Should the Reds focus be on starting pitching or the bullpen?

[ladiesbballcoach]

Looking back over the roster of the 90 Reds, their starting pitching was good, but their bullpen was phenomenal. So that got me to thinking. Our starting pitching is getting close to the way the 90 Reds were, not there yet, but not a total overhaul. But would they get more mileage out of the $$'s by trying to go out and get a Charlton, Dibble and Myers more than two more starters?

 

http://baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1990&t=CN5

 

The starters I believe were Rijo, Jackson, Browning, Armstrong and Robinson/Hammond??

 

Arroyo and Harang would fit in well there. Milton wouldn't be too bad towards the end of the rotation, especially how he threw the 2nd half of the season. One more good starter is all we need.

 

While the bullpen might need a good overhaul not seeing any that have shown anything close to the big 3 in 90.

 

To my memory, the Reds were so dominant that year because 7th, 8th and 9th innings belong to the Reds. The starters only had to go 6 good innings with the 7th being a bonus.

[STRIKE3]

QUALITY....Starting Pitching, you know me.

[ladiesbballcoach]

QUALITY....Starting Pitching, you know me.

Where do you think the strength of the Reds pitching staff in the 1990 was?

[STRIKE3]

Where do you think the strength of the Reds pitching staff in the 1990 was?

In 1990, they had Browning, Charlton, Dibble, Myers, Jackson, Rijo, etc....an excellent balance of both starters and relief corps.

 

I would imagine, you could total those names I mentioned and still be cheaper than $9 mil per season.....:sssh:

[ladiesbballcoach]

In 1990, they had Browning, Charlton, Dibble, Myers, Jackson, Rijo, etc....an excellent balance of both starters and relief corps.

I would imagine, you could total those names I mentioned and still be cheaper than $9 mil per season.....:sssh:

At 1990 rates, probably.

At 2006 rates, no way.

 

Rijo and Browning would have totaled together at today's rates.

 

Looking back at starting pitching, even in 75 and 76 they had good but not great starters and then had a great bullpen.

[STRIKE3]

At 1990 rates, probably.

At 2006 rates, no way.

 

Rijo and Browning would have totaled together at today's rates.

 

Looking back at starting pitching, even in 75 and 76 they had good but not great starters and then had a great bullpen.

I agree with the bullpen and honestly, I don't think they were the achilles heel of this year, other than closing problems but how many times, were the Reds down 3 or 4 runs, as a result of the starters.

 

Also, without looking I think they used 11-12 starter total this year, which is an alarming number. Middle relievers role, are to give a team a chance to sustain a lead or hold, not overcome the deficit....which was constantly the challenge.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Found this and thought you might find it interesting Strike3, team name, wins/losses, winning %, games back and TEAM salary

 

Pittsburgh Pirates

95 67 .586 0 $14,740,000

 

New York Mets

91 71 .562 4 $21,786,834

 

Montreal Expos

85 77 .525 10 $15,776,055

 

Philadelphia Phillies

77 85 .475 18 $14,013,500

 

Chicago Cubs

77 85 .475 18 $13,654,500

 

St. Louis Cardinals

70 92 .432 25 $19,225,834

 

West Team [Click for roster] Wins Losses WP GB Payroll

Cincinnati Reds

91 71 .562 0 $14,870,166

 

Los Angeles Dodgers

86 76 .531 5 $20,449,377

 

San Francisco Giants

85 77 .525 6 $18,804,272

 

San Diego Padres

75 87 .463 16 $16,677,834

 

Houston Astros

75 87 .463 16 $17,123,000

 

Atlanta Braves

65 97 .401 26 $10,914,834

[STRIKE3]

Interesting totals and the Reds, are in the middle to near lowest total in team salary. Historically, small markets have low salaries, as a result of fan base.

 

Pirates had a lot offense and some solid pitching. The Braves wised up and finally found solid starters. The Reds need to assemble, a solid pitching corps and to me, the first priority would be starters.

 

Excellent info LBBC....:thumb:

[ladiesbballcoach]

Interesting totals and the Reds, are in the middle to near lowest total in team salary. Historically, small markets have low salaries, as a result of fan base.

 

Pirates had a lot offense and some solid pitching. The Braves wised up and finally found solid starters. The Reds need to assemble, a solid pitching corps and to me, the first priority would be starters.

 

Excellent info LBBC....:thumb:

And thus two ways to look at it.

 

Long-term, meaning next 5-7 seasons, I agree stockpile young starters and go out and get hitters as you need.

 

But looking at an opportunity to win the division and NL NEXT YEAR, would not concentrating on the bullpen be better?

[cvillecat]

The Reds need to put together a solid starting rotation. The bull pen was worked to death due to starters not being able to finish. The only consistant man was AH.

[gametime]

The Reds need to put together a solid starting rotation. The bull pen was worked to death due to starters not being able to finish. The only consistant man was AH.

Arroyo was better than Harang on paper. More innings per start and lower ERA...

[STRIKE3]

Arroyo was better than Harang on paper. More innings per start and lower ERA...

Kept the Reds going, during most of the season.

 

Healthy arms, might help but some of the current starter options, really concern me as being consistent MLB winners.

[cvillecat]

Arroyo was better than Harang on paper. More innings per start and lower ERA...

To me Harang was the scissors, so I would take AH over "Shaggy"

[gametime]

To me Harang was the scissors

Bronson was more rock than paper...

[HammerTime]

Add Bailey to the list and get a #3 or #4 and 2 solid relievers and I like our staff a lot.