Could Orioles trade Jim Johnson for Porcello?

[SteveO]

But even if Porcello never improves from where he is right now, the pitcher he is today is clearly better than the pitcher Britton, Matusz or Arrieta are today. The argument for not trading for Porcello is that surely one of those guys will step up and be a reliable starter. Maybe, maybe not. Maybe Arrieta steps up and Gonzalez falls apart. Maybe somebody gets hurt and we're short on starters again. Or maybe by getting Porcello you allow these other guys to move to the bullpen, where they can be more effective. That's the argument for trading for Porcello.

I guess my feeling is that Porcello does not offer enough to make it worth trading a guy who saved 50 games and was a key reason why this team made the post season. have we all forgotten Kevin Gregg and the rest of the flunkies before him who could not hold down the role till JJ came and made it his? There is not another reliever on this team that I can say would do the job as good or better than JJ with any level of certainty. There are more guys on this team (Matusz, Britton, Arrieta, Johnson etc) who I think could potentially give you what Porcello has produced than their are guys who could give you what JJ did last year.

[crawjo]

If you are talking about saving 51 of 54 games, then even Johnson is highly unlikely to do that. If you mean being a very good reliever over being a solid #4 starter, I'd say we have more guys who could be solid relievers than solid #4 starters.

This. And as I pointed out earlier, the Orioles have actually gone through quite a number of successful closers in recent years--B.J. Ryan, Chris Ray, George Sherrill, Koji Uehara, and now Jim Johnson. I think people are overestimating how hard it is to find a good closer and underestimating how hard it is to find a dependable starter.

Also, every time someone in this thread cites Johnson's save total from last year, my eyes glaze over. I really, really don't care about his save total. The list is long of ordinary closers who have compiled a lot of saves in a single season. It's not hard to do if you are the closer for a team that plays a lot of close games.

[Norfolk orioles]

Just out of curiosity, without going to their boards and looking it up, what do you think Tigers fans reaction is to getting an all-star, elite caliber pitcher for their 5th or 6th best starter?

Do you think they are against it or for it?

Don't cheat!

[Il BuonO]

Just out of curiosity, without going to their boards and looking it up, what do you think Tigers fans reaction is to getting an all-star, elite caliber pitcher for their 5th or 6th best starter?

Do you think they are against it or for it?

Don't cheat!

I would think since they don't have a closer they would be ecstatic.

[Norfolk orioles]

Btw, maybe we should just trade Johnson and sign this guy to close instead!

And yeah, before the usual suspects lose their minds, it's a joke and I realize its a balk ha ha

[DrungoHazewood]

Just out of curiosity, without going to their boards and looking it up, what do you think Tigers fans reaction is to getting an all-star, elite caliber pitcher for their 5th or 6th best starter?

Do you think they are against it or for it?

Don't cheat!

I'm sure they're split, like us. Because there are some folks who still think "closer" has some magic associated with it. But most fans realize that relievers are inconsistent and only the very best approach the value of a middling starter.

[Norfolk orioles]

I'm sure they're split, like us. Because there are some folks who still think "closer" has some magic associated with it. But most fans realize that relievers are inconsistent and only the very best approach the value of a middling starter.

You state that like its a solid fact when that is simply nothing more than your opinion and the opinion of some other very silly people. There is nothing magical about being a closer, it just takes nerves and a backbone. It's why a guy can pitch awesome as a middle reliever and get moved to closer and struggle mightily (and there are plenty examples of this happening).

Pressure busts pipes, and there is usually much more pressure on a closer to end the game than there is middle relief because at least middle relievers can tell themselves "hey , if I give it up here, they have a few more innings to get it back".

Closers are usually only used in tight ball games, with a 3 run lead or less and if they are on the road, have the potential to give up a walk off.

Jim Johnson was 25/26 in 1 run, pressure filled games last year. I'd take a guy like that over a middle of the road (and that's being generous) 5th starter with an inability to miss bats in Camden yards.

Again, your opinion isn't fact even though you continually state it as such. It's simply a more analytical approach to trying to find out what's the best answer, but it absolutely is NOT always right.

[SteveO]

If you are talking about saving 51 of 54 games, then even Johnson is highly unlikely to do that. If you mean being a very good reliever over being a solid #4 starter, I'd say we have more guys who could be solid relievers than solid #4 starters.

Really? Have to disagree. First off Johnson is not just a reliever he is a closer and pretty good at it so far. I am not sure there is another guy on this staff that I trust with that role right now. Seems to me that he bullpen was very successful last year, I am not a big fan of discarding what is PROVEN to work in favor of what might work possibly if things go well lol. If you trade Johnson then multiple guys are filling different roles. Someone becomes closer, someone else takes setup etc. Lot of things that can go wrong there. Rick Porcello has not shown he is worth that risk IMO.

Last but now least I think calling Porcello a solid #4 is being slightly generous. 10-12 with a 4.59 ERA and a WHIP of 1.53 are not awe inspiring and really not the kind of numbers that I trade a guy who saved 50 games for. Far as Porcello's upside, if the Tigers were willing to go out and spend a nice chunk of change to keep Annibel Sanchez, that should tell you a little something about how likely the Tigers feel it is he will ever reach it. If the Tigers were willing to trade Porcello for say a bullpen arm and maybe a so-so prospect like Avery etc then maybe I am interested. Trading a guy who just saved 51/54 for him is just plain goofy IMO.

[SteveO]

Just to be clear by bullpen arm I am talking about a guy like Hunter, Ayala or minor league bullpen arm etc. Not Strop, O'Day, JJ

[glenn__davis]

I'm sure they're split, like us. Because there are some folks who still think "closer" has some magic associated with it. But most fans realize that relievers are inconsistent and only the very best approach the value of a middling starter.

To say that "relievers are inconsistent" is a pretty simplistic and "broad-brushed" way of looking at things. Yes, many relievers' performances are volatile from year to year. But that inconsistency is what separates the guys making 1-2MM from the guys making 10-15MM. Mariano Rivera sure isn't inconsistent. Trevor Hoffman wasn't inconsistent. Neither are Craig Kimbrel or the best closers of today.

Jim Johnson isn't at those guys' level, but he's been pretty darn consistent as a bullpen guy. If the term "closer" if too associative of those ignorant masses of baseball fans for you, fine, use the term "relief ace". But there's significant value in the consistency of those guys.

At let's not ignore the human element here. I firmly believe that a big reason why the O's had so many late-inning comebacks is because the team knew that JJ would come in and shut the door.

I'd think long and hard about trading Johnson for Porcello. I like Porcello, and he definitely brings value. I ultimately don't think I'd do it, because the risk of having another closer blow up isn't one I'm thrilled to take.

[Barnaby Graves]

To say that "relievers are inconsistent" is a pretty simplistic and "broad-brushed" way of looking at things. Yes, many relievers' performances are volatile from year to year. But that inconsistency is what separates the guys making 1-2MM from the guys making 10-15MM. Mariano Rivera sure isn't inconsistent. Trevor Hoffman wasn't inconsistent. Neither are Craig Kimbrel or the best closers of today.

Jim Johnson isn't at those guys' level, but he's been pretty darn consistent as a bullpen guy. If the term "closer" if too associative of those ignorant masses of baseball fans for you, fine, use the term "relief ace". But there's significant value in the consistency of those guys.

At let's not ignore the human element here. I firmly believe that a big reason why the O's had so many late-inning comebacks is because the team knew that JJ would come in and shut the door.

I'd think long and hard about trading Johnson for Porcello. I like Porcello, and he definitely brings value. I ultimately don't think I'd do it, because the risk of having another closer blow up isn't one I'm thrilled to take.

He blew up twice when it mattered more than any time in the last 15 years.

[Ruzious]

Btw, maybe we should just trade Johnson and sign this guy to close instead!

And yeah, before the usual suspects lose their minds, it's a joke and I realize its a balk ha ha

That was an awesome balk.

[Stotle]

I'm sure they're split, like us. Because there are some folks who still think "closer" has some magic associated with it. But most fans realize that relievers are inconsistent and only the very best approach the value of a middling starter.

I generally agree with the second half of your statement, but front office studies show there is something to the "closer mentality", and certain pitchers are not equipped to close.

[Frobby]

I think if you are an independent third party, Porcello > JJ.

The equation isn't that simple, IMO. Yeah, if I was starting a team from scratch I'd rather have four years of Porcello than two years of JJ. But I'm not starting a team from scratch, I'm considering the needs of the Baltimore Orioles. And by that measure, I think we need JJ more than a guy like Porcello, and I will worry about 2015 (when JJ could be gone or super-expensive) when the time comes.

[glenn__davis]

He blew up twice when it mattered more than any time in the last 15 years.

And if he hadn't done his job so well throughout the entire rest of the season, we wouldn't even have been there.

I don't consider Game 3 a blow-up. He left one pitch up to a streaky hitter who was red hot. Hot guys hit HRs. It happens. I thought his performance in the Texas game, in which he gave up no runs but loaded the bases, was worse.