Jump to content

Disagreeing With The Smartest Man In The Room


Can_of_corn

Recommended Posts

Everyone that has been here for a while knows that I have some rather strong views on a number of baseball topics.

I find more and more disagreeing with the moves made by one Billy Beane who is generally regarded as the most forward thinking GM out there.

1- Trading for Johnson. I understand the concept of using a rent a closer to keep the arbitration value of his bullpen core down but if Doolittle signed that extension this season then that couldn't have been the primary motivation. Johnson isn't suited for the park and was an obvious regression candidate.

2- Collecting Starters. The more I look at the flexible rosters and multiple off days of the MLB playoffs the more I think the future is in getting the ball to the pen as soon as possible and not riding a horse for the first eight innings. Starters are pricey, skittish beasts, easily damaged. And yet here we have Beane, picking up an extra #1 while sending a perfectly serviceable starter to Minnesota to reacquire someone they threw away.

3- Beane seems to think that, in a low run scoring environment that it was a good idea to trade a flawed but productive bat in order to double down on pitching. To my eyes in an environment where runs are scarce holding onto the bat is clearly the better play.

Is Beane losing his touch, or am I simply in over my head here with my crazy ideas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I can't find it now... read a MLB analysis of Beane yesterday. Basically it said right or wrong... Beane decided that when you have a contender you go all in. He ignores 2015 to go for it THIS year. When he has a chance.

Like I said, right or wrong, he's put all his chips on the table to go for it now. We'll all see how smart he is... :noidea:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get the JJ move and I don't think I ever will. But, I understand his other moves.

Millone isn't really anything special. Very Bruce Chen'ish and has struggled on the road in his career. A serviceable pitcher but easily replaceable for an organization known for developing top-tier arms.

Cespedes is more of a name than an elite offensive force. Guy for two years now has struggled to maintain a .300 OBP which is very un-Beane like. Fuld & Gomes meanwhile can draw walks while playing similar defense. Seems like a worthwhile gamble since it netted them a TOR starter.

I'm not sure why people are poo-pooing TOR in the playoffs. If you have to bring your bullpen in the 6th inning every game that usually is a sign that your starter has given up 3-4 runs already and you are likely trailing in the ballgame. Elite arms like Scherzer, Verlander, Lincecum, Sabathia, Johnson, Schilling, et al have shown the power of a shutdown starter in playoff games. Plus, its not like Beane has neglected the pen or anything. He has multiple shutdown guys back there. Elite starting rotation + Elite bullpen? Sounds better than our plan of mediocre starters + elite bullpen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't find it now... read a MLB analysis of Beane yesterday. Basically it said right or wrong... Beane decided that when you have a contender you go all in. He ignores 2015 to go for it THIS year. When he has a chance.

Like I said, right or wrong, he's put all his chips on the table to go for it now. We'll all see how smart he is... :noidea:

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/richard-justice-fearless-billy-beane-shows-hes-all-in-with-jon-lester-trade?ymd=20140731&content_id=87229658&vkey=news_mlb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone that has been here for a while knows that I have some rather strong views on a number of baseball topics.

I find more and more disagreeing with the moves made by one Billy Beane who is generally regarded as the most forward thinking GM out there.

1- Trading for Johnson. I understand the concept of using a rent a closer to keep the arbitration value of his bullpen core down but if Doolittle signed that extension this season then that couldn't have been the primary motivation. Johnson isn't suited for the park and was an obvious regression candidate.

2- Collecting Starters. The more I look at the flexible rosters and multiple off days of the MLB playoffs the more I think the future is in getting the ball to the pen as soon as possible and not riding a horse for the first eight innings. Starters are pricey, skittish beasts, easily damaged. And yet here we have Beane, picking up an extra #1 while sending a perfectly serviceable starter to Minnesota to reacquire someone they threw away.

3- Beane seems to think that, in a low run scoring environment that it was a good idea to trade a flawed but productive bat in order to double down on pitching. To my eyes in an environment where runs are scarce holding onto the bat is clearly the better play.

Is Beane losing his touch, or am I simply in over my head here with my crazy ideas?

Beane is playing Mahjong while some GM play chess and other checkers. Jack and Ruben play Go Fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get the JJ move and I don't think I ever will. But, I understand his other moves.

Millone isn't really anything special. Very Bruce Chen'ish and has struggled on the road in his career. A serviceable pitcher but easily replaceable for an organization known for developing top-tier arms.

Cespedes is more of a name than an elite offensive force. Guy for two years now has struggled to maintain a .300 OBP which is very un-Beane like. Fuld & Gomes meanwhile can draw walks while playing similar defense. Seems like a worthwhile gamble since it netted them a TOR starter.

I'm not sure why people are poo-pooing TOR in the playoffs. If you have to bring your bullpen in the 6th inning every game that usually is a sign that your starter has given up 3-4 runs already and you are likely trailing in the ballgame. Elite arms like Scherzer, Verlander, Lincecum, Sabathia, Johnson, Schilling, et al have shown the power of a shutdown starter in playoff games. Plus, its not like Beane has neglected the pen or anything. He has multiple shutdown guys back there. Elite starting rotation + Elite bullpen? Sounds better than our plan of mediocre starters + elite bullpen.

You can make a case for Fuld but Gomes is not near Cespedes level with the glove.

As for the other comment I bolded, I don't think you understand where I am coming from. I want my starters to know that they only have to make it five innings and then they will be pulled. That will be the strategy. With no need for a #5 (or in my scenario a #4) starter you will have a deeper then usual pen that will be having lots of extra rest and a chance to reload between each series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone that has been here for a while knows that I have some rather strong views on a number of baseball topics.

I find more and more disagreeing with the moves made by one Billy Beane who is generally regarded as the most forward thinking GM out there.

1- Trading for Johnson. I understand the concept of using a rent a closer to keep the arbitration value of his bullpen core down but if Doolittle signed that extension this season then that couldn't have been the primary motivation. Johnson isn't suited for the park and was an obvious regression candidate.

2- Collecting Starters. The more I look at the flexible rosters and multiple off days of the MLB playoffs the more I think the future is in getting the ball to the pen as soon as possible and not riding a horse for the first eight innings. Starters are pricey, skittish beasts, easily damaged. And yet here we have Beane, picking up an extra #1 while sending a perfectly serviceable starter to Minnesota to reacquire someone they threw away.

3- Beane seems to think that, in a low run scoring environment that it was a good idea to trade a flawed but productive bat in order to double down on pitching. To my eyes in an environment where runs are scarce holding onto the bat is clearly the better play.

Is Beane losing his touch, or am I simply in over my head here with my crazy ideas?

The Sam Fuld thing and Jim Johnson thing were both just weird and can in no way be justified with statistical analysis. A collector mentality on those items.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EXACTLY the article I meant! :high-five:

He has long said that there aren't that many times a general manager can look at his club and see a potential champion.

"When you do, you go for it," Beane has said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cespedes is Cespedes. I don't like the Sux having him but...

pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the question is, am I the one that is wrong? And if so where is the flaw in my thought process?

I am willing to accept correction.

I don't think anyone wants to play mahjong. Or soccer. Something happened out there. I have no idea what. I guess we can't answer those questions until we see how it ends up. Statistically, the current model is less than the one of 40 days ago.

The Milone and Sam Fuld fetish are the things that make me think you are right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...