Time for more projections
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 10:10 AM PST
in Research
256 comments
Last week I reviewed the Baseball Forecaster hitting projections with the promise to look at the pitching projections so here they are. Some good stuff mixed in with some surprises. Now remember when HQ does their projections they concentrate on the base skills of the pitcher and create a formula called BPV
For pitchers, our BPIs are control (bb/9), dominance (k/9), command (k/bb), opposition on base avg (OOB), ground/line/fly ratios (G/L/F) and expected ERA (xERA). Random chance is measured with hit rate (H%), strand rate (S%) and home run to fly ball ratio (hr/f).
So while Kershaw may have the best stuff on the team until he exhibits better control his BPI's are not going to extrapolate out to a break out season. Surprising to some but Hiroki Kuroda has the best BPI's in the projected rotation. A BPV of 100 or above is an elite pitcher with elite underlying skills. As an example a Chris Carpenter has a BPV of 105, while Josh Johnson has a 90. Matt Cain matches Billingsley with a 72. You may decry these numbers but until Billingsley and Kershaw drop the walk rate the raw skills they have will not match up with the peripheral numbers needed to become an elite pitcher. As you can see the ERA'f for them are still low because they miss bats and don't give up home runs so they are that close to moving from good pitchers to great pitchers if they can harness their control.
| Player | Age | TH | IP | H | ER | HR | BB | K | ERA | Ctl | Dom | Cmd | HR/9 | BPV ↓ |
| Broxton, Jonathan | 25 | R | 65 | 46 | 21 | 5 | 23 | 88 | 2.91 | 3.2 | 12.2 | 3.8 | 0.7 | 155 |
| Kuo, Hong-Chih | 28 | L | 44 | 36 | 15 | 2 | 16 | 48 | 3.07 | 3.3 | 9.8 | 3 | 0.4 | 108 |
| Kuroda, Hiroki | 34 | R | 145 | 140 | 61 | 15 | 32 | 102 | 3.79 | 2 | 6.3 | 3.2 | 0.9 | 89 |
| Lindblom, Josh | 22 | R | 29 | 29 | 15 | 2 | 8 | 22 | 4.66 | 2.5 | 6.8 | 2.8 | 0.6 | 83 |
| McDonald, James | 25 | R | 102 | 93 | 45 | 10 | 41 | 97 | 3.97 | 3.6 | 8.6 | 2.4 | 0.9 | 75 |
| Elbert, Scott | 24 | L | 87 | 77 | 39 | 9 | 39 | 86 | 4.03 | 4 | 8.9 | 2.2 | 0.9 | 74 |
| Billingsley, Chad | 25 | R | 203 | 185 | 82 | 18 | 83 | 189 | 3.64 | 3.7 | 8.4 | 2.3 | 0.8 | 72 |
| Schlichting, Travis | 25 | R | 29 | 32 | 14 | 2 | 9 | 21 | 4.34 | 2.8 | 6.5 | 2.3 | 0.6 | 68 |
| Ayala, Luis | 31 | R | 29 | 31 | 14 | 3 | 8 | 21 | 4.34 | 2.5 | 6.5 | 2.6 | 0.9 | 67 |
| Sherrill, George | 32 | L | 73 | 61 | 28 | 7 | 30 | 71 | 3.45 | 3.7 | 8.8 | 2.4 | 0.9 | 67 |
| Kershaw, Clayton | 21 | L | 203 | 166 | 77 | 16 | 97 | 209 | 3.41 | 4.3 | 9.3 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 66 |
| Wade, Cory | 26 | R | 29 | 27 | 16 | 2 | 11 | 20 | 4.97 | 3.4 | 6.2 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 62 |
| Troncoso, Ramon | 26 | R | 65 | 67 | 30 | 4 | 28 | 47 | 4.15 | 3.9 | 6.5 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 46 |
| Towers, Josh | 32 | R | 29 | 33 | 14 | 4 | 7 | 14 | 4.34 | 2.2 | 4.3 | 2 | 1.2 | 28 |
| Stults, Eric | 30 | L | 87 | 105 | 51 | 12 | 36 | 54 | 5.28 | 3.7 | 5.6 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 15 |
| Haeger, Charlie | 26 | R | 29 | 34 | 16 | 4 | 14 | 18 | 4.97 | 4.3 | 5.6 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 9 |
For an extended look at what Baseball HQ Thinks click on the jump.
Hiroki Kuroda - His injuries (an oblique strain, a liner off the noggin) weren't arm-related, and when he was out there, he saw a healthy skills bump. Another step up unlikely at age 35, but two solid years make a strong case for another.
Chad Billingsley - Unlucky 2H (s%, hr/f) made post-June dive seem worse than it was. Other rates remained strong. A viritual lock to return to a sub-4.00 ERA, and at 25, still has serious upside potential.
Clayton Kershaw - Despite sub-3.00 ERA, don't put him in class of Tommy Hanson yet. Electric Dom offset by wobbly Ctl. Touch of H% and S% support, combined with low hr/f, suggests his ERA is headed north. He'll be gem, but not yet.
Scott Elbert - 2-0, 5.03 ERA in 20 IP at LA. Dom shows the potential of a former 1st rounder, Ctl shows the refinement still needed. Cmd trend shows he's figuring it out. If he wins rotation spot, then... UP: 13 Wins, 3.50 ERA.
James McDonald - 5-5, 4.00 ERA in 63 IP at LA. Skills finally took a step in righ direction in 2H while working out of the pen. Future as a SP, and with Dom this good, he certainly belongs on your radar, if not yet on your roster.
Jonathan Broxton - Sparkling growth season all- around--Dom, GB, Opp BA-- and fully supported by sub-2.00 xERA. As long as he's able to shake the 2-time NLCS ghosts, he looks like money right now.
George Sherrill - PRO: LH don't have much of a chance vs him. Ctl rebounded. GB% improved. CON: Dom heading south. Still a FB pitcher. Verdict: '09 luck can't continue, ERA will rise toward xERA.
Okay that is all. The peripheral skills of Stults or Haeger are bad. Very bad. I will say that having looked at the projections for the other possible pitchers we could acquire only Harang (BPV of 90) would be a significant upgrade over Elbert or McDonald. As you can see they don't expect Kuroda to handle a full load so it is imperative that this team get another pitcher. Harang fits the bill as an innings eater and a skills guy. Garland is simply an innings eater. Padilla is also simply an innings eater who might have some latent skills coming back based on his 2nd half but it is quite a gamble based on what he's asking in salary.
It would seem the best move in 2010 would be to move Sherrill for Harang if we could find a why to take on the salary.
Harang - Skills aren't quite as good as they were in 2006-07, but main difference has been run support and a few more hr/f. Guy who earned $8 in '09 isn't that far of from guy who earned $24 in '06. UP: 15 wins, 3.75 ERA.
With Sherrill due to earn $4 Million in arbitration and the Dodgers not able to add salary. The goal would be to find a team with a $4 million dollar starter who needs someone who has closed in the recent past or who covets a solid left handed setup man. Only a contending team would be concerned with adding such a pitcher so it is very hard to find a match. Personally I'd flip Sherrill to the Yankee's for Chad Gaudin and a David Robertson. Robertson is better then Sherrill right now but the Yankee's may want the perceived thing in Sherrill. Gaudin is hot and cold but if you throw him out there every fifth day he will do the job as a back end of a rotation guy. Plus he was money against Colorado in Coors last year. Plus I've always liked him.
0 recs |
256 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Troncoso
With all the depth we have in the bullpen, maybe the time is right for converting Troncoso to a starting role. As it stands, our bullpen is stacked, even with the possible departure of Sherrill. The upside of turning Troncoso into a serviceable #4 or so would seem to outweigh the loss of his arm in the late innings.
by kinbote on Dec 29, 2009 10:22 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
i dont think he has the secondary pitches to be a starter..
he has a sinker but that slurve he throws is very inconsistent and gets hit hard every time he throws it in the zone… unless he develops other pitches… hes a reliever.
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Clayton Kershaw – Despite sub-3.00 ERA, don’t put him in class of Tommy Hanson yet. Electric Dom offset by wobbly Ctl. Touch of H% and S% support, combined with low hr/f, suggests his ERA is headed north. He’ll be gem, but not yet.
That’s ridiculous.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 10:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Why would you say that?
His XERA was 4.11 in 2009. Everyone talked about how lucky Matt Cain was last year, well Clayton was also very lucky. When you leave a game with people on base and they don’t score your ERA is saved but it doesn’t change the fact his strand rate (s%) of 77 was lucky last year.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Its a small sample size for Hanson, projecting Hanson to be better than Kershaw on the basis of 127 innings in the majors leagues is just bull headed.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
seriously..
dont put him in the class of hanson???
the opposite they mean
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The difference is simply control
Hanson at 3.2 and Kershaw at 4.3. Once Kershaw is able to drop his control one full walk per nine innings he can walk the talk with Hanson but until then I don’t see the two of them at the same level.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kershaw allowed 6 and a half hits per 9 innings, that is amazing. Yes defense has something to do with it, but it’s not like this was one of the top fielding teams last season, so I wouldn’t contribute most of that to his fielders helping him so much. He also struck out more than a batter per inning at 21 years old in 170 innings. Don’t try and tell me Kershaw needs to work to be at the level of Hanson, he’s already better.
Though he should work hard to get better, lol.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 10:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Dodgers were one of the top defensive teams last season. They led the majors in Defensive Efficiency, the rate at which they turned batted balls into outs.
That said, I don’t think Hanson is on some other level above Kershaw.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting, since UZR seems to consider Casey Blake the only above average defender on the Dodgers last year. Kemp sunk like a rock at the season passed.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
as was Furcal. And Pierre (in LF)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kemp was at 2.6 UZR, considering how its a range and not a definite number, I have to see that as Kemp being ranked with near the average baseline for CFs instead of clearly above it.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 10:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wasn't his UZR around 5?
I could have sworn that’s what fangraphs had him at.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow. His UZR just nose dived over the last month. I guess it’s the same as his hitting, he was just worn out.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He was up to around 11 or so
and then just kept on falling :(
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s surprising to me considering Either and Manny’s range in the outfield, but I guess Kemp covered for them a lot.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Didn’t Kershaw’s control improve over the 2nd half? There were games where he only issued one or two walks. Considering that Hanson wasn’t called up mid season, if we’re going to compare the two, it should be at the point where Hanson was called up, not using Kershaw’s full season to Hanson’s half season.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 10:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s really only a difference of 43 innings…it’s not full vs half
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You all need to remember this is a roto site, when they say don’t put Kershaw at the same level of Hanson they are not talking pitching levels they are talking dollar amounts. If you were bidding on a pitcher in 2010 they expect Hanson to outperform Kershaw by about $5 dollars worth mostly based on ERA and WHIP difference in a 5/5 league.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kershaw after June 7th (Hanson’s first game)
109.2 Innings 75 Hits 1.97 ERA 125 Ks 56 Walks .195/.297/.247 2 HR Allowed
Hanson after June 7th (obviously his first game)
127 Innings 105 Hits 2.89 ERA 116 Ks 46 Walks .225/.301/.358 10 HR Allowed
The Numbers speak for themselves in the Kershaw VS. Hanson argument.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 10:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We shall revisit
in a year when I expect you will find that Kershaws hit and home run rate will go up a tad. If not maybe he wins a Cy Young
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or Timmah wins his 3rd in a row and forces the Giants to pay him $20 million in arbitration.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Would that be better for us? I mean it’s not like he will suck next year anyway, so we’ve gotta expect another monster year from him. So if he does that maybe it makes SF trade him away.
Yeah, it’s a dream, but it would be such a great day, lol.
Then again, he’d probly go to Philly just to kill us in the playoffs…
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t expect Kershaw to be a beast with his homerun rate again, but it helps playing in Dodger Stadium (and making sure he never pitches in Houston, Colorado, or Philly, lol).
But I do fully expect him to maintain striking out a batter per inning and dropping his bb/9 inning to below 4, if not just below.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Me to
but when they do these projections they base it on the most likely expected outcome. Since Clayton has never exhibited control below 4.0 they can’t actually project it. We follow the Dodgers intently, we know that Clayton knows that control is what he needs to work on. We expect him to get better at it, the formula’s don’t. I’d be very disappointed if Clayton does not bring his control in below 4.0.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If he were to exhibit the same exact control and same strikeout numbers as 2009 in 2010
I would expect a mid to high 3 ERA and a hit more per 9 innings, but still a very fine season for a 21 year old.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Which I think
is exactly the projection. 200 innings of 3.41 ERA is good work for any age, for a 21 year old it is great. I think we got to caught up in the Hanson comment which was strictly based on roto value for 2010.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kershaw's control
had its moments as the season progressed, but outside of his shortened September (18 IP) there wasn’t a huge improvement:
Apr – 4.3 UIBB/9, 11.5% of PA
May – 5.4, 14.5%
Jun – 4.4, 11.2%
Jul – 4.3, 12.3%
Aug – 5.0, 13.1%
Sep – 3.5, 10.0%
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 10:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t put him in the class of Tommy Hanson? Well duh, he’s in a higher class….
Why is it that someone like Kershaw would be this underrated?
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 10:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Control
why are you guys missing the fact he would have led MLB in walks last year if he had not missed the time in Sept. Or that he only pitched 170 innings in 30 starts. Clayton Kershaw has the stuff to be an elite pitcher, but if you guys think he’s an elite pitcher right now with the control he showed in 2009 I think you are wearing rose colored glasses. He doesn’t get to pitch every game at home.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kershaw’s away splits are .204/.313/.317 in 2009. Does that say he can’t pitch on the road?
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The line that bothered me was “don’t put him in the class of Tommy Hanson yet.” Yes, Kershaw has control problems and yes, that caused him to leave games earlier, but he still did a lot of things better than Tommy Hanson:
K/9 – 9.74 to 8.18 for Hanson
FIP – 3.08 to 3.50
x-FIP – 3.90 to 4.03
Hanson averaged one more out per start than Kershaw. I don’t think that puts him on another level.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 10:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Same with me. I’m fine with people saying he isn’t an Ace (though he put up ace-like numbers), but that’s because he is so young and I don’t want that pressure on him.
If it were up to me I would have Kershaw be the 2 or 3 starter to start the year, behind at least Billingsely and maybe Kuroda.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Outside of opening day, the title of “Number X Starter” doesn’t really mean much, with all the differing schedules. Lots of things happen during the season such that #1s & 2s don’t always match up with other #1s & 2s, etc. I don’t think it will put any extra pressure on Kershaw.
They just need him to make 30-33 starts and be healthy, and let the chips fall where they may.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's true
But I’m sure players listen to the media and the media likes to talk about “aces” and what they mean to their teams. I just hope (and think) that Kershaw doesn’t listen to that type of stuff anyway and has a strong backbone, so to speak.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Because he was able to keep the hits down and he was able to strike out so many batters.
He was 21 years old this season, I DID NOT WANT him to pitch any more than that. No 21 year old should. This season I would guess Torre will let Kershaw battle through more tough innings and rack up more of them. I’m not sitting here telling you Kershaw is at Lincecum’s level, but considering the fact that he is so young and has already done so well why shouldn’t we talk of Kershaw like we do; He’s a complete and total stud.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The question isn’t that Kershaw is an elite pitcher right now, the question is if Kershaw is a full level lower than Hanson. I don’t think anyone claims that Hanson is elite at this time either.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
WTF
hanson?/
maybe they meant king felix?
by hirambocachica on Dec 29, 2009 11:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Off topic
but Ed Price of AOL has chosen the Red Sox as the team of the 2000s despite the Yankees having…
a better record (965-651 versus 920-699)
a better pythag record (.571 – .568)
more 90-win seasons (8-7)
more 95-win seasons (7-6)
more 100-win seasons (4-0)
more playoff appearances (9-6)
more division titles (8-1) (Price has the Red Sox at 2, which is wrong)
more AL pennants (4-2)
the same number of WS titles (2)
I can see the argument that since the Yankees have a much higher revenue stream than everyone, they should be discounted in some way, but Price doesn’t really even make that argument.
And to cap off this poor article, the title (which may or may not have been written by Price) is “No Rival to Red Sox in 2000s.” No Rival is just stupid.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 10:30 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
thats stupid...
showing those stats.. its obviously the yanks…
and what wins it for them is the division titles 8-1… that shows they were better then the red sox year in nd year out
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 10:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
2004
Alone might have won the Red Sox team of the decade. I can’t stand them, but the way that 2004 ended was the stuff of movies. The fact that they actually made the most intense rivalry in baseball actually interesting again also works in their favor.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 10:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t have a problem with anyone naming the Red Sox as team of the 2000s, but to claim they had “no rival” is just dumb, especially with the numerous factual errors in Price’s article (he got the pennants and division titles wrong, for instance)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I get it. Totally agree. There are a few teams you could make the case for.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Another Cubs Blog
There’s a very funny piece on Another Cubs Blog that takes apart his argument, ala Fire Joe Morgan.
by kinbote on Dec 29, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the team of the decade was the Rays for simply making the World Series with a payroll almost less then what Arod made by himself.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 10:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I was pleasantly surprised
and somewhat shocked to see what they called Elbert’s upside. If he puts up anything near a 13 win season with an ERA south of 4, the Dodger’s should be in really good shape.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 10:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
but he’s not at Hanson’s level.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Trying to project an ERA from college stats is kinda hard to do.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would be absolutely thrilled to have a season like that out of Elbert. I just hope he gets the chance.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here’s a thing, why are we assuming that walks are purely a function of the pitcher? We have an umpire that sets his own strike zone that pitchers must figure out from start to start. Then we have to see what his bias are, etc.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Every pitcher faces that
every game. They have to be able to adjust to the umpire once they know his strike zone.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I remember watching a few games this year
Where Kershaw just kept getting squeezed pitch after pitch. I know it happens to everyone not named Greg Maddux, but yeah.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Like Kershaw adjusted in game one of the NLCS? :(
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Knowing what they have to do and executing it are two different animals. Isn’t that why we are writing about baseball instead of playing it?
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently Mike Francesa on his radio show reported that the Mets have signed Jason Bay, pending a physical.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 11:12 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Best option with him ever since the Red Sox bows out. Guess Holliday also signs for less than a $100 million
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cool
good to see him come back to the NL. Unless they find a pitching staff they still look like the 3rd or 4th best team in a very loaded East. I’m loving it seeing the Cardinals giving out these silly deals to the likes of Bay and Holliday. Soriano will soon have company. No impact hitters left for the Giants so it looks like DeRosa was the addition and he’ll have to work hard to simply do what Uribe did last year.
Can’t wait to see what Lincecum is going to ask for in Arbitration.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The NL East is pretty loaded
especially if the Mets’ offensive stars are healthy, which of course is a big if. But Philly is obviously very, very good, and the Braves (their pitching staff top to bottom is still very good, even without Vazquez) and Marlins will be around.
I have a feeling Philly is still the class of the division, but the other three teams a step below and will probably fight it out for the wild card.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Braves
If Chipper and Glaus can stay relatively healthy they will be players but they took a step back by moving Vazquez. Luckily they have this kid Hanson:)
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I knew they would
People on another baseball forum I’m in were saying the Mets would be fighting for 4th place, and I thought that was not gonna happen at all. I don’t think they’ll compete for first, but I wouldn’t put it past them to get 85 wins and get 3rd place.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bay
I’m not that impressed by the move. I think adding Lackey to complement Santana would’ve been better. They still need another starting pitcher, so I expect to see Sheets’ name tossed around a lot.
by kinbote on Dec 29, 2009 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They also need
David Wright to become David Wright again. The West coast may not have noticed but Mr Wright sufferered a significant power outage.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Didn’t he have 4 homeruns by the All-star break?
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't get much better after that
only 10 for the year after two years in a row over 30 and four straight over 25.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 11:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m guessing there was some kind of injury he played through that robbed him of his power. I mean he still hit for average and had a good OBP, didn’t he?
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
His OBP has been relatively the same for 5 seasons
So are his hits for doubles. I would guess it’s the ball-park that’s giving him and the Mets problems.
by Julio Nievas on Dec 29, 2009 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Per Baseball HQ
10 HR and 72 RBI? Really? Mets faithful want to blame Wright’s power outage on Citi Field, but Wright’s PX (110) and HR/F (7%) suggest there is more to the story … especially when we note that Citi Field actually increases HR by right handed batters (+10%).
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 12:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
left hand hitters…. where you go to die..
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bay is better than Tatis or Sheffield
Though I still think Bay is a .270/.340/.500 type of hitter at heart, lol.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Paying Lackey $16 million a year to pitch 170 innings and miss April is a dumb idea. If all I’m worrying is 2010, I rather roll the dice on Sheets or Bedard.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’d love to take a good run at either of them for a year or 2. Sadly…we all know why that will never happen.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
John Lackey missed pitching in April the last two seasons.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
with specific injuries though, right? Does he have one now?
Or are you using the “Jeff Bagwell will get hit on the wrist again this season” prediction strategy?
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 11:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A little from column A, and a little from column B.
Its just a bit odd that claiming Lackey is a workhorse to justify his contract, but uh, he’s not.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lackey's entire reputation seems built around one season
and the fact that he won game 7 of the WS as a rookie. He’s had exactly one “ace-caliber” season, which was preceded by two very god seasons, and followed by two good seasons, but even ignoring the injuries, he’s not been able to duplicate even his ’05-06 seasons, to say nothing of ’07.
Is he still good? Totally. He’s just massively overrated (and overpaid) as an “ace”.
by EMDarrow on Dec 29, 2009 11:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My only concern with Lackey is health, and obviously that is a big concern. But Lackey has a better resume than just once “ace-caliber” season. Here are his MLB ranks in FIP (rate stat) and WAR (counting stat) over the last 5 seasons:
FIP
2009 – 3.37 (26th)
2008 – 4.53 (62nd)
2007 – 3.54 (12th)
2006 – 3.35 (6th)
2005 – 3.10 (8th)
WAR
2009 – 3.9 (22nd)
2008 – 2.0 (60th)
2007 – 5.6 (7th)
2006 – 6.0 (4th)
2005 – 5.9 (7th)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 12:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That “3.37” for 2009 should be 3.73, BTW. Still 26th though.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 12:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently the Bay deal is 4/$66m ($16.5 / yr) w/ vesting option for a 5th year, per Joel Sherman of the NY Post.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and once again ESPN looks brilliant.
Their twitter feed is running a teaser of “The Giants could move Pablo Sandoval to first base now that Jason Bay is coming to San Francisco..”
by EMDarrow on Dec 29, 2009 11:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
$
That’s a lot of dough. Holliday must be licking his chops.
by kinbote on Dec 29, 2009 12:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
…to heal the wound left by a ball that hit him in said chops :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 12:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if those are his chops, and he can lick them, why does he even need money?
by LA Taco on Dec 29, 2009 2:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Its a Mets tax for playing for the Mets. :)
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 12:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is the most boring offseason ever
by oshea2002 on Dec 29, 2009 11:49 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
If we sign Jason Bay, can we employ 4 outfielders?
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 12:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Can Bay play first base?
Can Manny?
by Michael White on Dec 29, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ethier
TBLA’s payroll worksheet has Ethier projected to make $12.5 mil the next two years (before he reaches free agency). Add a Bay-like 4y/$66 mil to that total and offer him 6y/$80 now? Seems a bit high to me, but it’s a moot point anyway with our ownership situation . . .
(Honestly, even if Colletti were able/willing to lock up the youngsters, it’s a tough situation with so many of them due to get paid at the same time. The way it’s looking, we may eventually have to pay absolute top dollar for Kemp & Kershaw, so the others may have to wait. And out of all of our young talent, Ethier seems closest to already hitting his ceiling.)
by kinbote on Dec 29, 2009 1:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
TBLA’s payroll worksheet has Ethier projected to make $12.5 mil the next two years (before he reaches free agency).
Luckily we have him for 3 years.
I wonder if regfairfield still thinks Travis Buck is better than him?
by silverwidow on Dec 29, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We missed the boat on offering Ethier an extension that would have saved the Dodgers a ton of money. It should have happened last year if Colletti was forward thinking enough.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t think he would have or will sign an extension. He strikes me as bitter about 2007-08.
by silverwidow on Dec 29, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’d be bitter too if I saw my GM think giving Luis Gonzales $7.5 million for one year to take my place in the starting lineup was a better allocation of money than using that to sign me to an extension. If you asked Ethier if he was willing to buy out two arbitration years for 3 arbitration years(due to being a super two) for $7.5 million, he’d probably doit.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 1:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope
Andre makes more then Martin this year in arbitration even though Eric has it $1 Million on the plus side for Martin.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Weird
seeing Andrew being referred to by his DT name on his old site. Hopefully he is just as wrong about DeWitt as he was on Andre. Can’t say I saw Andre becoming this good.
If this is his ceiling it is a damn fine ceiling.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 1:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong assumption?
All the predictions I have read assume what we all would like – that when the time comes to sign them up, the Dodgers will sign the best players with the highest upsides. That looks like Kemp and Kershaw, for sure. I too would like them signed. But if the Dodgers are really taking the tack – maybe not just divorce-influenced – of waiting until closer to FA time before deciding which ones to sign up – they may then decide that they can’t afford the best ones, and sign the second-best instead. Another Piazza situation – let Kemp go because he’s too expensive, sign Loney and Martin, who are cheaper. That is what I fear with their present sitting on their hands. Sure, they can wait a bit longer to see which are really developing, but by then it might be too late. They still have to try to sign up the best ones early enough that it will actually save some money, or I fear they won’t do it. Unless they sign up Kemp and Kershaw when they still have at least two years before FA, why should they sign? If there’s only one year to go, won’t they and their agents wait that one year and then test the market?
by berkowit28 on Dec 29, 2009 1:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That doesn’t make much sense from the Dodgers’ side. They are assuming all of the risk in that scenario. They are only going to sign a guy long-term if it buys out a free agent year or two, but not at market value.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Something like 4/$38m (with the potential for 5/$52)
$1m signing bonus
2010: $4.5m (arb yr 2)
2011: $7.5m (arb yr 3)
2012: $10m (arb yr 4)
2013: $13m (FA yr 1)
2014: $16m option ($2m buyout)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but
Colletti – or was it Mannion? – has said that they’re not going to buy anyone out this year. (That doesn’t mean they won’t in fact do so, of course.) They’re going to wait an unspecified number of years to see which of the youngsters actually develop into top players, since they can’t afford all of them, and not all will be worth it. Fine. Ignoring for the moment that they don’t want to spend now anyway, because of the lack of cash. What I’m worried is that they will leave it too late, too close to the end of arb years, to the point that the players who are by now clearly elite will not want a deal that buys out a year or two of FA under market. If the Dodgers wait until arb year 4, the player won’t accept. If they wait until arb year 3, certain agents may still choose to counsel not accepting. It looks like they’re planning to wait until at least that long. (Well, Kershaw has so many years to go, they might well decide on him by arb year 2, OK.) It’s Kemp I’m worried about. If they wait as long as they seem to be planning to, by which time he is clearly a super-star, he may not be interested in having a year or two bought out under market. It won’t be much risk – other than a poorly timed injury – for him to wait it out and go FA. They should be making the offer now.
by berkowit28 on Dec 29, 2009 11:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’d be very interested in Victor Martinez for 2011 if the Red Sox sign Mauer.
by silverwidow on Dec 29, 2009 1:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
John Kruk will claim the better FA catcher will be Carlos Ruiz because he knows how to handle a World Series staff.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of former douchebag Phillies, Odds on Bret Meyers becoming a Dodger?
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 1:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Meyers
I’ve heard Rangers, Astros, & Twins in connection with his name. He wants to be a starter. He does kind of fit that Padilla/Bad Boy mold . . .
by kinbote on Dec 29, 2009 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Going into the clubhouse to check your e-mail during games is a bit less worrying than beating up your wife.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 1:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
FanGraphs on Bay
Concluding sentences: “This move appears to be one of the more significant overpay [sic] of the offseason, and it by no means vaults the Mets into the playoffs. Much needs to go the Mets way for this contract to work out as planned, and it appears that this is just yet another example of Omar Minaya overpaying for a veteran presence.”
by kinbote on Dec 29, 2009 1:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
FanGraphs on Bay signing with the M's instead
“FUCK YEAH PLAYOFFS BABY. JACK Z DOES IT AGAIN. WHO CARES ABOUT STATISTICAL ANALYSIS, I’M GOING TO HAVE HIS BABY!!!”
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 1:31 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Except
The Mariners value defense, and there is no way, unless Bay was DHing, that Dave Cameron would have thought this was a good idea.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 1:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They’re going to Milton Bradley in the outfield, a guy with bad legs. The Mariners shouldn’t complain about Bay
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 1:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Last I heard he could either DH or play LF
With the way that team is now they might get a defensive minded LFer and stick Milton at DH.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 2:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah, that didn’t even occur to me.
I’d play him at 1B, hahah.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kershaw and Billingsley are “only” the 14th best duo according to this list:
http://ryryspoints.blogspot.com/2009/12/king-felix-and-cliff-lee-best-1-2-punch.html
by silverwidow on Dec 29, 2009 1:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
after seeing all those duos..
they should be 14th.. who hsould they be higher then? maybe oswalt rodriguez.. maybe wolf gallarado…
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I know
What I meant was – several people (including Phil’s reporting from BA) consider Kuroda to be the no. 1 Dodgers pitcher for 2010. Others may think of him as no. 2. Either way, he’d be one of the two in the top duo. Since we don’t have a clear “ace” – maybe we will be the end of the season – someone has to be excluded. If Kuroda were included, where would the Dodger duo (either) rank then?
by berkowit28 on Dec 29, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
probably still 14...
kershaw kuroda is still better then weaver saunders.
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Once injury risk is factored in, Kuroda is likely still the odd man out.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They think Haren/Jackson is number 6
Haren is an ace, Jackson is at best a 3 pitcher. Bad choice there.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow then goes Verlander/Porcello
I guess we should just look at wins for Porcello, because otherwise he wasn’t better than average.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
porcello is future too
the guy is going to be great in the future.
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t doubt it, but Porcello really didn’t have a very good year, he just won games.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Porcello is intriguing
because he doesn’t strike anyone out (4.7 K/9 in 2009, 5.2 in 2008 in Hi-A at age 19). Obviously he is still young and has good stuff, but is there something holding him back from striking more hitters out? Is there a pitch he’s not throwing (yet) or something like that? Or is he just a low K guy going forward?
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
His low strikeout numbers were odd to me too
I’m sure he will start to get more as he gets older, but he could just be a wakefield or Kenny Rogers type pitcher.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Verlander had some oddly low K rates his first year or two also
so its a little early to say if he’s just not a big swing-and-miss guy or if he just hasn’t adjusted to pro ball yet.
by EMDarrow on Dec 29, 2009 2:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Verlander was older, so it is a little weird comparing him, but he blew away Hi-A (10.9 K/9) and AA (8.8 K/9) at age 22 before getting called up. And his first year (2006), he was still at 6.0 K/9 which was only slightly below average (AL was 6.4 K/9).
Still, Porcello’s stuff is too good to not strike out anybody, so with a few adjustments he should be just fine.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
porcellos curve isnt a strike out pitch yert..
he hasnt developed it in the minors like he should have had… and his change needs work still but his fastball isnt really a swing and miss fastball either its a GB fastball so i can understand why his K rate was so low this year
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't he a groundball oriented pitcher?
A lot of the groundball types tend to not have huge strikeout numbers. I thought I once read something that compared him to Derek Lowe.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Extreme ground ball pitcher. 54.2% (5th in MLB last year, out of 77 qualifiers)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well at least he takes the democratic approach.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yea, he is a sinkerballer
Supposedly, thats one of the reasons it was believed he could come straight up, because he would benefit from a major league defense more than some others.
Not saying its true or not, just that its what was said.
by EMDarrow on Dec 29, 2009 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well they have greinke and bannisteer...
bannister is like a number 4 or 5..
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I completely missed that
I guess Verlander, Haren, and Greinke are really pulling the weight for their other pitcher, lol.
Halladay and Hamels are way too low on this as well.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Coming off the year Hamels had
its no sure thing he’ll be anything special going forward.
by EMDarrow on Dec 29, 2009 2:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He didn’t pitch well in the playoffs, but his regular season peripherals were almost identical in 2008 and 2009.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
butt when you look at him..
hes a 2 pitch pitcher… and the league will figure him out eventually… and i think thats what happened..
his 3rd pitch.. curveball is pretty bad..
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My point is that the “figuring out” part didn’t really happen until the 2009 playoffs. In the 2008 and 2009 regular seasons, he struck out the same amount, walked the same amount, allowed the same HR, but the only difference was that more balls in play found holes this year. He’s somewhere in between unstoppable super ace and ne’er-do-well malcontent. :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
oh alright..
i agree… but i think in a few years he will be closer to the malcontent one.. lol
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tiger Thome?
From Tine Cervasio of MSG Network:
Saw Jim Thome at hotel in Detroit area couple hours ago. Baseball tweeps, refresh me-is he a free agent right now?
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Someone named Josh Holub is tweeting that Thome is in Detroit for a funeral, but I have no idea whom that person is so take it with a grain of salt.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 3:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In case anyone wants to get paid to watch spring training
Camelback Ranch is hiring for stadium jobs during spring training.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I missed where it said:
Salary will be deferred over five years.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Baseball Forecaster
is the book shipping now? I havent rec’d mine yet. did you get an advance copy?
raygu
by Ray Guilfoyle on Dec 29, 2009 2:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Boo
Kelly Johnson is close to joining the D-Backs on a one-year deal, per Nick Piecoro of the AZ Republic.
D-Backs would also have Johnson’s rights in 2011. And Piecoro says the last offer was somewhere in the $2m range, or slightly more than we are paying Jamey Carroll (on an average basis, not 2010).
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
that is horribly sad...
we could have had kelly johnson for 1 year less for a little more money.. few thousands… BS ned.. johnson will give us wayy more offense.. and same D
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Assuming 09 was a flukey year for him
he could make a run at 20-25 HRs playing in Arizona. Not to mention the extra games in Colorado for playing in the NL west. If they do get him for $2m, thats a depressingly good signing.
by EMDarrow on Dec 29, 2009 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
best signing of the offseason...
this makes tony abrue their utility infielder..
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Can't agree
for some teams maybe but not for a team that already had Tony Abreu. This does not help them at all but it does give them depth.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 2:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
kelly johnsoon is a big upgrade of abrue..
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 2:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably right on abrue
but not on Abreu. Kelly should bounce back and it is very irritating that we spent money on Carroll instead of Kelly.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Especially considering it was similar money
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 3:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
kelly johnson has better patince and more power..
and has proved what he can do in the ml level…
abreu is an injury machine and hasnt been healthy for a long time..
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 3:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You do know that
Johnson was hurt most of last year? And Abreu was healthy from May on.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and defense, too. Johnson is a good athlete, but really hasn’t done much defensively at 2B. That’s where Abreu would make up any loss in offensive value.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 3:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh Well
I’m rather see Tony sitting on the bench then having a good year in our division considering we gave him away. Not seeing him play every day is okay with me. Johnson may help them in 2010 but Webb might notice a big difference as did Lowe.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
HQ does think it was flukey
8-29-.224 in 303 AB with ATL. Injury and poor h% obscure otherwise solid BPIs. BPV trend tells the real story; +5 Rand Var says to chalk 2009 up to bad luck. Great buy-low candidate. UP: 20 HR and 15 SB.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Now add in the Diamondback
offensive atmosphere.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mets to add Molina too
per ESPN 1050 (hat tip to Pat Andriola of The Hardball Times).
Two year deal
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 2:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
should say “are close to” adding Molina
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
what a day for the mets...
add a DH in bay..
and an aging catcher with a sub .300 OBP in molina
whats next? the torn rotator cuffs of ben sheets?
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If I had to bet, I think they end up with one of Sheets, Pineiro, Garland
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m terribly curious to see what Pineiro gets. I was kind of hoping for him to join the Dodgers, but then I heard what he was hoping to get in the market.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 3:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
3/30 is too much for the dodgers and would be overpaying for him even tho he was great last season
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
garland?
i think mets fans will be very disappointed if they end up with garland
by matthewmafa on Dec 29, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mets’ fans are a disagreeable sort. They won’t be very happy anyway :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
For selfish reasons
I’d like Sheets to bed down in NY
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing like blowing money
on guys whose reps don’t match production. Is Omar the new Isiah for NY?
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It pleases me that Ned doesn’t have a green light and a blank check this offseason. A few years ago, I would have expected exactly these types of moves.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 3:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure our day will
come soon enough to go “aargh”.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One of the tweets making the rounds today that made me laugh was I believe from Jonah Keri, who said something like “Omar Minaya traded a 23-year old Jason Bay for Lou Collier. Now he makes up for it by giving a 31-year old Bay a multi-year mega-deal.”
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 3:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's great
hard to remember that Bay was once Montreal Property. Do the Padres regret the Giles for Bay trade or did they get enough from Giles? GIven the money I’d say they whiffed since they could have Bay during his cheap years.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m kind of back and forth on that. I always thought the big loss was Oliver Perez, but he’s been so up and down it has been insane. I can’t really fault them for going for it with Giles, and they did win two divisions plus had a 2-run lead in extra innings to take the wild card for what would have been a third straight playoff appearance. But it was close.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well the idea
would be that they would have taken the money they saved by not having Giles and spent it wisely on another piece since they had the payroll to do so.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah it would have been tempting, but I can’t really fault them for getting the surer thing in Giles at that point, even with the increased salary. Giles did only make $7m per year through 2005.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kinda interesting that nobody is considering even a NRI at this point for Giles. Guess beating up your girlfriend trumps PVL status.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If he hit .291 instead of .191, he’d get some calls :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Somebody should do a study on the break end point of domestic violence and production.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 4:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Data points: Lugo, Myers, Giles. I’m sure I’m missing more…
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Had a great fastball early in his career, then relied on the soft stuff. Kind of a Frank Tanana with glasses :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wild Thing
you make my heart sing.
by MammothDodger on Dec 29, 2009 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
I didn’t realize his salary was that low at the peak of his career.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tripon
have you seen these?
http://fx.worth1000.com/contests/23840/missing-title
Check em out
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 3:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
awesome. I haven’t seen these yet, thanks!
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 4:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that was awesome
William Doolittle at your service, a.k.a. will do.
by Ollie on Dec 29, 2009 4:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i dont understand where he got Haeger’s stats from. The guy pitched 19 innings with an era of 3.32 and a whip of 1.053. significant difference.
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 3:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
…with bad peripherals. .180 BABIP, 5.68 FIP, and 4.45 x-FIP. That’s likely factored more into the projection than his raw stats.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The projections
From The Baseball Forecaster:
1-1, 3.32 ERA in 19 IP at LA. He’s at the mercy of his knuckleball. When it’s dancing, he can be baffling. Given this skill history, he’s danced alone more often than not. There’s no reason to speculate here.
They simply have no faith he can control the knuckleball. I just report the info, doesn’t mean I agree. I felt Haeger was making significant progress with the Knuckler in 2009 compared to his previous seasons. Remember his MLB career is 33 walks in 53 innings which was probably weighted more then his AAA 2009 season. He’s dropped his walk rate from 4.6 to 4.1 to 3.9 to 3.6 in each of the last four minor league seasons.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Odds on Heager staying with the Dodgers for the full year? Does it increase because Martin seems to be able to handle the knuckleball?
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Haeger is more likely to win a spot than Stults, but he is probably also more likely to clear waivers, so I suspect Haeger will be in the org all season, but probably not a ton with LA.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just got the vibe that Torre
does not trust Haeger and is not really very interested in having him in the rotation.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 4:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Torre doesn’t trust Stults either, and went on record that he doesn’t think Stults can relieve. Heager also did pitch in relief a couple of times in Sept.
by Tripon on Dec 29, 2009 4:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hope you’re wrong about the Torre comment, but it is one of my pet peeves with Torre, Mostly by the time Torre would trust, the guys career would be over due to age. Myself i’d give Haeger and McDonald the shot at the 4 and 5 spots, and have Elbert in the wings as insurance for when Kuroda goes down. hope he doesnt , but it seems inevitable
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You've gotta have Elbert starting
I can’t see him not.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As i said, with Elbert in the wings at Albuequerque getting regular starts. He would be our sixth starter, and as young as that would make our staff, sans Kuroda, hopefully all we would need
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 4:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess it would be nice having insurance for the rotation, but I would rather that be Haegar (though I’m sure he’s out of options now).
I would really like to see a rotation of:
Billingsley
Kuroda
Kershaw
Elbert
Mcdonald
That would be kick ass to see for me.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hopefully both Haeger and Ellis stay. Nothing against Ausmus, but Ellis will never pass waivers, AND he caught Haeger all year at Albuquerque. With Haeger and Ellis in the rotation once a week, the rest needed for Martin (and hopefully the bullpen) would be solved.
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 4:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m down with Ellis, but not so much with Haeger. I like him, but not above Elbert or McDonald.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well i could live with Haeger as our long relief and spot starter this season. The year after when Kuroda’’s gone he could step up. Cause i really love Elberts stuff, his pitches have a ton of movement.Elbert is more suited to starting every fifth day..
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 5:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I like that idea, especially with Weaver leaving.
Bills
Kuroda
Kershaw
Elbert
Mcdonald
Haegar
Miller
1 of the rule 5 picks
Troncoso
Belasario
Sherrill
Kuo
Broxton
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 5:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Who is Miller? Otherwise i could live with this also
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 5:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
he would have to beat out Wade, only possible if Wade is really hurting.jmho
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 5:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Purely a hunch
but I will not be even remotely surprised if Wade gets traded. I just think the Dodgers aren’t as high on him as they once were, but he still might be viewed by other teams as a great value.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 5:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope we don’t carry 13 pitchers again. It just seems so unnecessary.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 5:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It would be possible if the starters went more innings. That was one very frustrating thing this year. Thank god for the unbelievably good bullpen.
by prosellis on Dec 29, 2009 5:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you there
I’d be happy to cut miller and add another bench bat.
by Ivdown on Dec 29, 2009 6:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Simply having no faith is just guessing. So i am surprised. Haeger controlled it very well in Albuquerque, which has to be a knuckleball pitchers idea of hell. And i know about his earlier stats, but thats nothing unusal as a guy learns the ins and outs of the knuckleball.
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 5:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thin air = easier to control
Knuckleballs don’t move as much in Albuquerque. That makes them easier to hit, but it also makes it easier to avoid wild pitches.
I think.
Never having been able to throw one.
by MattBakerJr on Dec 29, 2009 6:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
All i can say is that he only pitched half his games in Albuequreque.
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 7:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Even fewer
2009 in AAA:
at ABQ: 56 IP, 5.30 ERA, 8.5% BB/PA, 13.9% K/PA (.326 BABIP)
on Road: 88.2 IP, 2.44 ERA, 9.8% BB/PA, 18.9% K/PA (.240 BABIP)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 7:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That was 9 starts at home, 13 on road
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 7:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The best I can tell, Haeger’s FIP was ~5.93 at home, and 4.31 on the road. But I calculated those myself, without knowing the IBB or HBP, but based on the full season FIP at First Inning. So take with a grain of salt.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 7:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So many minor league
knuckleballers fail it is hard for them to project success. Who was the last guy under 30 who has had any semblance of success with the knuckleball?
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Right
but look at that inconsistent ERA he has had and he’s the only regularly employed knuckleballer. They be a rare rare breed.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A very unique career, that’s for sure. I love that he’s at or near the top of the franchise leaderboard of the storied Red Sox in starts, IP, and wins. Amazing.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Amazing career
do you know he had 30 unearned runs in one season. 30!
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 4:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Brandon Webb gave up 28 UER in 2004.
Guys I can find with 30+ UER since 1947:
Hough 39 (1987, 159 total runs, sheesh!)
Kaat 38 (1965, started three WS games opposite a certain LHP)
G.Perry 30 (1972)
Craig Anderson 30 (1962)
I’m probably missing a few more, but that’s a short list!
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A few more
Phil Niekro 31 (1979, the infamous 21-20 season)
Wakefield 30 (1996, his ERA was 5.14, but his RA was 6.42)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 4:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You could have said the hitters are at the mercy of his knuckleball. Charlie Hough says its as good as any he’s ever seen. Better than Wakefields, this accordig to Hough
by Bluetrain on Dec 29, 2009 4:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Phil
Were there any projections for Belisario?
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 5:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yes
just wanted to see if anyone noticed he was missing. Since it was you who noticed it doesn’t count.
by meercatjohn on Dec 29, 2009 6:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kelly Johnson...more news (sort of)
per Steve Gilbert of MLB.com:
Final details being worked out, physical needs to be taken but K. Johnson to #dbacks. 1 year, little more than $2 million
by Eric Stephen on Dec 29, 2009 6:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Dodgers in the hunt for Pinieiro
According to Olney.
Kershaw
Bills
Pinieiro
Kuroda
Elbert/Stults/Haeger
by silverwidow on Dec 30, 2009 7:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
That would be awful, especially if he gets any kind of contract. If Pineiro signs something like 3/$24 (just speculating), how much would be deferred in year one? I’m guessing the payout would be like $4/$7/$9/$4
by Eric Stephen on Dec 30, 2009 8:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
2010 Projections
Bill James
Pineiro: 4.17 ERA, 4.27 FIP
Wolf: 3.87 ERA, 4.26 FIP
CHONE
Pineiro: 4.37 ERA, 4.23 FIP
Wolf: 4.23 ERA, 4.27 FIP
by Eric Stephen on Dec 30, 2009 8:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
December 30 birthdays
Sandy Koufax 1935
Tiger Woods 1975
Lebron James 1984
Today is a tough day to top in the sports world (hat tip to Richard Deitsch of SI)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 30, 2009 8:22 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Mongo
Brox is going to let up 21 ER! ? Let’s just tar and feather him now.
by Bob Hendley on Dec 30, 2009 8:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I hope about 18
of them are in one game in April. Get it over with.
by delias man on Dec 30, 2009 8:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Spring Snapshot: A's crossing fingers for comprehensive health
- Answer Man: Troy Tulowitzki talks brackets, dirtbags and mullets
- Toyota sign proposal in Wrigley Field's bleachers in need of recall
- Andrew Bailey doesn't play tennis, but he does have tennis elbow
- Quick Q&A: Matt Vasgersian of MLB Network talks '30 in 30'
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
