Jump to content

Let The Hot Stove Heat Up: 2015-2016 MLB Offseason


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 385
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If there was a fantasy draft at the start of every baseball season and you knew what each player was going to do, how many times would you take Trevor Hoffman in the first round?

Adam Vinatieri is probably a Hall of Fame kicker, but no kicker would be going in the first half of a fantasy draft, much less first round. Closers are the same. For a fantasy draft, your focus should be on the players that are on the field more. A closer isn't going to play anywhere near 162 games, so their value isn't as important as a first baseman or a corner outfielder.

I'm torn about modern-day closers being Hall material. On the one hand, saving games is a valuable asset, and having a pitcher be dominant in that aspect shouldn't be scoffed at. On the other, these are guys that....more often than not....just get three outs in a game and pitch 75 innings in a season. Are their stats eye-popping because of their success rate or their ability to pitch longer and due to longevity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there was a fantasy draft at the start of every baseball season and you knew what each player was going to do, how many times would you take Trevor Hoffman in the first round?

Adam Vinatieri is probably a Hall of Fame kicker, but no kicker would be going in the first half of a fantasy draft, much less first round. Closers are the same. For a fantasy draft, your focus should be on the players that are on the field more. A closer isn't going to play anywhere near 162 games, so their value isn't as important as a first baseman or a corner outfielder.

I'm torn about modern-day closers being Hall material. On the one hand, saving games is a valuable asset, and having a pitcher be dominant in that aspect shouldn't be scoffed at. On the other, these are guys that....more often than not....just get three outs in a game and pitch 75 innings in a season. Are their stats eye-popping because of their success rate or their ability to pitch longer and due to longevity?

Adam Vinatieri will probably be a HOFer because he made two big fields goals in the Super Bowl and no other reason. Also missed two field goals in Super Bowl 38 which everyone conveniently forgets about when talking how clutch he was in that game but that's neither here nor there.

My point is people say there's a lot of value to a closer, but when push comes to shove people tend to shy away from that statement. Value though by definition is a comparative word, so what does that really say about how valuable the position is if your not willing to go big or go home save for maybe 1-3 relievers in any given year?

I'm not questioning Hoffman's value as a reliever, so much as I'm questioning the value of a relief pitcher and its why my list of relief pitchers who I think are HOF worthy is only 3 and a half names long. You have to take position value into account. If you don't at some point you will put a worse player ahead of a better one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's value in having a guy that can get the last three outs in the game. Having a dominant closer...and in some extension, solid setup relievers....causes the opponent the change their game plan. The opponent's manager may pull their starting pitcher earlier than they want, pinch-run or pinch-hit a guy earlier than they want to try to avoid seeing that dominating closer. The totality of what dominant closers bring does make them pretty valuable.

Of course, there's eight innings of baseball to play out before then. A dominant closer doesn't do you much good if you're not leading after eight innings that often (this is why you saw the Braves trade away the best closer in baseball the last few years shortly before the season started).

This is why your question/statement of "Are you taking Hoffman in the first round of a fantasy draft?" is a flawed one. Your average daily players (RB's, WR's, OF's, 3B's) are instantly more valuable in fantasy sports than having the top specialty player (kickers, closers) due to sheer volume. Marcus Giles was more valuable in fantasy sports because he's getting four at-bats a game and playing every game. But no one in their right mind would ever think Giles is more Hall-worthy than Hoffman. If your belief in a player's worth in becoming a Hall of Famer is based on perceived value in fantasy games, that's a pretty lame stance to take. And one you should be ashamed of, really.

What I feel we should judge value in isn't so much the position as a whole, but the value of the position in the era in which they played. It's not quite fair to Hoffman to compare him to Goose Gossage because the games were being played out differently between then and today. The teams are constructed differently, roles to the team are different, the way games are managed were different, etc. It's fair to Hoffman to compare his worth and value to his peers that played when he did, not 20 years before then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question - how many really big games did Hoffman save? Not a lot of pressure in SD - were they even in the playoffs other than 98? He never won a cy young, and was never a "feared" closer. He was very good, and hung on forever (and had some great seasons late in his career) but at no time did I ever watch Trevor Hoffman and think I was watching a HOFer. I think most closers are way overvalued, but there are some who have proven their value by consistently coming through in the most high pressure situations. Maybe it's not his fault, but he didn't do that.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question - how many really big games did Hoffman save? Not a lot of pressure in SD - were they even in the playoffs other than 98? He never won a cy young, and was never a "feared" closer. He was very good, and hung on forever (and had some great seasons late in his career) but at no time did I ever watch Trevor Hoffman and think I was watching a HOFer. I think most closers are way overvalued, but there are some who have proven their value by consistently coming through in the most high pressure situations. Maybe it's not his fault, but he didn't do that.

I hope people don't really use that when voting. That's not to say that your point is not correct, regardless. Big games are big games in San Diego and New York. But I don't know that Hoffman has a lot of 'em. He's kinda like Jim Thome. The career numbers will probably get him in but was he really "great" or just "very good for long?"

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoffman was a damn good reliever for a number of years. If you combine his stats from '96-'98 you get a guy who had an ERA of 2.15 with 308 strikeouts over 242 innings pitched. Sounds pretty dominant to me.

But outside of saves, what makes Trevor Hoffman so much better than Keith Foulke? Or Billy Wagner? Or Joe Nathan? Which of those four is the best depends on what year you're talking about.

Hoffman's argument is essentially the same as Lee Smith's. How much you value the save is directly correlated to how great you think he was. I throw saves out when looking at relievers. When I do that Mariano still comes out way ahead of everyone and then tough call for who's second best of the three names I just mentioned and Hoffman. Personally I'd go with Nathan as the best of the bunch, but you could pick any of those four and I don't think it would make much of a diference in the win-loss column.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not talking about fantasy baseball. I'm talking building a real team, how many closers could you justify taking in round one?

To me, no closers would go in round one. I wouldn't even bother getting a closer until Round 18 (assuming it's a 25-round draft).

But I'm also of a mindset that I wouldn't go after any starting pitchers until like Round 12-13. At least with SP's, you know they're going to pitch 1/5th of the season. I'm going to worry about the roster spots where guys are going to play 150+ games and part of the bench before getting SP's that'll pitch around 33-35 games. I need the best I can get in positions/roles that get used on a near-daily basis more so than positions used every 5 days or in game-situation-dependent roles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Braves trade Andrelton Simmons to the Angels.

In entirely unrelated news, Brandon Crawford clears room on his shelf for more Gold Gloves.

That trade will also bring the Angels' top two pitching prospects (Sean Newcomb and Chris Ellis) to the Braves.

Simmons and Jose Bricena (catcher) for Erick Aybar, Newcomb and Ellis.

I can't say I'm thrilled to give up Newcomb, and I love Aybar, but I'm excited to have Simmons during what will hopefully be his prime years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say I fully understand what the Braves are doing anymore.

Heyward, Kimbrel, Justin Upton, now Simmons? How can you expect to keep trading these guys away and get better? Are they allergic to players with actual talent? Maybe they are. It would explain why their win total has gone from 96 to 79 to 67.

With the Angles, yes they just gave up arguably their two best prospects, but in return they get their starting shortstop for the next five years who if he does anything at all with the bat has the potential to be a superstar.

The biggest need of that team is still finding a bat but you have Yeonis Cespedes and Jose Bautista out there as free agents. If they can add one of those two players, they would go from a .500 team to the odds on favorites to win the AL West. Their farm system is helping them out anytime soon. Why not go for the gusto?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the Heyward and Justin deals...guys entering their final year of their contracts and the Braves very likely weren't going to even compete in free agency. Get what you can for them. Their values are higher with a full year's worth of contract left instead of two months. Their returns brought back Shelby Miller and Jace Peterson amongst MLB-ready players, and a couple other pitchers and position players a couple years away. And I believe some international pool money, too.

I got the Kimbrel deal because it served a dual purpose of shedding BJ Upton's mammoth contract. It also got the Braves a near MLB-ready pitcher in Matt Wisler, a veteran outfielder in Maybin, and a high draft pick. Having a top-notch closer doesn't do you much good if you're not leading after 8 innings very much. Having a Porsche doesn't do you much good if you're on a cruise ship.

But, I don't quite get the Simmons deal. Sure, his contract escalates each season, but if the team philosophy is to get batters on base and have strong pitching, part of that concept should include being strong defensively. Simmons' bat is frustrating, but his glove alone makes up for that. So the haul is two pitching prospects and Aybar, who I guess is an upgrade offensively. Assuming he's on the roster April 1st. (He definitely won't be on the roster on August 1st.)

They've acquired a ton of pitching prospects the last couple offseasons. That's great if they can be dealt for MLB-ready bats at some point. And it does help to have a pitching surplus, as we're seeing a growing number of arm/elbow/shoulder injuries with pitchers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.