbitration once he racks up a bunch of saves. If you pay for a closer, you have that guy in the 9th, you keep Britton in the 8th, and you push back everyone else, essentially for the same price after a few years.

So you look at Jim Johnson and Grant Balfour's seasons and come to a conclusion that we should pay for a closer like them too?? I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This entire season he's been everything you could ask for in a closer

Shutdown % leaders for 2014:

1. Huston Street - 96%

2. Glen Perkins - 89%

3. Joaquin Benoit - 88%

4. Joe Smith - 88%

5. Zach Britton - 87%

He's been one of the most reliable relievers in high pressure situations in baseball this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Britton was throwing 98 mph bowling balls to day. I will say my one reservation is the dependency on the sinker. Sinker ballers tend to lose that pitch from time to time and become very hittable. Like JJ, like Britton, like Wang, like the SP formerly known as Fausto, like Erickson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the Rays and A's paying for closers, it may be smart to pay for a closer. Britton will become expensive in arbitration once he racks up a bunch of saves. If you pay for a closer, you have that guy in the 9th, you keep Britton in the 8th, and you push back everyone else, essentially for the same price after a few years.

This is really bad logic. If Britton does the job then you have a cheap closer, when he becomes too expensive then you trade him away for assets and name another cheap closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Britton was throwing 98 mph bowling balls to day. I will say my one reservation is the dependency on the sinker. Sinker ballers tend to lose that pitch from time to time and become very hittable. Like JJ, like Britton, like Wang, like the SP formerly known as Fausto, like Erickson.

This. Zach has lost his sinker before. You can blame it on injury if you want, but sinker ballers do lose them from time to time. Look at JJ. Even when a pitcher doesn't lose a pitch, overuse gets hit, and if I recall that has also happened to Zach this year. Mariano Rivera was just nasty, and threw his pitch at an incredibly high percentage, but Zach is nowhere near that territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with most the stuff being said here.. however, I think using hindsight, we have to say not getting Rodney at least for this year was a mistake. At this point, I'd rather have Britton. On the whole (Hunter included), we have 15 blown saves on the year vs Seattle who has 6 total (only 3 have been from Britton). Not signing Rodney, at least concerning 2014, was a msitake in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • I'm 50/50. I take Spring Training results in moderation and with caveats. If it's a young player trying his hardest to make the team for the first time, I take those a little more seriously than I do veterans who are secure in their roster spot. The Vets who know they have a role already are more likely to tinker and experiment with new things in Spring Training. (I.E. a pitcher trying a new pitch, or a batter trying a new stance, etc.) As for my evaluations, it might be helpful to reveal my thoughts of last Spring Training. I thought that from how well Logan Gillaspie pitched in ST he would make the team and he did. However, I was also convinced that Lewin Diaz would be called up to the Orioles at some point because of how good he was in Spring Training, and that never happened. (Although it did for Jon Lester and Ryan O'Hearn). So it's 50/50. I've stopped trying to make predictions. I like being right more than being wrong and I'll admit when I don't have a clue about something.
    • I think a small sample size is nonetheless some sample size and from a practical standpoint it is virtually impossible to completely discount it when trying to make a judgement. I believe that is likely to extend to Mike Elias as well. 
    • I know from sooooo many spring trainings that what happens during these brief few weeks of ramp-up almost never translates into what happens during the season.  And yet, I find myself relying on what happens to justify opinions on who makes the roster and who gets sent down, opinions on how far a minor leaguer is likely to go in the long run, but also more rational (in my mind) selections of who to watch in the upcoming season, especially in the minor leagues.  I see guys drafted, then they disappear from view in Sarasota or even in the lower levels, and then even when they get to the AA and then AAA level are facing competition that may or may not be challenging them enough.  So seeing them perform in Spring Training, especially when they're set up against Major League opponents, and seeing their stats over time in these situations, really does inform me a lot, to see what might really be there.  Admittedly, I may be relying more on the eye test than stats tho.
    • If Bradish returns healthy, then he jumps up to #2 in the rotation and bumps everyone else down.
    • I think it depends on what time of the year we are talking. If It's by mid-season summer, then I think McDermott (or one of the other AAA pitching prospects) gets a call. If it's before then, I think Teheran is the #6 starting option at least until Means returns to the rotation. Although, that could very well just as easily be Suarez as much as Teheran. But I think Suarez might be looked at more for the bullpen. Until June when some of the prospects might be ready at the earliest (and prior to expecting Bradish to return), I see the starting the starting rotation pecking order to look something like this... 1.Burnes 2.Means (IL, expected to return in April)  3. Rodriguez 4. Kremer 5. Wells 6. Irvin 7. Teheran 8. Squarez 9. Zimmerman   Then when we get to June, I think McDermott jumps up above Teheran unless Teheran has been showing himself to have success. Of the minor league starting prospects, I see something along these lines... 1.McDermott 2.Povich 3.Johnson 4. Armbruester 5.Stallings
    • Who say spring training stats mean nothing and then use them in an argument whether it's for or against a certain player?
    • Better guess!   The beard and fun personality threw me off.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...