tRA...for starters
by chuckb on Dec 13, 2008 10:44 AM EST
in St. Louis Cardinals News
Email
PrintSaber-friendly websites and new ways of measuring baseball performance are becoming more and more common every day. Indeed, the evolution of numbers themselves is baseball’s version of prescription drugs – every day there’s a new one you can’t pronounce and don’t know what the hell it does. It takes more than watching the evening news to understand them. Well, a new stat for measuring pitching performance was developed this summer by the folks over at statcorner. Sky’s brief tutorial can probably do a better job than I could of explaining it.
But the most advanced pitching statistic available just popped up this summer over at StatCorner, although there has yet to be a study to show that it's actually better than FIP or xFIP or even ERA. (Many people assume it is, though.) It's called tRA and uses eight categories of outcomes that are strongly under pitcher control: Ks, BBs, HBPs, HRs, GB%, LD%, OF FB%, and IF FB%. In one sentence, tRA credits pitchers for their ability to induce those eight events, without caring about the actual outcomes of the balls hit into play. And everything's park-adjusted. For a longer explanation, read this. For a no-numbers explanation, try this.The purpose of tRA is to best determine a pitcher’s true skillset. A lot of pitching, like hitting, is luck. Pitchers often have the misfortune of having an unusually high number of their fly balls leave the park. Maybe they pitch a disproportionate share of their games in high (or low) run-scoring environments. Maybe they happen to pitch in front of a poor defense or, like the ’08 Cards’ rotation, in front of a very good defense. Maybe a disproportionate share of the ground balls they get found holes.
For example, Barry Zito – a pretty bad pitcher – only had 6.8% of his fly balls leave the park last year whereas only 10 qualifying starters had a greater % of their fly balls leave the park than Roy Oswalt (same link as above)– a very good pitcher. If you just look at their respective ERAs – Oswalt was at 3.54 last year and Zito was at 5.15 – well, you still get that one guy’s pretty good and the other guy stinks. However, how high would Zito’s ERA have been if he had had the misfortune of having a similar % of his fly balls leave the park as Oswalt? Oswalt turned 31 last season and had the highest ERA of his career. Is he slippping due to age or was he a victim of bad luck? tRA hopes to tell us.
Ok, so tRA tells us truly how they pitched last year. Statcorner has also regressed tRA to league average and created tRA* which is designed to be the best predictor of a pitcher’s future performance – a handy tool for anyone trying to figure out how well (or poorly) their favorite team’s pitchers will pitch next year.
Finally, Sky has graciously taken all baseball’s SP tRA data and made an adjustment for the fact that NL pitchers didn’t have to face a DH and created a spreadsheet to tell us each SP’s runs above replacement for ’08. You can view or download the spreadsheet here. My contribution to this endeavor is limited to showing you the Cards’ SP’s data for last year. Remember, the tRA* is designed to be a predictor of future performance.
| tRA | tRA* | RAR | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wainwright | 4.19 | 4.51 | 23 |
| Wellemeyer | 5.10 | 4.97 | 16 |
| Lohse | 4.99 | 4.94 | 19 |
| Looper | 5.18 | 4.87 | 15 |
| Pineiro | 6.14 | 5.24 | -3 |
20 RAR is considered roughly league-average so we’ve got 1 above league-average pitcher and 2 others right around or slightly below league-average pitchers. Pineiro’s a $7.5 M replacement-level pitcher and Looper’s, of course, a free agent. Follow the "team pivot" at the bottom of the spreadsheet to see that the Cards’ starters last year were 24th in the big leagues. Those who think that our pitching problems last year were limited to the bullpen are sorely mistaken. We’ve got rotation problems as well.
Here are the numbers for this year’s free agent SP crop. I’m including those who’ve already signed.
| tRA | tRA* | RAR | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sabathia | 3.54/2.38 | 3.87/3.15 | 81 |
| Sheets | 3.45 | 4.19 | 50 |
| Lowe | 3.24 | 3.66 | 57 |
| Burnett | 3.69 | 4.05 | 59 |
| Johnson | 3.32 | 3.83 | 51 |
| Ol. Perez | 4.98 | 5.09 | 18 |
| Wolf | 5.46/3.96 | 5.12/4.67 | 20 |
| Pettitte | 4.50 | 4.46 | 37 |
| Garland | 5.74 | 5.22 | 10 |
| D. Cabrera | 6.58 | 5.78 | -6 |
| Moyer | 4.89 | 5.08 | 20 |
(Note: I left Sabathia’s and Wolf’s tRA and tRA* stats separate for their two teams b/c I didn’t feel I could combine them accurately).
Cabrera was non-tendered, along w/ Tim Redding, Chuck James, and Chris Capuano. I didn’t include those 3 but thought that Cabrera might be interesting enough to include but there’s not a lot interesting about those numbers. Is there any doubt that Sabathia was the best free agent starter on the market? Is there any doubt that there’s an upper-class of free agent starters and a lower-class of free agent starters? Nothing in that lower class is of any interest to me. If any of it interested Mo, he should have offered Looper arbitration since he’s the same pitcher as some of those other guys and if Looper had accepted, we’d have gotten him for a 1 year deal. Garland’s the one who’s scared me for some time and scares me more now. He’s simply poor and I fear that the fact that he’s thrown over 190 IP 7 years in a row and has won 12+ games 6 times (and 18 twice) will fool the front office into thinking he’s a good pitcher. We already gave a guy like that $10M per year for 4 years. We don’t need another one.
For all those saying RJ’s too old – for 1 year, I’ll take my chances. He’s much better than people like Wolf (and much more likely to pitch 160+ innings, too) or Perez. It’s simply not close. A young, cost-controlled pitcher is still preferred but, lacking our ability to acquire a good, young pitcher, we ought to … well, I’ve said my bit.
224 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don't know if your post is interesting or depressing.............
Wainer is only a 23 RAR? wow, not impressive at all. Why does he rate so low? Was the fact he missed a bunch of time hurt that? Heck according to this wainer is not much better than O. Perez or Randy Wolf. Isn’t Wainer who the Cards are going to depend on this year?
tRA isn't scaled to ERA so don't be deceived by that.
Also, the Cardinals had a very good defense last year, which tends to make the pitching look better.
I still think that focusing on infield defense
has been the Cardinals’ version of moneyball over the course of the past six to eight years. And it gives you the simultaneous benefit of preventing runs with mediocre middle of the rotation guys and building up mediocre starters as trade bait. Though the latter realy hansn’t worked out much since the Bottenfield trade.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
building up the team's defense
also helps the team make the most of those mediocre starters. Without solid defense, we would have been considerably worse last year than we were.
I think the defense on the infield has been mostly accidental
If you look at Eckstein and Grit, you have two below average defenders. I don’t think TLR moved Albert to 1B because he knew AP would be the best defensive 1B in baseball, he did it because of his arm. Plus, if the club truly valued infield defense then why would they acquire Lopez and then play him on the infield? Especially with Ryan and/or AK in the OF.
The only real defense first guy they have had is Iz2. Kennedy too, I suppose, but they didn’t seem to value his defense.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
seems like a pretty darned theory though
www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D
by jealousblues on Dec 13, 2008 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
good
www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D
by jealousblues on Dec 13, 2008 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
Billy Beane likes that strategy, too.
Yes, given the Cards excellent fielding, their starters will tend to be overrated.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 14, 2008 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
plus
he was hurt and pitched just more than 1/2 a season. It would’ve been much better w/ another 60 innings.
ah
that was the main question I think
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 5:18 PM EST up reply actions
In the spreadsheet available for download, I converted everything onto the ERA scale, fyi.
While I agree that RA is a better measure of pitcher talent, and a better scale, it just isn’t nearly as popular/intuitive as the ERA scale.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 14, 2008 12:42 PM EST up reply actions
I'm gonna download that thing
once I get on a computer that can read it. for some reason it won’t open on my computer
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 14, 2008 2:35 PM EST up reply actions
Why did you want to offer arb to Loop?
Your list alone shows seven pitchers(who are still avail) with RAR numbers better than Looper. I’m not saying the Birds are in the running on all seven of them. They are, however, financially capable of going after who they want now.
by Beardsville Rockers on Dec 13, 2008 12:00 PM EST reply actions
Because even if he declined
we’d get the draft picks for compensation.
Patiently awaiting the day Colby Rasmus does this: .275/.381/.551/.932, 29HR, in St. Louis...
by RunninRedbird on Dec 13, 2008 12:05 PM EST up reply actions
I was just assuming that Looper
would have been smart enough to realize the days of paying top dollar to mid to back end starting pitching ended with our own four for forty. He surely would have accepted a guaranteed raise even (especially) for one year.
by Beardsville Rockers on Dec 13, 2008 12:12 PM EST up reply actions
Can't speak for Looper
But maybe he is expecting to get his own 4yr/$40mil deal with somebody else. I doubt that, but like I said I can’t speak for the man. He’s older than Lohse and wasn’t as good statisically, but still improved from last season so he should get a raise even if he signs w/ another team. Plus he could probably get a 2-3 year deal meaning more job security than a 1-year arbitration deal would get him.
Patiently awaiting the day Colby Rasmus does this: .275/.381/.551/.932, 29HR, in St. Louis...
by RunninRedbird on Dec 13, 2008 12:31 PM EST up reply actions
he was saying
that if we make an offer to the lower half of that list of pitchers, why didn’t me just offer arbitration to Looper
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 5:19 PM EST up reply actions
I haven't read the links yet
but does something explain the translation process to RAR? Is the RAR number based on 2008 performance or 2009 projection?
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
There's a baseline replacement level tRA
and then, just like you would for FIP, you calculate the runs allowed compared to the replacement level tRA
Recommendations for baseline replacement-level tRA?
Would love to know what you think. I emailed Matthew Carruth, and he said “they don’t have one.” Doesn’t mean we can’t rough one out, which it appears Sky did. I’m just curious to know what that replacement-level tRA was.
He used 5.75
as he states here. It’s not clear why he chose 5.75 rather than 5.50 but he pops in often enough. One of us ought to ask next time he drops by. ;)
as soon as they get the relievers #s up
at BtB. (kidding, sort of) We could do their tRA’s tomorrow but I’d like to wait for Sky’s RAR calcs.
so...
the numbers for relievers should be totally different than those for starters? I mean will the tRA & RAR be significantly higher (or lower) for relievers, or are they adjusted for the lower amount of innings pitched?
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
Relievers will have RARs much lower, on the whole
Replacment-level ERA for relievers is a lot better and they pitch nowhere near the number of innings. Leverage helps, though.
I’m still deciding what I want to use for leverage:
- actual pLI from how they were used in 2008?
- estimated LI based on their role?
- estimated LI based on how good they were (in other words, if a pitcher had a 2.50 tERA, they get assigned an LI of 1.8 as a closer. 3.50 is more like 1.2. this is how you should value relievers going forward.)
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 14, 2008 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
He used 5.75 for his "tERA" stat
But it’s probably fine to go with since it’s got his NL adjustment for no DH
I used 5.75, which is 1.28 * 4.50...
Except that league-average ERA is currently more like 4.30, something that crept up on me. So I’m over-valuing IP compared to quality of those IP a little bit. Sorry. Maybe I’ll offer a corrected version at some point.
For relievers, use 1.07 * lgERA (overall, not for starters or relievers specifically.)
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 14, 2008 12:46 PM EST up reply actions
So pineiro is going to be are most improved starting pitcher?
I find that hard to believe.
"There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary. And there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I learned that, I gave Jesus a chance."
Still the worst
I can believe that the guy was a little unlucky. His stuff isn’t horrible.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
Glad you did this chuckb
I’m still learning all of the new sabermetrics myself, so this was very helpful. What this says to me is Sheets and Johnson are still the best options for us to try and pursue, and we should stay as far away from Garland as possible. Pettite doesn’t look like he’d be a bad option from this either, but he’s going to command probably more money than say RJ.
Patiently awaiting the day Colby Rasmus does this: .275/.381/.551/.932, 29HR, in St. Louis...
"we" need all the evidence
we can find to support staying as far away from Garland as possible. I just hope beyond hope that he isn’t in our rotation next year. I just have to believe that this team does not see him as any kind of help to the rotation.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on Dec 13, 2008 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed, RR.
Backs up my point yesterday about YES to Sheets and NO to Fuentes.
I wouldn’t mind a one-year flyer on RJ as option #2.
Proud sponsor of the Official 2009 StL Cardinal theme song:
to be honest I had thought that Pettite
was washed up, or way over rated. but i havent followed him since he left Houston
www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D
by jealousblues on Dec 13, 2008 3:43 PM EST up reply actions
yeah, chuckb, this is a great tutorial on tra. this is a real learning moment.
this site is a great resource.
Farmers and Statisticians
I’ve been following the primers over at BTB as well, but I wouldn’t yet attempt to implement them in public discussion. No doubt those metrics offer a better insight to past and expected future performance than wins/losses, or fan’s gut feelings about how a pitcher will perform in a new setting, look in a birds uni etc. What I would like to see is an old school, been in the system for years scout/coach’s predictions compared with the SABR predictions in a one season period for a group of players with whom the scout/coach has some familarity/ knowledge and compare them with the then, i.e. pre-performance, SABR expectations, at the end of the season. It probably wouldn’t prove anything; if the scout/coach were wrong it’s just one person, if the SABR predictions are wrong it would be explicable within an aceptable range of error or a new metric would be provided to explain the discepancy. I’m not dissing the SABR approach, it’s fascinating, when I understand, nevertheless, I’d like to see a comparison of experience vs. stats. For predictions, I think i’d trust a guy who’s been farming for 40 years over a guy who in the past year has analyzed the farming statistics over the past 40 years – to put it in a non-baseball experience vs. stat analysis context.
Other mysteries remain. TL
well, i’m a number cruncher by training, so i tend to compare numbers to other numbers, and it bothers me that evidently nobody’s sat down and compared tra to the much simpler fip. if i built a projection stat, that’d be the first thing i’d do.
by greenback06 on Dec 13, 2008 12:30 PM EST up reply actions
yup
it seems like it got widespread acceptance pretty much overnight; suddenly, it’s “the most advanced stat out there” and yet we don’t know if it works, and can’t replicate the work ourselves based on the information available, so we can’t check the math. And it tells us that Jorge De La Rosa and Sidney Ponson were basically as good as Aaron Cook or Adam Wainwright or Carlos Zambrano in 2008.
I think I’ll wait a bit before I start quoting this stat. Change my name to grouchy if you want ;)
they can't play baseball, they don't wear sweaters, they're not good dancers, they don't play drums
+1
The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.
by thegodfather on Dec 13, 2008 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
The theory behind communism sounded good too
Just didn’t seem to work in practice…
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
I feel the same way about
PMR. I like the approach, but some of the results don’t seem to make sense.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
I have, when I first developed it.
It beat the crap out of it for the 2006-07 data, but I haven’t got around to actually running a 5 year study. Graduation, new job, etc. Sorry that it bothers you.
by Graham MacAree on Dec 13, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions
i’d worry less about my feelings than about sky kalkman’s and other prominent folks’ knowledge of your work. and not to put the onus on you, because as much as your stat gets quoted, it’s disappointing that evidently (again, assuming kalkman’s statement about the lack of validation is correct) nobody else took the initiative to validate your findings on their own.
by greenback06 on Dec 13, 2008 10:42 PM EST up reply actions
I agree. I'd love to see the scout's side on everything.
Although, in order to compare the approaches, their info would need to be on the same scale (say, ERA).
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 14, 2008 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
so wait
i’m a little confused…why is waino so low…is it because he was hurt a good portion of last year…or is he not as good as well all think he is?
injury
he threw 132 innings last year. If he gets to 200 next year, the RAR will (should?) go way up and be near 35-40. That’d make him worth $15-20M as a 3.5-4 WAR player.
which is why
i think the folks who make the financial decisions need to look at rate and counting stats separately. one can always extrapolate a rate stat if need be, but as humans, this is not likely to be a simple linear extension. consequently, i pay little attention to counting stats outside of simple things like HRs. tRA looks interesting, but i’d like it better if it were converted to a rate stat.
"No matter where you go, there you are" Buckeroo Bonzai Across the 8th Dimension
it is a rate stat
the RAR that Sky Kalkman created based off of it was a counting stat. You can get a rate stat out of it by just dividing by innings, IE RAR/IP = RARr.
they can't play baseball, they don't wear sweaters, they're not good dancers, they don't play drums
How is RAR calculated?
According to statcorner KMac’s tRA* is 4.37 and I’d be curious to see what his RAR would be, and how it would move if more innings were pitched (leaving durability, etc questions aside)
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 1:09 PM EST reply actions
You could click through to the article for the explanation...
RAR = (repEAR – playerERA) x IP / 9 x lev
Leverage piece is for relievers only.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 14, 2008 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
Not a fan of using a stat that relies heavily on IP
and then coming to the conclusion that Wainwright was our only above average pitcher.
shouldn't that tell us how good Wainwright is
considiering that he had the fewest IP of anyone?
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
what, exactly,
is it that you don’t approve of? Wellemeyer, Looper and Lohse all pitched full seasons — 190+ IP — and registered fewer than 20 RAR. Presumably, if they had thrown 130 IP, they would have been around 10-12 RAR. What does the number of IP have to do w/ Lohse’s, Wellemeyer’s, or Looper’s totals? The number of IP is the reason they’re (the RAR) as high as they are. Or is it that you disapprove of the notion that, at best, these 3 are league average pitchers?
I think that if a stat actually biases towards a full season
And we have a pitchers that pitched full seasons with seamingly above average stuff, and it still biases against them there is something wrong. This would lead me to believe that our starters are all below average except for one and we didn’t get a full season from him. Yet the staff as a whole last year was fine, which is way to many IP and way to much data for me to excuse based on a statistic. Therefore, I can’t except conclusions drawn from it.
I suppose we just disagree
that “the staff as a whole last year was fine.” I don’t at all agree that it was. It wasn’t awful but it certainly wasn’t good either. I also reject the notion that any stat that suggests that Lohse and Wellemeyer aren’t as good as we think they are is a bad one.
at the same time, I am surprised at how bad tra thinks that Wellemeyer is
I wonder if his bad months just drug him down a LOT or what.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
well
let’s not forget that Wellemeyer was hurt, and that the time around the injury he wasn’t very effective (not to mention that Phillies game had to blow up his stats, and throw weight into the numbers that perhaps should not be there, since it just lost the cards one game)
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 5:48 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, this is a good point, one some people are missing.
20 RAR is about average OVER A FULL SEASON. So you could say Wainright was above-average in quality and below-average in quantity. Or that his production was about as valuable as an average starter over a full season.
Skill and past value are different beasts.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 14, 2008 12:53 PM EST up reply actions
I'll take three years of Oliver Perez
over one year of Randy Johnson any day. Perez has upside, and I’m sick of one-year patchwork solutions. But most of all I’m sick of following a disfunctional organization that seems to have no clear idea of what it really wants and needs and is all to willing to accept second best because it is unwilling to spend for real quality. If they really are convinced that Fuentes is what they need, they should make it happen and stop haggling. Teams like the Mets and Phillies target the players they need and find a way to get them (Putz, Ibanez). The Cardinals dither endlessly and then find their “generous” offers simply aren’t good enough. What a surprise! Fear not, however. There’s always that fabled “low-hanging fruit,” which all too often is bruised, in more ways than one.
Do you think that Randy effing Johnson doesn't have upside? Really?
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
I really hate some of the notions of 'upside' that people advance
if you’re talking about Anthony Reyes, yes, by all means, look at what he might develop into and his skill set, and try to project.
But a vet’s upside is probably their best season. Just like Anthony Reyes might not live to potential, Randy Johnson might not be able to replicate his best seasons. But he had them, so it shows that he’s capable of that. If they’re distantly removed, they are less probable. Dude had a 117 ERA+ last year, and is only four years off of losing the Cy Young to a steroided Roger Clemens.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
also, because I had forgotten that randy johnson was an expo
and upon discovering this, decided that that would be a… erm… unflattering picture.
Well, it didn’t disappoint:
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
actually
that might be the most flattering picture ever of RJ
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
No.
The most flattering pictures of the Big Ugly Unit are the ones taken from behind.
by StanTheManFan on Dec 14, 2008 12:37 AM EST up reply actions
Beg to differ.
Dude’s got a weird butt and bird legs. But really, there is no flattering angle from which to photograph Randy Johnson.
i think that in that picture, whether you believe it or not,
RJ is trying to smile.
I like that even when he tries, he looks like he had just drunk half a bottle of jim beam and probably killed the man who took his photo 90 seconds later.
Point taken.
I meant to say the most flattering pictures of the Big Ugly’s face are the ones taken from behind. Remember the old limerick? “For beauty I’m not a great star … There are others more handsome by far … But my face, I don’t mind it … Because I’m behind it … It’s the folks out in front that I jar.”
by StanTheManFan on Dec 14, 2008 11:14 AM EST up reply actions
That's
exactly what I think. If you weren’t so wedded to the notion that a 45-year-old pitcher is likely to repeat last year’s statistics, you might think so too.
Even if RJ
doesn’t replicate last season’s performance, he still has a better shot of outdoing Perez’s performance than Perez does. Why? Because RJ is a fantastic pitcher, one who has adapted to his loss of overwhelming power. Oliver Perez is not a very good pitcher, and he probably never will be.
Further, why would you want to lock yourself into a contract with a mediocre pitcher? We’ve already done that with Piniero and with Lohse, who is better than mediocre, but only based on last season. By signing another pitcher, and a not very good one at that, to a multi-year contract, you are wasting money and opportunity. Perez isn’t suddenly going to be a great pitcher, just like Randy Johnson isn’t suddenly going to fall off a cliff.
by spants on Dec 13, 2008 5:01 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
If you weren't so wedded to the notion
that a 45 year old pitcher has no value, you might like RJ more.
and teams like Giants target the players that they want and go and get them
but then overpay really badly and cripple themselves. The Mets and the Yankees and Bosox can afford to make a few mistakes. We kind of can, but unless Carp bounces back, we’re already paying for a huge mistake. We really cant’ afford another one.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
you don't like Johnson
but think that Oliver Perez offers “real quality?” And Ibanez blows, big time. His signing is easily the worst of the offseason so far. They gave a 36 year old who is one of the worst defensive players in baseball a 3 year, $30M contract rather than offering Burrell — a better hitter who helps balance their offense more while offering similarly poor defense — arbitration and a 1 year deal. A 3 year deal for a bad player isn’t better than a 1 year deal for a good player.
My point
is not that the Phillies are necessarily right. It’s simply that they identify a player they want and get him. The Cardinals identify a player they want, lowball him, and get outbid for him. That’s why these offseasons are always so fruitful. I’m sure we’ll soon be hearing the opportunities will be better in spring training, or July for sure.
I'm, for one,
glad that the Cardinals have missed out on some “opportunities” over the years because they would’ve been very expensive mistakes. Prudence is wiser than “gimme, gimme, gimme.”
Holliday, Ohman, Fuentes last year etc.
I like keeping Motte, Ludwick and Perez, thanks.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 7:56 PM EST up reply actions
just because the Cards put a certain value and don’t step over a line on “players they want” doesn’t make them a bad F.O.
Actually, that’s what I want in an F.O.
There’s nothing wrong in saying that it’s too much. However, it’s easy to get burnt when you turn your head when you know it’s too much.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 7:55 PM EST up reply actions
But nothing is ever just about the player.
It’s about the player and the player’s price. Most FAs have bad contracts. So losing out on them is usually a good thing. But to have an offer out there that might be accepted and that isn’t outrageous is a good plan.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
But a three-year deal
for a talented pitcher with upside is better than a one-year deal for a player who once was good but is now a good candidate to break down. Basically, I don’t accept your evaluations. I think you’re too enamored of last year’s statistics, which I don’t think are likely to repeat themselves.
so you'd rather go w/ a 3 year contract
to a pitcher who’s never done anything than a 1 year contract who’s been productive damned near every year of his career?
As I said, I’m all for going w/ a young pitcher. Let’s trade Ankiel + for Ian Kennedy or someone of his ilk. If we’re going to go young, we should go young and 28 ain’t young. We should also go for cost-controlled and paying big bucks to a mediocre starter isn’t that either. Oliver Perez doesn’t fit into the “young with upside” category. He’s middle-aged, mediocre, and expensive.
by chuckb on Dec 13, 2008 5:43 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
If I had a choice of Perez and internal options I would call KMac and tell him to get geared for starting. That would be my choice anyday.
If we’re going to accept mediocre as what Perez represents (ok, "upside") I’d much rather do it with someone who actually has upside and costs all of 400k.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 7:58 PM EST up reply actions
Perez can't throw strikes, and as he ages he'll lose velocity
There probably isn’t any upside there that’s worth more than a few million dollars on a flyer
by JI on Dec 13, 2008 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
Randy Johnson
…is hardly a patchwork solution. Go look at his numbers and tell me that he can’t come out and be a very good 2 for the Cardinals. And why shouldn’t they “haggle” with a guy like Fuentes? If he wants more than he’s worth than you can’t sign him. Period.
Like Valatan above me said, the Mets have a lot more resources than the BoB, so they can overpay a guy that they need. Teams like the Cardinals have to be smarter than that.
I’d say that Mo definately has a direction in mind…build the farm system with Jeff Lunhow, don’t sacrifice young talent in foolish trades, and fill holes with short-term veteran solutions. The Lohse signing is really the only head-scratcher he’s had in his term here.
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 13, 2008 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
Well
Mo didn’t exactly trade A. Reyes in a timely fashion, either. More of a head-shaker than a head-scratcher.
IMO
that was an example of a poker player waiting too long to fold and he ended up owing $100 instead of $20.
Yeah that was a cry-into-your-beer-about-what-could've-been
Different category.
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 13, 2008 3:28 PM EST up reply actions
I think Piñeiro was extended in that interim after Walt was fired and before Mo was officially hired
but I’m not 100% sure.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
you're right
according to Cot’s Mo became the interim GM on 10/3/07 and was hired officially on 10/31/07. Pineiro was extended on October 15. It was Mo. Bad move, Mo.
I agree with the context part
I hate the contract as much as the next guy. But remember this is the same off season Silva was signed. Contracts were peaking at this time and the Cardinals hedged their bets
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 13, 2008 4:50 PM EST up reply actions
context is right
that was a horrible contract. It does make me feel a little better that it was far from being the worst one handed out to pitchers that offseason
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
no, hence the terrible contract statement
I am just trying to make myself feel better about the whole thing. I just like the thought of only having to suffer through it for one more season. If I had to think he was gonna be here for 2 or 3 more I think my head would explode.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
Remember that Marquis signed for 3/$21 and Eaton got 3/$25
He also posted a 3.96 ERA in 11 starts for the Cards in 07 with his first taste of the NL
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 13, 2008 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
However
if we remain w/ the context, they extended him after 64 pretty good innings w/ the team and about 5 bad seasons in a row w/ the M’s and Sox. While salaries were higher, they also fell for the notion that 64 innings w/ Duncan is a better indicator than several hundred previous innings.
I think they thought he could maintain
His career low walk rates due to the switch to the NL
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 13, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions
I wonder if it was a situation
where the deal was already in place and Mo’s hand was forced because the organization had already decided. Then again, Mo was probably part of that decision.
Ya, I believe you are right
Although I liked the deal at the time. At least there were much worse deals made. He looked pretty good for the Cards b4 he was resigned and had a few good seasons for the Mariners in years past. I think it was a reasonable gamble on his return to form. Would be nice to not have to pay him this year though.
I like Mo, therefore Walt extended Pineiro
It feels right, so it probably is, right?
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 13, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions
give mo a break. remember that this was october of 2007.
just remember what our rotation looked like in 2007.
while we overpaid, pineiro was much better than kip wells. and the FA class that year was very very thin. mo had very few options.
It's looking more and more
like Mo doesn’t want to sacrifice any young talent in any trades. Either that, or his idea of that talent differs significantly from that of his rivals. I’m afraid that with a few exceptions the “talent” isn’t as good as some of us think it is.
Ankiel + Reifer = Ian Kennedy
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 13, 2008 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
It depends
on who he can get. I suspect it’s less than we think with what he is willing to offer.
You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth here
Why is Oliver Perez a good bet on an expensive 3-year deal due to his upside, but Mo is wrong for holding onto players that are younger, cost next to nothing, and will be with the team for 6 years because of their upside?
Perez
does have upside, but how long do you wait for his upside? Perez might just be nothing more than failed potential. Beyond that , is his upside even any better than what Johnson will give you next year? There are reasons why Johnson is projected to be a better pitcher next season than Oliver Perez. Also, with Perez you might be paying for several years of mediocrity, you don’t have that problem with RJ on a one year contract.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
Last time I checked
Perez wanted slightly less than Burnett and Derek Lowe money with the same amount of years.
As of right now he’d be a terrible sign.
Yes...
…I’m intrigued by Perez, but not at nearly Derek Lowe money.
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 13, 2008 3:29 PM EST up reply actions
You don't?
Johnson’s inevitable breakdown is long overdue. Why not this year?
why not last year?
come on, there’s nothing that has been shown that he’ll drop off the map. he’s still solid even at his age.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 7:48 PM EST up reply actions
At what cost would you rather have Oliver than Randy?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Angels Are Fuentes' 'First Choice'
According to James Burns of the Merced Sun-Star, Brian Fuentes said the Angels are his “first choice.”
“Anaheim would be a great fit, being a California kid,” Fuentes told Burns.
Fuentes goes on to say that he’s not worried to see fewer suitors out there, now that Francisco Rodriguez and Kerry Wood have signed. Instead, he said it’s a good thing, especially since he sees himself as “the last top-end closer left.”
The Angels, Brewers, Tigers and Cardinals could all pursue Fuentes.
Stat Whore
That's the way
it always ends up that way with the Cardinal wish list. Why should this year be any different? It’s just the Cardinals being “aggressive” as usual.
Ok
They’re pretty good at hanging on to their money. I’ll credit them with that.
you a little bit
bitter?
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 6:18 PM EST up reply actions
The Cardinals have been
one of the most successful teams of this decade, just after the Red Sox. With a fixed income, not every season can be champagne and caviar. And besides, we’re top 10 in payroll in a mid-sized media market. We’re lucky the Cardinals spend as much as they do. Some of us just want them to spend wisely.
by spants on Dec 13, 2008 6:24 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
When you win so much and then go through a rough patch, that’s when you start seeing the cynicals come out in droves in my opinion.
It’s kinda sad to see.
Agreed on all of your points.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 7:52 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah.
I have no patience for The Cynicals. I mean, the Yankees spend more than anyone, and they haven’t won the W.S. since 2000. Simply spending money on free agents is not the key to success for an MLB franchise.
Aside: I can’t decide whether that’s a good band name or not. Hmm…
Devil's advocate part two
The Yankees position in the AL east since 1993:
2, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3.
I know the Red Sox have only recently come to power, but that’s an insane run.
I think that a playoff position can be virtually bought, but running a best of 5/7/7 playoff gauntlet could be difficult for even an all-star team to win because of the inherent variance in baseball games.
I should've said
that simply spending money on free agents isn’t the only key to success for an MLB franchise.
Obviously, the Yankees have been wildly successful. They effing better be after spending that much money. And like you said, there are inherent variance in baseball games, and seasons, and players, etc. That’s why no team is winning the WS every single season.
Still, you’ve got to feel pretty good about being a Cardinals fan when compared to other NL franchises.
The Cynicals
sounds more like a beat poetry troupe
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
there is a band called Cynic
who just released their comeback album (Traced in Air) after 15 years of hiatus, to critical acclaim.
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 14, 2008 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
Devil's advocate part one
The Cardinals had extreme fortune to not just land Pujols, but also sign him to 7Y/100M.
True.
Don’t you think other teams have had fortunate moments, signings, etc? Albert could’ve done a smaller deal. He could’ve done a year-by-year arbitration thing. But he wanted to play here. Do I think that’s luck? Maybe. I think that playing for the Cardinals is attractive to Albert and he wants to be here. But that’s true of any superstar that signs with any team. Even if the team is paying through the nose, they’re still fortunate to have durable, talented players who suit up and play for them instead of the opponents.
Either way, the Cardinals have made some good decisions and have fielded competitive teams for the most part. Luck? Maybe. But we’ve had a lot of bad luck too.
sometimes
you don’t want what’s on the Cardinals wish list
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 6:18 PM EST up reply actions
Being aggressive and being stupid
are two entirely different things, for the record.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 7:52 PM EST up reply actions
Wrong End of the Free Agent Pool
…for starters. As much as I would like to see Ben Sheets or Randy Johnson (Brad Penny) pitching in red, I just don’t believe the FO will go that route. Just because they are trying to throw all the remaining funds at a closer doesn’t mean they would do the same for a starter if they miss out on Fuentes. They will take the same old path to the bottom of the barrell looking for starting pitchers. The only difference will be they are going to be less likely to sign any physical question marks (which is about 75% of the whole pool anyway, health is always a question). That leaves the “mental” question marks … Daniel Cabrera.
I would much rather gamble on Sheets or Penny than Fuentes. The roster makes it seem easier to find an in house closer rather than one or two starting pitchers.
by Beardsville Rockers on Dec 13, 2008 3:05 PM EST reply actions
When did Penny's transition from all-star to dirt begin?
Honestly I didn’t follow him very closely and was surprised when I found he’d become a reclamation project.
2007 all star game
is a pretty clear delineation point. He was still decent in the second half of ’07 (3.84 ERA) but nowhere near his first half (2.34), and of course he was awful in ’08.
they can't play baseball, they don't wear sweaters, they're not good dancers, they don't play drums
About the time he started
that allstar game. His arm was dragging the dirt!
by Beardsville Rockers on Dec 13, 2008 3:12 PM EST reply actions
I am surprised the Cards are not linked more wtih the
White Sox and Bobby Jenks…..he’s clearly available and has 3 years of arbitration eligibility before FA…..if we wanted Putz then why not Jenks?
you have a point there
and I’d kind of rather have Jenks than Putz, anyway.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
so would I
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 6:20 PM EST up reply actions
His velo has dropped 4 mph over the last 4 seasons
And his K/9 was a totally unsustainable 5.55 last year.
Not afraid to nitpick
Fuentes tRA* last year was 3.08
So I hope you guys are starting to understand how good he was all the while pitching in COLORADO
Stat Whore
’07 : 4.51
Though, to be fair Izzy’s great comeback in ’07 netted him 4.58
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 3:40 PM EST up reply actions
’06 : 3.70
’05 : 3.97
’04 : 4.21
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 3:41 PM EST up reply actions
again, i know you may feel that you’re alone in wanting Fuentes, but I don’t think it’s the case.
I’d love to have him, just not at 11m per – a price that he won’t get I’d bet. We do have quite a bit of money off the books next year so we can niggle around.
But we need another starter, one that is good enough to push Joel into a longman or spot start role/fill in for Carp.
If the org would take on Fuentes while not adding him to the “soft cap” we have going into this year, I think you’d find a lot more people in favor. 80% of remaining funds to one guy, no matter how good who will pitch as little innings as Fuentes is a hard pill to swallow.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 3:39 PM EST up reply actions
Money off the books
next year? That’s always the story with the Cardinals. It was the story last year about this year. They love to string us along, and some of us bite every time.
We actually have quite a bit of money coming offf the books next year
The pay raises won’t be that much to Wainwright or Lohse. The problem is that the Free Agent market looks pretty weak so far.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 13, 2008 5:14 PM EST up reply actions
They always have a problem
when it comes to spending on free agents. They also seem to have a trading problem. They do throw money at their own injury risks. I’ll give them that.
So far this offseasons...
The Cardinals have locked up a Starting pitcher {Lohse};improved thier middle infield{Greene}; and improved the left side of thier Bullpen{Miller}. Before the offseason they locked up thier Gold Glove catcher{Yadi} and their rising star pitcher{Wainwright.}.
That’s aggressive.
They will have about the same payroll as they did last year. And in the first time in a long time attendance is going to be an issue. If they don’t end up Fuentes it is going to be because the Angles are going to give him $30+ mil for 3 years. Wouldn’t surprise me if they decide to go as high as $33mil.
If the Cardinals don’t get him that money will still end up in the payroll somewhere.
I highly doubt Angels will sign Fuentes
They plan on using Shields as a closer. I actually think Fuentes saying he wants to go the Angels for his first choice is just a ploy to get them more involved. I think Cardinals are the highest bidder right now but it is still lower than he wants to accept.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 13, 2008 6:23 PM EST up reply actions
is the problem...
that they don’t have a NYC level pay roll?
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 6:22 PM EST up reply actions
No, it seems when you finish fourth place it allows some to take all of the stereotypes based around the team and wrap them up in a ball of cynicalism.
let’s go resign Mulder to a 2 year deal so he’ll be right, sigh.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 8:00 PM EST up reply actions
there’s 29 other teams, if the “story” of the cardinals is causing that much grief
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 7:40 PM EST up reply actions
His numbers aren't as pretty going back more than one year, though. And he's 34.
I really like him, but I’d rather have KRod and Wood at similar prices. If KRod’s at $12MM, Fuentes is probably $8-$9MM.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
And that's a big IF.
Really should be $9MM and $6MM
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
One thing that should be said, though
a statistic that normalizes pitcher performance so that we can predict how they would perform in front of an average defense does not necessarily tell us how much a pitcher might benefit from playing in front of a particular defense.
For example, lets say that a particular pitcher gets almost all of his outs from strikeouts. he’s going to perform essentially in the same way in front of any defense. Great defenders behind him might prevent doubles from becoming triples, they might get a few more assists on run scoring plays, bt in the end, they’re probably goign to be about the same.
A groundball pitcher, however, lives and dies with his defense. He will perform much better than average in front of a great defense, and much more poorly in front of a horrible defense. It’s something interesting to keep in mind, I would think. Just for the sake of saying that someone like Brandon Webb might be a better ideal pitcher for us than someone like Tim Linsecum.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
which, maybe I should test this claim if I have the time soon.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
I would be especially interested in
Brandon Webb as a test case. The metrics generally agree that no one on the DBacks infield had very good range.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
I slightly disagree w/ your last statement
Lincecum’s younger and, in my view better. I’ll agree that someone like Webb might benefit more from a good defense such as ours than Lincecum might, but to me, that’s not the same thing as saying that I’d rather have Webb than Lincecum b/c we have a good defense. I wouldn’t rather have Carlos Silva or Wang b/c of their high GB rates but they’d benefit more from being here than from being w/ a poor defensive team.
I was just trying to come up with an example of a good gb pitcher and a good power pitcher
both guys are pretty stellar and relatively young.
But yeah, fair enough.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
and I still wanted to introduce this idea
that we need to be thinking as much about how these guys would perform in front of our defense as we do about how ‘intrinsically good’ they are. If we’re going to carry defensively minded no-hit guys in the MI (though I guess now that we have Greene, maybe this is changing), we might as well use them, I say.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
I agree that it makes no sense
to have ground ball pitchers and poor infielders. It makes sense to have as much good defense on the field as you can. I’ll also add that in our ballpark we shouldn’t be as afraid of fly ball pitchers as the Phils or Reds should b/c it’s tougher to hit homers in Busch and that we might benefit a lot more from fly ball pitchers than most teams would.
it's interesting to see moyer's tra so low relative to his era,
given that he pitched in such a hitter friendly park.
is that because utley/rollins/victorino are just so good up the middle for him?
because I wouldn’t put too much faith in what the phils have at the corners defensively.
and I have trouble figuring out another explanation for why he’s a third of a point lower in tra than pettitte (2008 era 4.54), when moyer had a great 2008 (era 3.71).
if utley/rollins/victorino are propping up a mediocre pitcher in a bad pitcher’s park by that much, then i think we need to give them a round of applause.
nevermind
Nelson is a righty. he had a good year last year but is 34. for some reason I thought he was a lefty
I wouldn't mind
signing him to a low $ contract and bringing him to spring training w/ the intention of sticking him in the pen and being our long man. If he pitches well, he could work his way into the rotation but, if not, we could dump him and miss nothing. I do not want him to be considered for our 5th rotation spot right now, however.
I don't disagree
it’s just — if it’s him or Brad Thompson, I’ve seen Thompson and know that he doesn’t have much. I wouldn’t mind seeing if Cabrera can find a reawakening somewhere else.
Move from AL to NL + "Duncan Magic" = viability?
Don’t know enough about Cabrera’s stuff to know if he’s a good candidate for a Dave Duncan re-work, though.
Ya ever see Thompson before the shoulder woes?
Damn he used to be filthy.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 8:18 PM EST up reply actions
how about Brad Thompson as 5th rotation spot?
and Pineiro being our long man
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 13, 2008 6:27 PM EST up reply actions
Randy Johnson won't sign here....
I don’t know why people keep bringing him up like he’s an option – he only wants to sign with a West Coast team.
I think people here sometimes think this is a video game. There are other factors than simply stats and money involved.
Felipe Lopez - next year's Joel Pineiro
and as I said in the post
that “west coast” stuff was never mentioned until there were only west coast teams who were interested. In fact, a coupole of weeks ago he said he’d play for the Cardinals. I don’t know why people comment on posts they haven’t read.
by chuckb on Dec 13, 2008 8:02 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
C'mon Chuck...
You don’t honestly believe that he wanted to come to St. Louis do you? The dude was willing to take a giant pay cut to stay in Arizona because they train in Arizona and they play in Arizona and he lives in Arizona. If the Cardinals offer him $10M and the Angels, Giants, and Oakland all offer him $10M, do you think that we have any chance at all of signing him?
He’s using us like AJ Burnett has used us the last two times he’s been a free agent — he wants to drum up a number of buyers so he can drum up the price. Period.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
I get all of my trade ideas from R.B.I Baseball
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 8:04 PM EST up reply actions
As do I
Just something about an entire roster of Ronnie Belliard’s entices me for some reason….
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
I'm still pissed Jose was in the lineup and Mark was on the bench
bullshit I say.
One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.
by AdjustedExpectations on Dec 13, 2008 8:07 PM EST up reply actions
Awesome Video Game coming out in Jan
MLB Front Office by 2KSports. It looks pretty sweet. You get to be a GM and control every aspect imaginable of the Front Office.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Dec 13, 2008 8:25 PM EST up reply actions
Funniest comment of the year so far.
Diamondbacks manger Bob Melvin hinted Friday that he might try Felipe Lopez at leadoff next season.
“He can do a lot to complement our roster,” said Melvin. “Defensively, as a base runner, offensively.”
I am going to have to recheck the definition of “complement.”
Very useful post. It highlights how inept the pitching was on all fronts. The need for more effective starters is clearly there . .
. . . for starters
An optimist is a man who upon discovering that a rose smells better than a cabbage concludes it will make better soup.
HL Mencken
Excellent post to inform the starter-closer discussion of the past few days
There have been several comments recently about getting cost controlled young pitchers. A week or so ago there was talk of a trade for Edwin Jackson or Andy Sonnanstine from Tampa Bay. I followed your links, and here are their tERA, TRA*, and RAR respectively. Edwin J 5.23, 5.51, 10, and the numbers speak for themselves. Looper would seem to have been a better option. However, Andy S. is 3.51, 4.31, and 49! While the discussion about acquiring Randy Johnson or Sheets has merit, Sonnanstine would appear to have what can genuinely be described as upside. I hope that trade is still being considered.
by kkkkathmandubirdsview on Dec 14, 2008 8:53 AM EST reply actions
Not to mention Sonny is cost controlled!
But didn’t TB trade Jackson to the Tigers? I think they did, and if this is the case I think it would be much more difficult to pry Sonnanstine away from the Rays. Either way, I hope the FO is trying to pursue him.
Patiently awaiting the day Colby Rasmus does this: .275/.381/.551/.932, 29HR, in St. Louis...
by RunninRedbird on Dec 14, 2008 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
+1
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Dec 14, 2008 2:42 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
