young guns
by chuckb on Oct 5, 2008 7:00 AM EDT
in News
33 comments
Needless to say, I was humbled when he asked me if I would be willing to take on some of the duties of administering VEB after his departure. It’s daunting but when he told me that DanUp was going to be coming on board as well, it made my decision so much easier. If you haven’t read Dan’s work at getupbaby then you’ll soon know why LB turned to Dan as well. I truly believe that, though LB will be missed around here, VEB will remain one of the premier blogs out there and I hope that you’ll all stick with us. I’ll be adding 2 days to my regular Sunday post – Thursdays and Saturdays. RB’s going to keep his regular Wednesday gig. We’re glad he’ll be sticking with us. Dan’s going to be with us on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Fridays. BTW, if you’re uneasy about LB’s departure, I think you’ll be seeing him here from time to time, perhaps even making a cameo on the main page on occasion.
Finally, in my own little tribute to LB – consider this our own little jersey retirement ceremony – I’ll be doing today’s thread, LB-style, w/ no capital letters. Here’s to you, LB!
i’m really tired. i’ve been staying up late watching the playoffs and, needless to say, took some joy last night in watching the cubs go down as quickly as they did last year. i know it sounds spiteful but, alas, i’m not a perfect man. as i’ve been watching the 4 series, one thing I’ve noticed is the large number of good, young pitchers in the 8 teams’ rotations. it’s like there’s one young gun after another taking the mound for their respective teams.
i wanted to see just how prevalent the young’uns were among the playoff teams. The conclusion: of the 29 starters who will be making postseason starts this year (counting ted lilly who now won’t be), only 11 of them are in their post-arbitration years. add in ben sheets, who would be starting if he were healthy and still might return for the nlcs if the brewers make it that far, 12 out of 30 are "veterans." the other 18 starters are still cost-controlled by their teams. a few of them have signed long-term contracts with their teams that bought out their last couple of arbitration years (kazmir, lackey, myers, sabathia) but even those have not yet reached eligibility for free agency. sabathia, of couse, does after the season ends. lackey’s in what would be his walk year if he hadn’t signed the long-term contract. still, 60% of the pitchers who would make postseason starts for their teams are in their first 6 years in the league. astounding!
would you believe that the average age among those starting pitchers is 28.17 years old – and that includes 45 year old jamie moyer! there are 5 24-year olds, 3 25-year olds, 2 26-year olds, a 23-year old (john danks), and a 22-year old (yovani gallardo – who started game 1 for the brewers and, though he walked 5, he gave up 0 er).
i divided the starters into 2 groups – those who are still cost-controlled by their teams, and those who have reached free agency. the post-free agency group of 12 pitchers (counting sheets) threw 2335.2 ip this year for an average fip of 3.91. these are the teams’ vets – buehrle, lowe, sheets, beckett, zambrano, et al – they probably pitched considerably better than the younger group, right? the younger group is filling out the rotation, pitching the 3rd and 4th games of the series, right? nope. the pre-free agency group of 18 pitchers threw more than 3354 ip this year – an average of 186.1 per pitcher – and that counts the 24 ip that gallardo was limited to due to his injury. their avg. fip – 3.92.
| # of pitchers | total innings | innings per pitcher | avg fip | avg salary | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| vets | 12 | 2335.7 | 194.6 | 3.91 | $9 m |
| young pitchers | 18 | 3354.5 | 186.4 | 3.92 | $2.46 m |
put another way, the best teams in the majors turned more often, during the season and during the postseason, to young pitchers rather than vets. those young pitchers have pitched just as well over the course of the season as the vets have and thrown basically the same number of innings per pitcher as the vets. (as i said, the innings per pitcher stat for young pitchers is skewed by gallardo’s injury.) most obviously, the young pitchers cost their teams considerably less than the vets do as well. in fact, if you want to divide up the posting fee the red sox paid just to negotiate w/ matsuzaka over the 6 years of his contract, the average salary for the vets rises to $9.71 m per year – more than $7 m more than the kids are paid.
again, the best teams in baseball trust young starters more than vets. they’re also, by and large, smart enough not to overpay for mediocre starters. there are a few exception, however. these teams do have several vets earning big bucks who, nonetheless, haven’t merited a starting assignment for their teams this postseason. the dodgers are paying jason schmidt $12 m, brad penny $8.5 m, and greg maddux a prorated portion of $10 m to enjoy their victories from the sidelines. the white sox are paying jose contreras $10 m to enjoy the playoffs from the comforts of his sofa. the cubs chose their 4 starters over jason marquis and his $6.375 m salary. (he’ll make almost $10 m next year, btw.) jon garland and adam eaton were paid nearly $20 m this season to pitch themselves off their teams’ respective playoff rosters. all told, that’s almost $60 m in veteran pitchers that, either b/c of injury or ineffectiveness, aren’t going to be trusted w/ starting assignments this postseason. all of them except marquis were replaced by at least 1 young kid earning less than 1/20th their salary. harden, if you can believe this, earns about 70% of jason marquis’ salary.
so what does this have to do w/ the cards? next year’s rotation, for now, includes 2 "kids" (wainwright and wellemeyer) and 2 vets (pineiro and lohse). i know lohse was really good this season, but if you look at k rates, and k/bb, he looks more like people like garland, suppan, marquis, blanton, bush, and moyer than people like billingsley, danks, shields, santana, hamels or gallardo. he does also look like kuroda, buehrle, and saunders but pitchers who win in the postseason tend to be more like wainwright than lohse.
contrary to tony’s declarations, it wasn’t our lineup but our pitching staff with the biggest holes this year. if we’re going to build great teams over the long-term, we’re going to need more good, young pitchers and less higher priced vets signed through free agency. i’m not here today to rehash the lohse signing, but it’s just a patch – a band-aid for what ails us now. he’s got a long-term contract but he’s not a long-term solution.
az stated on Friday that he thought we ought to offer looper arbitration this offseason. strangely, i agree with him. the supplemental pick we receive has value that can, hopefully, be used on a pitcher w/ big upside or, if he accepts, he provides 1 more band-aid for a team that needs another. fortunately, his would only be a 1 year contract. it’s what we should have done w/ lohse. if neither accepted, we could always come back and resign lohse then. of course, we would have run the risk that he would have signed w/ another team but, since young pitchers are the foundations of great teams (even boston’s vets are just 28 years old), how risky is that really?
whether or not looper accepts arbitration, we need to attempt to trade for a "kid" to add to our rotation this offseason. gottfather suggests the rays’ andy sonnastine here -- a fine choice as is the giants’ jonathan sanchez (3.85 FIP, 8.94 K/9) but whoever it is, it should be a much higher priority than signing mediocre pitchers to long-term contracts. all the playoff teams recognize this.
i’ll be back later w/ a playoff games thread. could we be looking at 2 more sweeps?
0 recs |
33 comments
Email
Print
Comments
the media and veb seem to be putting lots of pressure
on the cards front office to make a move this offseason. Hopefully they will but I have a feeling that the roster will look pretty close to what it did this year with no major editions or upgrades. I even have doubts whether we’ll unload kennedy.
"The two most important things in life: good friends and a strong bullpen." - Bob Gibson
by Bahamaredbird on Oct 5, 2008 8:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think they'll be changes
last offseason, Moz’s position seemed impossible for making any major moves…..rookie GM, no salary space, bad contracts on aging vets………yet he managed to move both Rolen and Edmonds in good deals
I doubt we sign a FA starter and the bidding will probably be intense for the few OPS+ MIs in the free agent market too. So we’ll probably bring back Flippy and deal for a shortstop
Peter Gammons cannot utter the word Fuentes without adding the word Cardinals to the sentence. Given the ‘need’ to fix Perez, that does seem the likely place the Cards spend their money.
TLR is likely to get his impact bat…….Moz granted his wish to make the 3B disappear and that seemed a more daunting task than finding a LF who can put up an OPS gt 800
by vances law on Oct 5, 2008 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love it!
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2008/10/5/628469/i-have-nothing-to-say
"The two most important things in life: good friends and a strong bullpen." - Bob Gibson
by Bahamaredbird on Oct 5, 2008 9:11 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
yeah, it's great...
though I admit I feel for Al who is a pretty good guy and who legitimately respects the competition.
by tbell61 on Oct 5, 2008 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
October baseball
remains The Triumph Of Small Sample Size… success seems to follow those who don’t (or can’t) think about the pressure; see Ramirez, Manny. The Cubs were “squeezing sawdust from their bats” the whole way… hard to win when you’re not relaxed.
Meantime, Fred Merkle continues to get his revenge…
The “villain” of the piece was Cubs 2B Johnny Evers… quoting from Al’s profile of Evers at BCB…
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
His official website says that he was nicknamed “The Crab” because of
the way he slid over the entire infield from his second base position
… but it might have been as much for his admittedly somewhat unpleasant personality. Evers and Joe Tinker formed the Cubs’ 2B/SS combination for nine seasons, from 1903-1910 and again in 1912 (he missed much of the 1911 season with an injury), and the Cubs won 90 or more games in eight of them (missing that mark only in the first year, 1903). They were a key part of all four of the Cub pennant-winning teams in that era, and Evers himself played an important role in the famous September 23 “Merkle’s Boner” game that helped win the Cubs the 1908 pennant. From the Evers website:
The Giants apparently beat the Cubs 2-1 in the bottom of the ninth. Fred Merkle, who was on first base, trotted off the field toward his dugout when Evers realized he never tagged second. Evers got the ball and touched second, Merkle was called out and the game was tied up. The Cubs would eventually end up winning that game. Evers was aware of the rule that stated a runner on first still must tag second even on the winning run for the play to be over. Merkle failed to do this and was called out.
The website doesn’t do full justice to this play, or Evers. This single play shows all of Evers’ competitiveness, abrasiveness, knowledge, and leadership, all produced at the most critical moment. There was, in fact, at the time, some dispute about whether the ball that Evers had used in the play was the actual ball, or was another one that had been thrown to him from the Cubs’ dugout.
There had been another play exactly like it earlier that same month — in the SABR BioProject biography of NL umpire Hank O’Day, it’s explained:
In a [September 4] game involving the Cubs and Pittsburgh Pirates, a Pirate runner [Warren Gill, who, oddly enough, never played again after the 1908 season] failed to touch second on a game-winning hit. When Evers tried to inform O’Day of the decision, O’Day said he did not see the play and could not do anything. However, the play remained in O’Day’s mind.
It’s further elaborated upon in the SABR BioProject biography of Evers:
Evers, standing on second, called for the ball and demanded that umpire Hank O’Day rule the play a forceout, which would nullify the run and send the game into extra innings. Gill’s maneuver was customary in those days, and O’Day refused to make the call that Evers was seeking. “That night O’Day came to look me up, which was an unusual thing in itself,” Evers recalled many years later. “Sitting in a corner in the lobby, he told me that he wanted to discuss the play. O’Day then agreed that my play was legal and that under the circumstances, a runner coming down from first and not touching second on the final base hit was out.” Evers’ account may not be trustworthy, especially given O’Day’s exceptionally reclusive nature and the lengthy period between the event and the retelling, but the incident undoubtedly had a pronounced effect on the umpire, as was demonstrated by subsequent events.
O’Day thought he was mollifying Evers by saying if it happened again, he’d give it to him. Well, guess what, and guess who was the umpire. The play not only wound up helping the Cubs win the pennant and World Series in 1908 (since the September 23 game was ruled a tie, it had to be replayed at season’s end, and the Cubs won the replay 4-2), but it resulted in an official rule change, requiring the umpire(s) to make certain that all players touch their required bases on game-ending plays. It is arguably the single most significant play in Cubs history.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
And the Goaler reads this and thinks, “Karma’s a (bleep)!”
"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra
by The Ol Goaler on Oct 5, 2008 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good analysis, houston.
The problem seems to be that the Cards aren’t developing good, young, cost-controlled pitchers. McClellen seems to be the only one who fits the description, and I hope they give him every chance to be the fifth starter in ‘09. Boggs was unimpressive, at least to me, Garcia is out for ’09, and everyone seems to think of Todd as at best a #3. A trade for a good, young pitcher would be a good move, but it would cost. Sanchez would be my target, because he’s left-handed, another Cardinal need. It would probably, however, cost Rasmus or Wallace plus.
by vinniefromjersey on Oct 5, 2008 9:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.....
My guess would be that most of those good, young SP’s were drafted by their teams. STL hasn’t shown that we can do that. Aside from Ankiel, who was the last SP we drafted that turned out to be that good? Well, Haren too I guess. But other than those two, I can’t think of anybody else.
We’ve all seen the improved drafting, but it has related primarily to hitters and lower end pitching. Hopefully in this year’s draft, we can find a legit #1/2 type SP. OR…..if one isn’t available, we can start moving players from areas of comfort (OF’s, Anderson, etc), and get a good young SP that way.
by SoonerfanTU on Oct 5, 2008 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope I am not being too redundant
but I think part of the reason we are not developing good, young, cost-controlled pitchers is we are fishing in the wrong pond. For many years the front office has followed the urge to draft college pitchers because they are allegedly less risky, closer to the big leagues, etc. The sad fact is that they are closer to becoming middle relievers. Of course, there are college pitchers that become fine starters, but virtually all of the young pitchers HC mentioned above were drafted out of high school.
Our two best starters, if we are allowed to count Carp, were drafted out of HS. Lohse was also a HS pick. Then there is McClellan and Garcia. All those RHPs in the minors that project as middle releivers: Todd, Boggs, Mortensen, and Parisi were all college picks, just like virtually all of the former prospects who never made it.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Oct 5, 2008 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah perhaps college pitchers
are just four years closer to surgery.
by Red in Chicago on Oct 5, 2008 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You actually need both.....
High risk/high reward high school pitchers and some polished college pitchers.
I understand not wanting to give the big bucks to the high schooler with no track record, but you have to be willing to do it when special talent is out there.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on Oct 5, 2008 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that they're in the pipeline
my concern is that we’re going w/ fast-risers rather than more high-ceiling guys. I think we’ll get something from guys like Todd, Boggs, Mortensen and, when he’s healthy, Garcia. I think there’s a good chance that a couple of those guys are able to stick but we’re probably talking about guys in the #3/#4 category. They are parts of the long-term solution, but there needs to be more and better pitching prospects.
Be patient w/ those guys — Boggs and others. There’s a good chance that one of them could be as good as Pineiro next year for next to nothing. They won’t be world-beaters at first, but Kazmir wasn’t either. McClellan, I’ll get to soon, I think can probably be a pretty good starter but again, not a top-tier guy. In any case, we’ve got to get something from these guys b/c we cannot continue to count on reclamation projects and $10-12 M free agent pitchers. Lohse, as I said, is a short-term solution to a long-term problem and when Pineiro’s salary comes off the books next year, and Wellemeyer’s a free agent, Bernie, Gordo, and Strauss — along w/ the fanbase — are going to want management to go out and spend another $10-12 M on a mediocre 30-31 year old free agent starter.
by chuckb on Oct 5, 2008 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another concern is the unwillingness to go "above slot."
Porcello, a HS pitcher, from what I’ve read seems to be doing well. The Cards could have had him. Is it better to get stuck with a 10 mil. useless FA or take a chance on a draftee you control for many years? Anyone else frustrated with this management stance?
by vinniefromjersey on Oct 5, 2008 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boggs.........
I have not seen these 4 pitch Todd, Lynn, Garcia, Mortensen………………………..
Boggs has a chance to be better than any of those guys, based on what I have “seen” of Boggs and what I have “read” about the other 4. Garcia was OK however he was hurt this year so maybe he can be better. Garcia was a guy that looks good but nothing really wowed me about him.
Boggs actually really amazed me. He is very raw, but his fastball is better than all the STL pitchers except Wellemyer. It has so much natural movement and he was still throwing it 94-95 MPH, I was just shocked at how much run he had on that pitch. The question with Boggs is can he throw anything else and can he have better command.
If Boggs “gets it” he can be very, very good.
by ICbirdfan on Oct 5, 2008 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The fanbase might be reacting different
If it were not for management always telling them our up and coming pitchers couldn’t succeed and we needed “proven” players. If instead the team was talking about how soon we were going to get to see Todd, or Mort then the pressure might be different.
In a lot of ways they dig their own graves
by DriverZn on Oct 5, 2008 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe
I just think fans have a tendency to be impatient. I don’t blame them but I think it takes a lot more work to convince fans to be patient than it does to convince them that the team can win now. I think the organization has to make a stronger commitment to p.r. if they want to us to believe that these young players will eventually pay off and it doesn’t help that the organization doesn’t always seem to be on the same page in this.
by chuckb on Oct 5, 2008 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You might put that in the past tense
…weren’t developing good, young, cost-controlled pitchers.
Kyle McClellan, Jaime Garcia, Jesse Todd, Lance Lynn…things are changing. It might be a couple of years before we have one of these guys in the rotation, but it will happen. They can’t keep sending inverted Ws and inverted Ls out to the mound with umpty-ump incision scars on their shoulders and elbows.
by Red in Chicago on Oct 5, 2008 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trade for young pitcher
As suggested above, the alternative i thought the Cards might be after when it became clear they weren’t going to sign a big free agent besides lohse was that they’d trade for a younger, cheaper pitcher. I also thought about that when mlbtraderumors posted what young pitchers would be on the block this year. they mentioned matt cain a number of times as well, but the giants might not be a good partner for the Cards. let me see if i can dig up the link. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/10/olney-young-sta.html
by spencegrif on Oct 5, 2008 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
SFO
Theyd be a perfect trade partner with the Cards. After all, theyve been looking for a power hitting LH 1B for a while now.
(/sarcasm)
C'mon you Redbirds, lets prove em' wrong, again!
by yer dog first on Oct 5, 2008 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I absolutely agree about arbitration.
So many times over the last few years it has seemed that an arbitration offer to a free agent would have been a win/win situation. Either you get free agent compensation or you get a useful player with only one year of commitment.. If a player like Lohse then proves that he’s not a one year wonder then you can renegotiate.
I am opposed to using a big buck free agent contract to bolster the bullpen. With Johnson coming back and Mclellan, Kinney, Motte and Perez showing they belong and that they have the potential to be better I want those bucks and draft picks spent on middle infielders. I’m also not sure Mclellan should be tried as a starter. He obviously tired down the stretch this year with a reliever’s work load. I wouln’t want to see him after 100 innings.
by easy on Oct 5, 2008 10:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
K-Mac
Could his tiring be that, because he has been a SP his entire career, pitching on a SP’s normal rest, and not being used to pitching on consecutive days throwing max effort? I seem to think it would be of some fault for is tiring. Maybe, just maybe, he wont tire during the stretch run if he is given a normal rest sequence. If that doesnt work, well, hes been pretty good out of the pen.
C'mon you Redbirds, lets prove em' wrong, again!
by yer dog first on Oct 5, 2008 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, he could have been tired because he only pitched 49 2/3 innings in 2007.
And he was out with surgery in 2005 and 2006.
I’m not sure it’s wise to just assume he can go straight to the rotation. If they’d like him to start, I think he really should spend some time in the minors before they put him into the rotation.
I say this because of injury concerns. I’d like him to be able to stick around for awhile.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on Oct 5, 2008 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
for a guy who's short on stuff
sonnanstine has put up pretty good numbers in the al east posting a 3.95 fip this season and a massive 37 BB in 193.1 innings this season. problem is, if tampa moves a starter chances are it will be jackson, who isn’t short on stuff, just results, posting a 4.90 fip this season. his stuff’s probably good enough to take a chance on if you don’t pay full price, but he certainly doesn’t look like the front line starter he was once touted as.
If sanchez is healthy, he has pretty good stuff as well, but the shoulder strain should put doubt into any cardinals fans mind
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.
by Dave Barry on Oct 5, 2008 11:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
sanchez
i did a fanpost on trading for sanchez a while ago…a couple of people commented that his mechanics were not very good, which might one of the reasons he has the shoulder issues…still if we can get him for freese and a relief prospect or lower level sp prospect, i say do it
by VolsnCards5 on Oct 5, 2008 1:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Difference:
Unlike almost every other team, the rotations that the cardinals send out and succeed with are very often dominated by a group of veteran scrap-heapers who are bought low and told to work low and throw strikes.
Often the cardinals have spent lots on hitters and they have been able to use whatever pitchers float their way, and this mix has been relatively successful.
Whether this formula has simply become dated and the days of climbing the ladder with the FBs of Motte and YP are here, and that now we should be trusting the kids like so many other teams are, it’s possible.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
by hazel on Oct 5, 2008 1:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
cheers hc
I’m sure you guys are up to the task.
I’ve been missing innings. How’s Soup looking? Phils beating him up, it seems.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 5, 2008 2:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Players in their walk years...
… are cost-controlled kids? i question the methodology. also, i’m not sure how you counted Dice-K and Kuroda, but they should count as free agents even though they technically have < 6 years of MLB service time. Kuroda actually was a FA, and Dice-K should be treated as one (he cost way more than a typical FA because of posting fees).
the other way of looking at the playoffs this year is to question LB’s argument after the Lohse signing. he said the playoff teams were dominated by cost-controlled kids, and there weren’t Lohse-types on those rosters. i’m not sure that’s really accurate. a quick glance:
it’s true that the Dodgers have Billingsley and Kershaw, but they also have Lowe, Maddox, Penny, Kuroda, Park, & Schmidt.
the Cubs don’t really have any young cheap starters (Hill and Marshall can’t keep a spot in the rotation). their roster is instead filled with steady, mid-priced vets (Marquis, Lilly) with an expensive ace at the top (Z) and a rental with an option year (Harden) for whom they traded their best kid. Dempster would’ve been a FA a few years ago if he hadn’t signed a 3-year deal.
The Brewers have Gallardo, but Manny Parra was so disappointing down the stretch that he was demoted and his playoff start was given to Suppan. Capuano is on the verge of being non-tendered. Bush was started in the playoffs out of desperation, but wouldn’t’ve been if Sheets was healthy. the Brewers wanted their playoff rotation to be 3 vets (Sabathia, Sheets, Suppan) and 1 kid (Gallardo).
the Angels have two Lohse-type contracts on the books, although they’ve done well with Weaver, Saunders, and Santana. they are probably the closest to the proposed ideal, but most teams don’t have 3 guys that good in their farm systems.
the White Sox? Contreras, Buerhle, Vasquez are the vets. Danks and Floyd are the kids.
the Phillies? Moyer, Eaton, Blanton are the vets. Myers, Hamels, Kendrick are the kids. Eaton and Kendrick have been disappointing, as has Myers for long stretches.
BoSox? Beckett, Dice-K, Wakefield (albeit VERY team-friendly deal), Byrd. Lester is starting, but Buchholz isn’t. Papelbon got moved to the pen. they added Byrd to replace Buchholz and also gave 7 starts to Colon.
the point? the best teams have balance between vets and kids. usually 1-2 high-priced Aces, one mid-priced #3, and some combination of vet reclamation project/kids to fill the last two spots. the exceptions are the Cubs, who basically aren’t starting any kids, and the Rays, but their success with kids required 10 straight years of last-place finishes and letting every FA walk in order to stockpile #1 picks. i don’t think that’s a model the Cards want to emulate.
the Cards have traditionally had a similar sort of rotation to a lot of these playoff teams: 1-2 high-priced “aces”, 1-2 mid-priced vets, 1-2 cost-controlled kids, and a vet reclamation guy as insurance/depth. this year the “kids” were Welly and Waino (and sometimes Boggs, Parisi, Thompson, or Garcia). in ‘07 they had two kids: Waino and Reyes. in ’06 they had Reyes and Marquis. ’04-’05 it was Marquis. looking forward, their top 3 will be Carp, Waino, and Lohse, and the kids will have chances to claim spots 4-5.
i don’t think the Lohse contract was a good idea on balance, but if you look around the league, a lot of perennial contenders do have similar contracts on their books. having a league-average (or slightly better) innings-eater allows you to gamble a bit on the kids and still be pretty sure that you’ll stay in contention if they don’t pan out.
there’s another aspect to this. the Angels OF alone costs $41mn+ this year, whereas the Cards cost ~ $2.5mn (including Duncan and Barton). if you have cost-controlled position-players, but have fringe-y pitching prospects, then it can make a lot of sense to spend more on pitchers, even if they are only marginal improvements over the kids. marginal improvements = marginal wins, and marginal wins can be the difference between the playoffs and an early vacation. the Cards will continue to have a cheap OF, have a cost-controlled C, and will likely have a cheap 3B and/or 2B within the next few years. given that, spending some money to provide stability to the rotation is certainly rational.
i agree about Loop: offer arb. i think he’ll turn it down, but even if he doesn’t, it won’t cost too much.
also, a question: if Carp can’t pitch next year, is his contract insured?
by kindred on Oct 5, 2008 2:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I THINK
that Carpenter’s contract is insured for around 70% at a premium somewhere around 10-20% of the yearly cost of the contract. I think this because Walt Jocketty talked about insurance costs being a consideration when signing, and supposedly most pitchers are insured. The terms above seem average to me. This is absolutely not sourced or authoritative in any way.
I also think you might be able to tell if he is insured because in order to collect the money supposedly the player has to be activated.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
by hazel on Oct 5, 2008 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did count Matsuzaka and Kuroda
as free agents. That’s what they were.
The term “kids” I used simply as a way of differentiating them from vets. Sabathia and Lackey, one is a free agent at the end of the season (for the first time) and the other would have been had he not signed a long-term contract, are cost-controlled b/c they’re still in their arbitration years.
I’m sorry but I disagree with your statement that “the best teams have balance between vets and kids.” While that may be true on the roster, it’s not true of their playoff rotations, as I believe, my post outlined. These are the best 8 teams (presumably) left and 60% of their playoff starters are pitchers in their first 6 years in the league — they’re still in their arbitration years. And yes, this counts Kuroda and Matsuzaka as vets. That’s not balance. 18 of 30 are young pitchers. 12 of 30 are vets. All 4 of the Rays’ pitchers are kids and they’re looking to advance to the ALCS today. The “12” counts Ben Sheets, who may or may not have been healthy enough to pitch in the NLCS had the Brewers advanced.
Many of the “vets” you mentioned, were either too ineffective or injured to make their postseason rotations — Garland, Marquis, Contreras, etc. The Cubs do start 1 kid — Harden, as I mentioned.
And while you’re correct when you say a lot of teams have “Lohse-like” contracts on their books, few of the contenders are doing anything more than filling out their rotation w/ their “Lohse-like” pitcher. People like Garland, Suppan, Marquis, Eaton, Bush and Moyer are either barely filling a spot (and only b/c they’ve got nobody better) or couldn’t even make the playoff rotation. It’s not a feather in the Cubs’ cap that they have Jason Marquis and Jeff Suppan was atrocious this year, and today.
by chuckb on Oct 5, 2008 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
true, but...
… 12/30 equals 40%. that’s a “pretty good mix” to start with, and we’re dealing with a small sample (8 teams in one season), so part of this is circumstantial. Contreras and Kelvin Escobar would’ve been starting had they not gotten hurt. that would make the total 14/30, which is roughly 1/2, which is pretty much the definition of “good balance”.
or, if you eliminate the Rays as an outlier caused by a decade’s worth of futility and focus on the teams that contend pretty much every year — BoSox, Dodgers, Cubs, Angels, Phillies, ChiSox — then the number is 12/26 (14/26 if you factor in Escobar and Contreras). again, pretty much half-and-half. pretty good mix.
by kindred on Oct 6, 2008 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess if you change all the equations
you can make the numbers fit whatever you want them to look like. I didn’t count injured pitchers or ineffective ones. Older pitchers are more prone to injuries. Escobar, Contreras, and Schmidt aren’t starting b/c they’re injured. That counts. Garland, Marquis, and Eaton aren’t starting b/c they aren’t good. Your point seems to be that a balance is needed b/c sometimes older pitchers are healthy and pitch.
Otherwise, if you want to count a 40/60 split as “good balance”, feel free. I’m not going to argue semantics.
by chuckb on Oct 6, 2008 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Manny Parra did fade in the end of the season......
I still think he’s going to be a good one. This was his first full big league season and I’d rate it as not too shabby. He’s got good stuff and that left handed thing going for him too.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on Oct 5, 2008 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree...
… but the Brew-Crew haven’t had much success with young lefties lately; see Capuano, Chris.
by kindred on Oct 6, 2008 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
