Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



New Blog: UW Dawg Pound launches! Bar-right-arrows



betting on bradley

if you're feeling uneasy about the transition the cardinals are in the midst of, read yesterday's post at USS Mariner:

If every postseason tells a story, then so far, the story of 2007 is the dominance of the new school of baseball executives. . . .

Cleveland, Arizona, Colorado, and Boston aren't true "Moneyball" organizations --- they're Moneyball 2.0 clubs, the ones who have successfully integrated both scouting and statistical analysis into a cohesive organization and are leveraging every good piece of information they can find into a competitive advantage. . . . .

This isn't stats vs scouts --- this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going.

it's where the cardinals are trying to go, too. walt's gone because he placed himself in opposition to that objective; the new guy, whatever other strengths and weaknesses he might possess, will be down with it.

the term "every good piece of information" jumped out at me, given the source of the article; USS Mariner itself, you might recall, became a source of valuable information this summer. in its june 27 post, USSM noted a counterproductive pattern in felix hernandez's pitch selection. the team's pitching coaches (allegedly) had already noted the same pattern, but it was the USSM post that got through to hernandez; after reading it, he altered his pitch sequencing habits --- and reaped the benefits. he went 10-3 the rest of the way, shaved nearly half a run off his era, and lowered his opponent ops by about 75 points.

the point being --- blog communities made up of knowledgeable fans are among the sources of information that "moneyball 2.0" organizations have begun to use. including this blog community. i've had enough interactions with jeff luhnow and his charges to know that they read the site daily --- not just the main-page posts but also the comments and the diaries. and luhnow has a history of taking fan input seriously --- back in march 2004, shortly after he joined the cardinal front office as a consultant, luhnow wrote brian gunn soliciting input about how much the cards ought to pay edgar renteria (scroll down to the march 30 post). gunn dug into the numbers and set parameters that turned out to be right on the (literally) money --- between $8m a year (the cards' top offer to edgar) and $10m a year (what renteria got from boston).

check out brian's analysis --- it's simple, logical, and based on freely available sources of information. three and a half years later there's much better information in the public domain, and we have that much more empirical data about how the baseball marketplace values certain types of performance. (see jeff sackmann's post today at the Hardball Times for a more recent example of this type of work.) so here's a little assignment --- pick a free agent you like; rough out an estimate of what he's likely to get offered this winter (with empirical data behind the estimate); and then make your case for why that player will (or might) outperform his contract --- ie, be worth more on the field than he is in the marketplace. the guy i wrote about on tuesday, ryan franklin, is a prime example of what i'm talking about --- the market valued him at a million bucks, barely above replacement level; he delivered performance that was worth about $6 million, give or take.

in my mind, a free agent with a very good chance to outperform his contract is milton bradley. baggage? you betcha. he's fragile both emotionally and physically. between injuries, suspensions, and other aggravating factors, he has averaged just 77 games and 281 at-bats a year since 2005. but he's also a gifted 30-year-old player who gets on base, hits with considerable power, runs the bases well, and plays superior defense. those virtues appear to carry more weight than bradley's faults; he has generally been a member of winning teams. bradley has started for two division winners in the last 4 years (dodgers 04, athletics 06), and his team only missed out on the playoffs this year (san diego) because trevor hoffman blew saves in games 161 and 163. granted, bradley's tantrum on the penultimate sunday of the year didn't help matters; he lost his cool, got hurt, and missed the last 8 games of the season. but the padres still should have been in, and they wouldn't have been in that position without bradley. before he joined the padres, they were averaging just 4.26 runs a game; bradley came aboard on july 7 and produced a .313 / .414 / .590 line, which helped raise the padres' output to 4.86 runs/game the rest of the way. the team obp rose 20 points after he joined them; the team slugging, 45 points.

since 2004 bradley has posted an aggregate .830 ops despite playing in three of the toughest hitters' parks in baseball --- los angeles, oakland, and san diego. one of these years he's gonna stay healthy and out of trouble and have an all-star season while making platoon-player money --- and the team that holds that contract is gonna be in contention.

what's he likely to get offered this winter? let's start with his basic output, and leave the baggage aside for a moment. over the last three years, bradley has averaged 6 win shares above bench (WSAB), which translates to roughly 2 wins above replacement level. per Baseball Prospectus' WARP (wins above replacement), bradley has been worth about 3 marginal wins a year since 2005. both these figures are unadjusted for playing time --- that's what bradley has contributed in half a season, basically. if he could ever stay on the field for 130 games, we can safely assume that he'd be worth 5 or 6 wins --- slightly better than chris duncan, if you want a comparison.

a player like that is worth $10m a year on the open market; bradley clearly isn't going to get offered $10m. so what will he get offered? given the glut of available outfielders this year, i think he'll go cheap; that's just my gut. guys like andruw jones, aaron rowand, torii hunter, and bob abreu are going to attract all the big-money offers, and still-useful geezers like luis gonzalez, kenny lofton, and moises alou will draw lots of interest on one-year pacts; there are also plenty of reliable mid-level players out there mike cameron and shawn green and brad wilkerson. given all those alternatives, teams are likely to shy away from a baggage-y player like bradley. so i think he'll slip through the cracks and go for less than what his "objective" market value is.

objectively, that value is about $6m a year --- that's the average taken from the Hardball Times win shares calculator and Baseball Prospectus' MORP estimator, using his 3-year averages of WSAB and WARP, respectively. realistically, i think the cardinals can get him for $4m a year or less. let's take a look at a few fairly comparable players:

player years avg G avg AB overall
WSAB
overall
WARP
overall
OPS
signing
dave dellucci 2004-06 122 343 14 7.9 .856 3 yrs / $11m
frank catalanotto 2004-06 111 368 15 11.0 .799 3 yrs / $13.5m
eric byrnes 2003-05 127 447 12 14.2 .763 1 yr / $2.3m
nomar garciaparra 2003-05 103 403 25 12.9 .844 1 yr / $6m
bradley 2005-07 77 281 18 12.0 .855 ????

these are all part-time outfielders (except garciaparra) of a similar age to bradley; the average annual salary is $4m. it's a short list of comps; if i had more time, i'd come up with more. but i think $4m a year is a pretty reasonable guess for this player.

he's worth that easy, even if he only manages to play half a season. if he plays 100 games, you're way ahead on the deal; if you get lucky and he stays out there for 140 games, you've got a gold mine. i see very little downside and loads upon loads of upside; my kind of bet.

so that's my message to the front office --- take a close look at milton bradley. sound off on him if you want (should be a fair number of "he's not worthy of the the birds on the bat!!!" comments), but better yet name somebody else who you think will be a good value buy this off-season --- and explain why.

0 recs | Comment 102 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

solid rationale
What you're talking about is akin to Warren Buffett-esque value investing, i.e. exploiting the market by investing money in something that's undervalued. Billy Beane first did it with walks and OBP, then shifted to defense.

I think you did a good job with the comps. All are very talented guys who are injury prone. Although I wonder if those comps seem more like max-effort guys. What's Bradley's reputation for giving 100%? Obviously we know about his famous temper - but how hard does he work?

Also, did anyone else see his interview in the locker room shortly after the crazy injury and umpire incident? I was surprised and impressed with how Bradley represented himself. His comments presented a composed, measured and intelligent viewpoint. He represented himself in a mature and fair way. It was not at all what I would have expected.

Anyone have a youtube link to that?

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 9:42 AM EDT   0 recs

I agree Bradley is a valuble option
That said, my concerns about Bradley do not stem from his volatility, but his injuries (there is a reason why he is heavily discounted outside of his temperament). Not only has Bradley been injury prone throughout his career, but in 2008 he will be coming off of ACL surgery, which as we have seen in the recent past (from Berkman to Alou to Kubel) can sap your power (and may impact his D) for the first few months you play after the surgery (or longer in Kubel's case).

by JMedwick on Oct 11, 2007 9:48 AM EDT   0 recs

I thought it was believed that Bradley
would miss a good chunk if not all of 2008 with the ACL tear.
Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 11, 2007 9:52 AM EDT   0 recs

i hadn't heard that
if it's true, it would pretty well sink my theory . . . .

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 10:02 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

it doesn't sound as bad as that, HC
here's what will carroll says:

"Milton Bradley had his knee surgery, repairing the ACL torn in the strangest manner I've ever seen as well as some associated meniscal problems. Bradley likely won't be ready for spring training, and even then will have another chronic problem to deal with on top of his leg, back, and oblique problems, as well as any attempt to rehabilitate the reputation he carries. Bradley had Tim Kremchek do the surgery since Kremchek repaired his knee back in 2005 when Bradley was dealing with a patellar tendon problem. Bradley was able to return quickly from that, and there's no reason to think that he won't be able to do the same here, once he finds a team that needs his bat."

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6765

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 10:04 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I originally heard it on XM from a SD beat writer
but online, all I can seem to find is that with the torn ACL, it was going to be 6 months and:

During surgery, doctors also found Bradley had torn his meniscus and fixed it, the team said.

Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 11, 2007 10:06 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

it it's six months
then he's back in april

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 10:08 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Knees don't
necessarily heal on a timeline...Plus if there is also arthritic degeneration at the knee(do we have an answer to this?)you can set your sights much lower.  Guys like Bill Mueller and Mo Vaughn come to mind.

by DesmetMattdNYC on Oct 11, 2007 11:54 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

imagine this-
I reply to a post about injuries.

2 things:

  1. ACL rehab takes about 6 months nowadays.  Players usually don't feel "right" until 12-18 months.  It is easier to return to baseball activities than football or basketball activities.  I don't think I have to explain why.  I would imagine that the team that signs Bradley would get him at about 75-80% speed and strength for at least the first half of next year.  He tore his right ACL, which would limit his batting from the right side more than the left.  His defense would also be mildly limited.
  2.  The torn meniscus that was "repaired" was likely just cleaned up.  Meniscal repairs are very rare, as the tear has to be clean so it can be sewed back together.  If they actually repaired the meniscus, he cannot bear weight on his leg for 6-8 weeks, and this will delay his rehab about a month.

by silent_bob on Oct 11, 2007 12:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

good info bob
thanks as always. based on this, i would think whoever signs him wants at least a 2-year deal, maybe 3, with the contract heavily back-loaded. so maybe it's 3 yrs / $15m guaranteed, where you pay him $3m in 2008 and $6m in '09 and 2010; or maybe you structure it similar to the they structured mulder's contract, by a low base and lard it up with incentives and a flashy option year if he's able to stay healthy.

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 2:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If the Cards took this chance...
with a back-loaded and especially incentive-laden deal, I'd be plenty happy.

As Bob said, and as most of my anecdotal knowledge seems to indicate though, it can be the full year before the an athlete is fully back from an ACL tear.

Good to hear that with baseball activities that this is generally less though, which of course makes sense, since it's less strenuous, and most of my anecdotal info is from basketball players.

by mtalken on Oct 11, 2007 6:33 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Bradley in the clubhouse....
I agree, he would be a good signing without the "baggage" he carries... The Cardinals have some pretty darned strong-willed guys in the clubhouse (Pujols, Rolen, Edmonds, Molina)... would being around those guys help Bradley with his (admitted) "anger management" issues?

MB was definitely provoked into his most recent blow-up (else, why would the umpire involved get a season-ending suspension?)

It might depend on the GM-manager combo... assuming TLR's return (I know, that's a big "if"!), Hal McRae could act as a mentor to Bradley. Like Milton, McRae was an oft-injured outfielder with a burning desire to win that occasionally got him in Dutch. It might be better if the Cards had another African-American player who could become Bradley's "buddy"; oh, for a guy with the attitude of a Willie McGee on the roster!

SansLa Russa, would a "rookie" manager like Jose Oquendo or Terry Pendleton be able to deal with Bradley's temper? Dunno, but it's an additional factor to think about.

Bill DeWitt needs to hire a new GM sooner rather than later; the direction of the 2008 Cardinals will follow from that decision.

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on Oct 11, 2007 9:57 AM EDT   0 recs

Eeks
"It might be better if the Cards had another African-American player who could become Bradley's "buddy"; oh, for a guy with the attitude of a Willie McGee on the roster!"

I'm sure the front office will search high and low for a black player (not just any black player, mind you - but the good kind, the kind that acts like Willie McGee) to be Milton Bradley's black "buddy" if they sign him. I mean, we know now that the execs read these blogs.

"Luhnow. Get out there and sign me a black guy. Milton can't play with white people."

by baw on Oct 11, 2007 1:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Look at what...
Look at what the Patriots have done for Randy Moss this year...of course, they are also the best team in the league, bar none.

stlfan

by stlfan on Oct 11, 2007 10:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Springer quotes
Upon signing his contract:

Russ
"I talked to them and made sure we were going to make some moves to be competitive, that we weren't going to rebuild," Springer said. "They assured me that that's not the Cardinal way. We're in it to win it. At my age, I sure didn't want to be part of a rebuilding process."

His Agent
"Mr. DeWitt said we're going to sign the players we need to sign, go after the players we need to go after, trade if trades will help. I wanted to hear that."

Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 11, 2007 10:03 AM EDT   0 recs

Larry,
At first I thought you were going with the "new moneyball" angle of taking advantage of a glitch in the market -- but this time instead of high OBP guys being under appreciated, it was "crazy people" who could be had on the cheap. I choose to ignore your further writings and subscribe to this theory. Please send a newsletter accordingly.

(also, in a somewhat serious voice: I agree that he'd be a good signing. Switch hitter, decent glove, can be had below market value. And he's one of the funniest crowd hecklers I have ever seen.)

Well, let's go to the old mill anyway -- get some cider!

by Alxfritz on Oct 11, 2007 10:05 AM EDT   0 recs

John Rocker for setup man!
This frees Franklin up for a starting role, as LB has stumped for all year long.

by silent_bob on Oct 11, 2007 12:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Carl Everett: Still availible
lord help us if the Cubs sign a dinosaur to pitch to him.

by Valatan on Oct 11, 2007 2:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He's out half the season at least
He'll be out half the season and probably no better than 50% the rest of it.  The ACL tear is going to cut down his defensive prowess and his baserunning skills, as well as tapping his power quite a bit.  Being that these are his "positives" and frustration with the injury could well enhance his "negatives" I don't like this signing at the time.  How about comparing him to the current OF the Cards have in terms of those same numbers.  Lets compare him to Preston, Rick, Jimmy, Juan, and Duncan and see how he measures up.  Only 2 of those guys will make more than we'd have to pay Bradley, and all except Wilson are signed through next year.  Tony's not a fan of Wilson because he doesn't put the ball in play, but Tony might not be back either.
"The Cardinals have won a World Series in THEIR new stadium!" --my Uncle Jim to a heckling Cubs fan

by fourstick on Oct 11, 2007 10:05 AM EDT   0 recs

are you sure he's out that long?
see the will carroll comment above; carroll doesn't anticipate him being sidelined that long

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 10:07 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

and since you mentioned edmonds
he's an older, less productive, more expensive version of bradley --- injury-prone, can't stay on the field. but his abilities are in serious decline, whereas bradley's aren't, and he makes $8m a year, whereas bradley probably will only cost half that.

he's a much better bet than edmonds at this stage of their careers.

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 10:12 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Baseball execs reading VEB
Given the quality empirical research and frequent insightful opinion, I cannot imagine why a GM would not frequent this site.  At the very least, a wise staffer should be gleaning the best of.  I am not bent toward sabrematics (word?) but I am amazed at what you guys come up with up.

On another note, I find it interesting that the AZ and CO rosters are littered with names that the average person had never heard of just a couple years.  Of course these guys didn't just appear out of nowhere and we all know the dangers to modeling a long-term strategy after this year's hot team (you certainly wouldn't mimic the 06 Cardinals), I still feel there is a lesson in player development to be learned from dissecting these two rosters.

Personally, I wouldn't mind saving money spent on average free agents and biting the bullet for a couple years to revamp our system more in the fashion of these two contenders.  A $110M dollar budget permits us to always have 2-3 carefully selected prime investments that when surrounded by AZ/CO like young farm products can make for a killer good team on a consistent basis.

by Hinkster on Oct 11, 2007 10:16 AM EDT   0 recs

If the people in the FO are reading this
can I give them just 4 words?

NO MORE MIGUEL CAIRO!

Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 11, 2007 10:18 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I second that!
Also, how about a backup catcher who's somewhat useful?

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 11:03 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Bradley
I like the Milton Bradley idea for a couple of reasons if the price is right.
a) We need depth in CF.  Jimmy Ballgame is undoubtedly going to take a few trips to the DL next season.  Rick Ankiel is still Rick Ankiel ... anything can happen.  Bradley is a plus defender.
b) We need help at the top of the lineup w/ the expected departure of Eckstein.  Miles is not an everyday leadoff hitter and we just don't have a large enough sample size with Ryan to know what he will give us next year.  Bradley would look great in the 1 or 2 holes.
c) If we got Milton, I would look at us having three players to fill two positions (CF and RF): Jimmy, Bradley, Ankiel.  You stand a good chance of getting 300 games out of these three.  Thus, if you are only expecting 100 games out of each player, it lowers expectations and the lineup is still strong regardless of which 2 play any given day.
d) Bradley is a true switch hitter (not big difference in production from either side of the plate).  If TLR comes back, solves his obsession with the righty -- lefty match up.
e) We have a veteran presence in the Cards clubhouse that can help to moderate Milton.  I'll call it the New England Patriots effects (see Randy Moss circa 2007).
f) Acquiring Bradley makes Duncan expendable in trade for a starter.  Platoon Schu and whoever in left.

by jjray on Oct 11, 2007 10:26 AM EDT   0 recs

F)
Instead of platooning Schumaker or whoever, why not just shift the leftover of the Edmonds, Bradley, Ankiel battle over to LF

by Glowsticks on Oct 11, 2007 3:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

sitting one of the three
The thought is that we cannot count on any of these three (Edmonds, Ankiel, Bradley) for more than 100 games so one sits every night.  It's realistic given injury history of each.

by jjray on Oct 11, 2007 3:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe as a precursor to this analysis
we should define which 2 of the current 3.5 outfielders (Duncan, Edmonds, Ankiel, perhaps Enc) you believe should/could be starting next year along side Bradley?

by sdrone on Oct 11, 2007 10:26 AM EDT   0 recs

none
I don't see the StL OF having 3 stable guys or even 2 for that matter, it will be a rotation.  Assuming Bradley you would rotate Edmonds and Bradley in and out of CF, Ankiel, Duncan, Ludwick would all switch out in RF and LF and occasionally CF.

by StLHugo on Oct 11, 2007 11:08 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

None?
So no Enc.

I could probably live with that situation.  But man it's a lot of outfielders.  heh.

by sdrone on Oct 11, 2007 11:18 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Is there really a bad one year deal...
I have been thinking lately that we will need to be making a lot of one to two year deals in the next couple years.  Given the lack of contract security for the player involved in these deals, I would expect that they would command a premium over what there expected worth relative to performance is.  So for an expected value of $4million per, what should this team be willing to pay beyond that?  Should the Cardinals be willing to pay $8million for an expected performance of $4million if it is a one year deal?

by BigJawnMize on Oct 11, 2007 10:44 AM EDT   0 recs

Thanks, Larry...
...for referencing my Renteria piece from way-back-when.  You're right; there are more sophisticated tools out there to do the kind the kind of analysis I attempted in the post, although re-reading it I'm less ashamed of its methods and conclusions than I thought I'd be.  And of course it was fun to recall Mr. Luhnow reaching out to Redbird Nation, one of my favorite moments from working on that blog.

But I wanted to check and see how close Renteria came to his projections.  His Win Share guesstimates from March of 2004 were 22-19-20-21 over the next four years. His actual Win Share totals were 16-14-19-18.  So he's done slightly worse than I expected -- about one win per season (3 WS are equal to one win), but we might chalk up some of that to the difficulty of playing in an unwelcome environment in Boston, as well as learning a new (and tougher) league.  In the NL he's been about what we expected.  Who knows?  We might need to size him up once again, if the rumors about him coming to St. Louis for '08 turn out to be true...

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on Oct 11, 2007 10:59 AM EDT   0 recs

brian, those win-share figures
are well within acceptable tolerances, as far as i'm concerned.

whaddya think about mr bradley --- would you take a flyer on him, or do you figure the (figurative) price tag of having this guy in your clubhouse is too high? or  maybe you thing the ACL thing lowers his upside . . . . ?

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 11:15 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I would take a flyer on Bradley, yes
Normally I don't like bringing in character issues when assessing a player's skills, but with Bradley the character issues are SO glaring (and so intertwinced with his value on the field) that you can't ignore them.  But I'd go for him, and my logic runs something like this --
  1. He's produced everywhere he's been
  2. He's a high-risk/high-reward player -- he could be a steal, and he could be a flameout
  3. However, given that the Cardinals are running from behind without much talent from within, the team needs to take risks
  4. A reasonable amount of risk is warranted with Bradley provided you accept upfront that (a) Bradley will be injured in the near term and probably down the line, (b) Bradley will get into some embarrassing flap that might affect his play (or the play of his teammates), and (c) those first two warnings can be mitigating depending on the manager of the team.  If it's La Russa, forget it -- he and La Russa are like powder keg meets match.  But if it's someone who can embrace Bradley while being firm with him (not sure who that is; is Phil Jackson available?), then sure, sign him up...
Brian Gunn

by briangunn on Oct 11, 2007 11:38 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

CARLOS QUENTIN
This is a guy we should be after, and we probably will not be alone in that regard.  I know he is not a free agent, but it looks like he has been squeezed out of Arizona with Upton, Byrnes, and C.Young secured.

If this organization is hell bent on dealing Reyes, then wouldn't a deal with Reyes & Quentin as the centerpiece make a ton of sense?

We would control Quentin for I believe the next 5 seasons.  I also think once he gets on track it would not be unreasonable to expect an OPS of .830 to .860 out of him on a regular basis.  

by MrPlow on Oct 11, 2007 11:01 AM EDT   0 recs

do we know why...
Why would a very smart organization like Arizona give up on a guy like Carlos Quentin? I know that he's got a reputation as being a perfectionist and is supposedly very hard on himself. But his minor league numbers were outstanding...

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 11:05 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Quentin
That's a fair question.  I think the Byrnes signing was a bit of a surprise, and I'm not entirely certain that it was a true "baseball" decision.  I think other factors came into play --Byrnes' popularity with the fans and his teammates specifically.  

So I don't know if they gave up on Quentin or whether he just became a victim of circumstance as sometimes happens.  

by MrPlow on Oct 11, 2007 11:12 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

you're prob right...
about the Byrnes decision. I think (Dbacks GM) Josh Byrnes was influenced by the fans and not by the shared last name - they're not related.

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 11:31 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes!!!!!!!!!!
I have heard that Quentin is being squeezed out in AZ..they have Byrnes, Young, and Upton already, with Carlos Gonzalez on  the way (and sharing RF).  At the very least, they will listen to suggestions for Quentin.

I;m wondering if a deal for Reyes alone would get it done.  Or Reyes and a solid MR prospect.  This would give an OF of:

Vs RHP:
Duncan
Edmonds/Ankiel
Ankiel/Q

Vs LHP
Duncan/Q
Ankiel
Ankiel/Q

Quentin also has terrific OB skills with pop, making him potentially the ideal #3 hitter in front of Albert.  He's young (25), and the Cards will control his rights for a long time yet.

THIS IS THE GUY TO GET!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

by siddfynch on Oct 11, 2007 12:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Here's the scoop on Quentin
My buddy works for the Tucson Sidewinders (and has for several years). This is his take on Quentin:

"I think his shoulder was a continual problem for him the entire season, although the DBacks repeatedly denied that it was still hurt him.  When he was back with us in August I talked to him about it and he straight up told me it was killing him, and it almost seemed like the DBacks didn't believe that he was still hurts and that they thought he was using it as an excuse for his struggles.  I think it legitimately tanked his season though.

Byrnes, CY, Upton are all pretty much locked in unless there's the odd chance the give Upton a little Triple-A time....very doubtful though.  They'll probably try to deal Q for starting pitching, and if Scott Hairston is any precedent they'll ask for the world, sit on him for too long and end up getting very little in return from a patient team."

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 3:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If i were in charge...
I would certainly buy low on Carlos Quentin. I would hassle and harangue Josh Byrnes about this. Of course, you could argue the merit of a Quentin / Anthoney Reyes swap.

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 3:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If Quentin has shoulder problems
I'd prefer to dangle Anthony Reyes for someone that might not spend 30 days on the DL a season.  We've already got enough of those.

Quentin, I feel, is going to suffer from Barden's fate:  Good prospect who is pushed out by better ones.

I'd love to snatch up Quentin too, but I don't think we should trade pitching for an injured OF.  We've got 4 of those already.

Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 11, 2007 3:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Fair point
Although assuming the Scott Hairston precedent, I wonder what he could be had for. Shoulder problems can be scary, but he's not a pitcher, and even when it was hurting him in AAA he was able to put up some good monthly splits.

I'd agree with you re: Reyes. If there's a new manager and pitching coach I'd hope we stick with the guy and give him a new shot.

I do wonder what it would take to get a guy like Quentin. How much value does McCormick have? Or maybe M Boggs?

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 4:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Quentin's Shoulder
I suspected that the shoulder was bothering him more than was admitted, and it was nice to hear that confirmed by your source.

Will it be completely healed up by next spring?

by MrPlow on Oct 11, 2007 3:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Wow, timely...
This just came across the wire:

"Right fielder Carlos Quentin had surgery on his left shoulder on Tuesday.

One of the club's top prospects a year ago, Quentin was penciled in as the Opening Day starter in 2007. He suffered a slight tear in the labrum in his left shoulder midway through Spring Training, forcing him to start the year on the disabled list. He never seemed to be able to recover his rhythm at the plate and struggled to a .214 mark.

The estimated recovery time for Quentin is six months."

Guess this means there's little chance he'll get dealt until after he comes back and proves to be healthy and effective. Damn.

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 5:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Wow, sweet
that's quite an inside scoop.

I can't compete with that, but I can offer this parallel overview:

  • Q hurt the shoulder in spring, and was a progressively worse hitter in April, May, and June.  He was pretty much shut down in late June (or so).
  • He then came back in July, and hit the tar out of the ball at AAA - clearly, his shoulder was feeling better.  Or, at least good enough to repeat his numbers there from 2006.  he got called back up to AZ, but hurt his hamstring.
  • In August, he made another comeback in AAA, and again hit well.  He was recalled for Sept, and was respectable in a handful of ABs.
So it certainly looks as if his shoulder bothered him, but also that it improved over the coutrse of the season...and when it did, he was able to hit the way we had expected.  Perhaps it was still "killing" him, but he was back to some semblance of function.  FWIW, he is quoted as saying he still intends to get surgery in the offseason.

I really think we should go after this guy.  

by siddfynch on Oct 11, 2007 3:33 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Agreed...
Hard not to like him given his numbers. Although it's important to remember that TEP in Tucson is quite the hitter's park. Still, what would it take to get him? Of course, Josh Byrnes has a few other distractions right now...

by airhad on Oct 11, 2007 4:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Only...
15 AB...very much a "handful of ABs."

stlfan

by stlfan on Oct 11, 2007 10:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Your hypothesis on Bradley
is certainly intriguing, but would make sense for the cardinals only if the we have and outfielder or outfielders that other clubs are willing to trade for in return for a ss or pitching. You made a good case for Bradley, but I could make a good case for Ankiel, Ludwick, Duncan or even Shumaker. If you want to go for gambles, I still haven't given up on Edmunds getting it all together for one more good season. He certainly hasn't been  overworked the last couple of seasons. Way back in the early 50's Enos Slaugter had a couple of years like Edmunds at the end of his career, but then came back for a very good one. unfortunately it was the Yankees after the Cards had waivered him.  

by ridgesee on Oct 11, 2007 11:04 AM EDT   0 recs

skip schumaker played over his head this year
and his ops was .816. that's an off-year for milton bradley. likewise, ryan ludwick mined all of his upside this year and posted on ops of . . . . .818. neither of those two has demonstrated the ability to post ops' in the high .800s, which bradley has done routinely in his career.

the jury's out on ankiel. duncan's a better hitter, but once you adjust for fielding bradley's a better player. edmonds' ops last year was .728; bradley hasn't posted an ops that low in 6 years. you're right, maybe jed has one last .850ish year in his bat, but his odds of doing that are much lower than bradley's --- and edmonds' downside is much worse.

by lboros on Oct 11, 2007 11:22 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Iboros, you present good stats
to back up your argument and you are probably right, but I am just old fashoned and never have been sold completely on stats, there are too many varables to make complete judgements on them. (in fact stats are a little like insects, more keep croping up every year). I enjoy reading and studying them though to some degree, but I mostly go by what I see, who hits when you need it. or who makes the play with the game on line, who gives you a 100% all the time. To tell the truth I'm trying to catch up on some new stats and most are simple enough to figure out but I'm still baffled as to what ops means. Somebody help me out.
If you would go back to 1949 ( I know this is a long way back and there  are a lot of others more recent  that could be used to illustrate but this one has always been burned in my memory) look at the team rosters and stats of the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees and you will say how in the hell could the Yankees have possibly beaten that Red Sox team, yet they did by one game on the last of the season. They did by character. I still like your stats though.

by ridgesee on Oct 11, 2007 11:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

you mean the Red Sox team
that was led by Ted Williams putting up a 192 OPS+, w/43 HR & 159 RBI (13.0 WARP3), and Vern Stephens behind him @SS w/39 HR and (also) 159 RBI (138 OPS+, 9.4 WARP3)?  And Bobby Doer putting up MVP-caliber numbers (9.6 warp3) at 2B (128 OPS+)?  And Mel Parnell (25-7) and his 157 ERA+ over 295 IP, 122 PRAR, backed up by Kinder (23-6) with a 130 ERA+ over 252 IP, 100 PRAR?  And 3 other guys with ERA+ over 100?

(just kidding)

Seriously though, looking at the stats of the two teams on baseball-reference.com and baseball-prospectus.com, it is obvious that the Red Sox had a better team, or at least "played better that year".  The question is, could anyone have developed a set of mathematical tools to predict the outcome based on the 1946/7/8 stats more often that a person who watched every game of the 1946/7/8 seasons?  If the Yankees had a tool like that, could they have found a better SS than Rizzuto, or maybe a pitcher better than Reynolds to be their #2?  What can we learn from the player performances to help us figure out what Ludwick and Pujols and Edmonds and Bradley will do next year?  

by SleepyCA on Oct 12, 2007 12:52 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

lol
Just realized that i misread your original post, and the yankees beat the Red Sox that year- despite the fact that the Red Sox outpitched and outhit the yankees over the course of the season.  how awesome.  That's why they play the games, I guess, and that's why the statistical tools we have, at least available to the public right now, aren't perfect...  

Still, the question then becomes, "If the Red Sox had a tool that could accurately predict player performance, could they have found a better hitting 1B than Goodman, or maybe a pitcher better than Kramer to start for 18 games?"

by SleepyCA on Oct 12, 2007 1:09 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sleepy Ca, I am glad you took the time
to go back and study the stats of the '49 Yankees and Red Sox. I was a teenager at the time and a rabid Cardinal fan. The Cards also lost the pennant to The Brooklyn Dodgers on the last day of the season and I have always felt the Cardinals could have beaten the Yankees in the World Series. If you want to be further amazed, look at the stats of the Dodgers that year (an Allstar line up) and yet the Yankees beat them in seven games. Although the stats won't show it, there were three players mostly responsible for their success and that was Yogi Berra, Tommy Hienrich, and Allie Reynolds. all three were unbelievably clutch. Yogi Berra led that team in BA I believe and he didn't but something like .274 or .275. Dimaggio was injured that year and played little, none in the 2nd half of the season.

by ridgesee on Oct 12, 2007 3:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hey, ridgesee
OPS is a lot simpler than it sounds. (This is, in fact, something I hate about sabermetric stats. I think they're given space age names and acronyms to tout their legitimacy in the face of average baseball fans; often all it does is alienate them. Sorry to tell you, though, I am a total stathead.) The stat is nothing more than On base percentage Plus Slugging (percentage). It's wonderful for getting a feel for how good a player is overall, but doesn't really give you an idea of their individual skills. I hope that helps. And I hope you're not joking. Because otherwise I'll feel like a jerk.
Visit Cork, Ireland!

by gbrusca on Oct 12, 2007 2:19 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Thank you
and no, I wasn't joking. I just couldn't figure that one out. You cleared it up. thanks again.

by ridgesee on Oct 12, 2007 9:19 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Bradley
I think your overall reasoning is sound, Larry, but I think Bradley would be more valuable to an AL team that can DH him some, that would help with the obvious fragility issue.

by mikedallas23 on Oct 11, 2007 11:29 AM EDT   0 recs

Exactly,
To a team like the Twins, in need of another middle of the order bat with Hunter leaving and with DH issues, Bradley would be a great fit.

by JMedwick on Oct 11, 2007 11:40 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

A good portion of Bradley's value
is being an above average corner outfielder and an average centerfielder defensively.  Additionally, it's important to remember that his latest injury is of the fluke variety from being detained by his manager during a heated argument (near fight) with an umpire.

by azruavatar on Oct 11, 2007 11:49 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

IF THEY REALLY LISTEN TO US
TELL THEM NOT TO RAISE TICKET PRICES WITHOUT RAISING PAYROLL.

JUST RECEIVED MY INVOICE FOR 2008.  MY SEASON TICKETS PRICE ROSE 16%.

by whatapartier on Oct 11, 2007 11:50 AM EDT   0 recs

TOLAXOR...
is that you?
I'd rather my sister become a prostitute than my brother become a Cub fan.

by _pistol_ on Oct 11, 2007 6:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Matt Stairs and the sacking of Walk Jocketty
1. When the Cards were looking at Tino 6 years ago, I suggested they sign Matt Stairs.

If you want to talk value for money, he had 7 WSAB (14 total) for $850K last year. Yes, he's going to be 40 in February, but if you give him 400 PAs against RHP he's likely to give you value for minimal cost. He's not a great fielder, but again who cares when it's a LF that you are talking about?

If the Cards are going to use Duncan as a trade chip (though I don't recommend it), a Stairs/Ludwick platoon in LF would likely be a $1 to $1.5 MM league average position.

2. I read the USS Mariner article yesterday and your thoughts are the same as mine. Four years ago there was a series of newspaper articles on what Cleveland was doing to rebuild their farm infrastructure.

That serie