How to spend 10.8 million dollars on your bullpen

[Stotle]

I love Buck, but his achilles heel has been that he is loyal to a fault with his players.

It isn't about loyalty. And it's not Buck's responsibility to set a 25 man roster.

[MDK02]

I'm not thrilled about JJ being next years closer for any price, let alone for 10mil. Pretty ridiculous I think.

[Number5]

If you are trying to win a championship while operating on a restricted payroll, you don't get the luxury of putting 1/10th of your budget into a closer, let alone an "okay but hardly impact" arm. It's incumbent on the front office to make sure that doesn't happen and, if need be, to sell that to the manager. Buck is a very smart man -- this isn't a complicated issue.

I hear what you are saying, but I think there is also value in at least having the appearance of having all of the baseball people on the same page. I also think $10.8 million is a considerable overpayment, and I think the roughly $100 million budget is unreasonably low. However, all appearances are that is the budget that DD has to live with, and his manager clearly wants JJ. Yes, he can ho ahead and non-tender JJ, but at what cost within the organization? Given that set up guys are getting $4 and $5 million in free agency, what is a 30-year-old proven closer worth? Is a 3 or 4 million overpayment to the closer the manager wants worth the peace within the family it might bring? I don't know the answer, but that looks to me like the question DD is faced with.

[video=youtube;9RQf_QtBJag]

[oriole]

Nice, while we are at it, I bet a Stanton, Trout, Puig outfield would be pretty affordable too. And a rotation of Hernandez, Miller, Tillman, and Cole would be cheap. Championship team on a Houston sized payroll. I love it!

[Guest]

Paying Jim 10.8m this year is a joke. Get a player that can help the team win. Hunter can do what Johnson does.

[ShaneDawg85]

Paying Jim 10.8m this year is a joke. Get a player that can help the team win. Hunter can do what Johnson does.

Enough of this. Tommy Hunter has always been home run prone, and he couldn't get both sides of the plate out last season. End of story. When he's off he's just as frustrating as anything Johnson has done. Lest we forget the thread at the start of the season trying to bestow a nickname to Hunter to highlight his penchant for giving up home runs and failings.

I know everyone is on the "I despise Jim Johnson train," and I agree that's more money than I would want to spend on any reliever, help the team win? Jim Johnson has done that throughout his career, and just because he's gotten expensive doesn't change that.

[Guest]

Enough of this. Tommy Hunter has always been home run prone, and he couldn't get both sides of the plate out last season. End of story. When he's off he's just as frustrating as anything Johnson has done. Lest we forget the thread at the start of the season trying to bestow a nickname to Hunter to highlight his penchant for giving up home runs and failings.

I know everyone is on the "I despise Jim Johnson train," and I agree that's more money than I would want to spend on any reliever, help the team win? Jim Johnson has done that throughout his career, and just because he's gotten expensive doesn't change that.

You DON'T pay 10.8m to a pitch to contact closer. If Johnson had the ability to K the side then maybe he's worth it.

[Stotle]

Enough of this. Tommy Hunter has always been home run prone, and he couldn't get both sides of the plate out last season. End of story. When he's off he's just as frustrating as anything Johnson has done. Lest we forget the thread at the start of the season trying to bestow a nickname to Hunter to highlight his penchant for giving up home runs and failings.

I know everyone is on the "I despise Jim Johnson train," and I agree that's more money than I would want to spend on any reliever, help the team win? Jim Johnson has done that throughout his career, and just because he's gotten expensive doesn't change that.

The cost absolutely changes that. Jones helps the team win, but paying him an extra $10MM would make his assistance less desirable.

[El Gordo]

I haven't seen where they have paid JJ anything yet. Are people saying we should just non tender him to avoid having to? Why would they do that, and why would they announce that they were doing that? I can't believe he has no trade value, even at 10M. Why assume that because they are tendering a contract they intend to pay him 10M.

[ShaneDawg85]

The cost absolutely changes that. Jones helps the team win, but paying him an extra $10MM would make his assistance less desirable.

Cost isn't the crux of my argument, the rhetoric is. Johnson has helped this team win, and can help this team win, no matter the cost. Like I said, I don't advocate giving any reliever $10 million a year, but to say Johnson can't help this team win is ridiculous. The underlying crux of the argument is people are still pissed of about last season and the playoffs and are all of a sudden on the anyone but Johnson train. Lets face it, if Jim Johnson doesn't blow as many saves this past season, this conversation isn't as black and white as it is, and a certain contingency of people would be less inclined to see him gone.

[Stotle]

Cost isn't the crux of my argument, the rhetoric is. Johnson has helped this team win, and can help this team win, no matter the cost. Like I said, I don't advocate giving any reliever $10 million a year, but to say Johnson can't help this team win is ridiculous. The underlying crux of the argument is people are still pissed of about last season and the playoffs and are all of a sudden on the anyone but Johnson train. Lets face it, if Jim Johnson doesn't blow as many saves this past season, this conversation isn't as black and white as it is, and a certain contingency of people would be less inclined to see him gone.

I disagree. The issue is pretty black and white (though it relies on the assumption that the team cannot add significant amounts to the payroll). If BAL is around a $100MM payroll team, you simply can't spend 1/10th of it on a closer. You might have that luxury if you have enough surplus value in other areas, but BAL does not have that. For the most part, their players are paid for their production.

[TradeAngelos]

Cost isn't the crux of my argument, the rhetoric is. Johnson has helped this team win, and can help this team win, no matter the cost. Like I said, I don't advocate giving any reliever $10 million a year, but to say Johnson can't help this team win is ridiculous. The underlying crux of the argument is people are still pissed of about last season and the playoffs and are all of a sudden on the anyone but Johnson train. Lets face it, if Jim Johnson doesn't blow as many saves this past season, this conversation isn't as black and white as it is, and a certain contingency of people would be less inclined to see him gone.

Well it should be because that is what this all boils down to.

Johnson COSTS 10m, which is why he shouldn't be on the team at that COST unless he can bat 5th too and "help us win".

[Guest rochester]

My hunch is we will see a longer term contract (3 years?) signed at a (I hope, much) lower rate. I can't imagine there is a team desperate enough to trade for a $10M closer plus give up something worth value, unless the closer's name is Rivera. It'd be nice to contract Andy M out for some "percolating" on the trade market, but I digress....

[weams]

You know what I meant. Thanks for adding an informative post though.

It's true though. Some of those folks are cheap because of the fact that they are not yet to the expensive point. Some are cheap because they were a surgery away from amputation. Some were washed up and tossed aside. Some won't shave a beard. Some for various reasons. But not available so I think the exercise is moot.

[weams]

If BAL is around a $100MM payroll team, you simply can't spend 1/10th of it on a closer.

Why not, we spent a 10th of it on an aging second baseman that did not play.