Billy Beane has proven that he only makes trades when he robs the other team. Now, he is looking to deal Joe Blanton, and he is asking for a king's ransom once again.
For example, Beane has asked the Dodgers for Andy LaRoche, Andre Eithier and another prospect in return for Blanton. That's right - the #13 prospect in all of baseball, plus a 25 year old outfielder who already has an OPS+ of 108 through his first two seasons, plus another unnamed prospect. All for a guy who has given up more than 60 more hits than innings his last two seasons.
The Red Sox also may be interested, but it will cost them Jacoby Ellsbury and Jed Lowrie. No way the Sox, who refused to give up a similar package for Johan Santana, give that much up.
The Reds are considered the front-runners, but any guess who Beane will ask for in return? You have to believe it will cost the Reds one of their three top prospects - Jay Bruce (#1 prospect in all of baseball), Homer Bailey or Joey Votto.
Hide your wallet and turn on the security system, Billy Beane is on the prowl for his latest heist.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Clemens Stats: A Cautionary Tale on Numbers
Roger Clemens and his agents have taken their fight against the Mitchell Report to the internet. On www.rogerclemensreport.com, the Rocket's people have a compiled an 18,000 word report attempting to prove that Clemens' late career success wasn't so atypical. Of course, their goal is to prove that Clemens' success wasn't due to outside factors (i.e. steroids or HGH), and simply due to Clemens learning how to pitch better.
Clemens' camp uses comparisons to pitchers such as Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling to prove their point. But the numbers can be twisted any way you choose. The New York Times is running a piece today that provides a different slant on the same stats.
"Yet such comparisons tell an incomplete story. By comparing Clemens only to those who were successful in the second act of their careers, rather than to all pitchers who had a similarly successful first act, the report artificially minimizes the chances that Clemens’s numbers will seem unusual. Statisticians call this problem selection bias."
Instead, the Times article, written by a group of professors from Wharton's School of Business, looked at the statistics of all pitchers since 1968 who enjoyed the longevity that Clemens had. Certainly should give you a better comparison, right? Well, the professors reached a different conclusion:
"Our reading is that the available data on Clemens’s career strongly hint that some unusual factors may have been at play in producing his excellent late-career statistics."
Statistics alone cannot prove or disprove the allegations that Clemens is a cheater. But the unusual career pattern noted here certainly provides some damning circumstantial evidence against Clemens' innocence pleas.
But the real lesson learned from these two differing opinions is that, in this age of baseball analytics, statistics can be found to back up any opinion you would choose. I'll give you an example. Say I wanted to prove that Whitey Ford is the worst pitcher in postseason history (an asinine opinion to be sure.) Well, it took me all of two minutes to find that Ford has by far the most losses in World Series history - he lost 8 times. It takes further digging to find out that Ford also won 10 World Series games, made 22 WS starts, and threw 146 innings - all also are all-time highs.
Stats can be twisted to fit what we want them to. You have to take a real close look at what stats the writer is using to back up his opinion.
Clemens' camp uses comparisons to pitchers such as Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling to prove their point. But the numbers can be twisted any way you choose. The New York Times is running a piece today that provides a different slant on the same stats.
"Yet such comparisons tell an incomplete story. By comparing Clemens only to those who were successful in the second act of their careers, rather than to all pitchers who had a similarly successful first act, the report artificially minimizes the chances that Clemens’s numbers will seem unusual. Statisticians call this problem selection bias."
Instead, the Times article, written by a group of professors from Wharton's School of Business, looked at the statistics of all pitchers since 1968 who enjoyed the longevity that Clemens had. Certainly should give you a better comparison, right? Well, the professors reached a different conclusion:
"Relative to this larger comparison group, Clemens’s second act is unusual. The other pitchers in this durable group usually improve steadily early in their careers, peaking at around age 30. Then a slow decline sets in as they reach their mid-30s.
Clemens follows a far different path. The arc of Clemens’s career is upside down: his performance declines as he enters his late 20s and improves into his mid-30s and 40s."
And their conlusion:"Our reading is that the available data on Clemens’s career strongly hint that some unusual factors may have been at play in producing his excellent late-career statistics."
Statistics alone cannot prove or disprove the allegations that Clemens is a cheater. But the unusual career pattern noted here certainly provides some damning circumstantial evidence against Clemens' innocence pleas.
But the real lesson learned from these two differing opinions is that, in this age of baseball analytics, statistics can be found to back up any opinion you would choose. I'll give you an example. Say I wanted to prove that Whitey Ford is the worst pitcher in postseason history (an asinine opinion to be sure.) Well, it took me all of two minutes to find that Ford has by far the most losses in World Series history - he lost 8 times. It takes further digging to find out that Ford also won 10 World Series games, made 22 WS starts, and threw 146 innings - all also are all-time highs.
Stats can be twisted to fit what we want them to. You have to take a real close look at what stats the writer is using to back up his opinion.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
What Makes a Championship Club?
The A's, Twins and Orioles have all dealt young, ace pitchers this winter to 're-build' and build for the future. The Twins and A's were forced to because of financial restraints, and the Orioles are just dumb. But when you look to build a team to win, how should you build it?
Let's look at how the recent champions have been built -
2007: Boston Red Sox
Pitching: Top heavy both in their rotation and their bullpen. Josh Beckett and Curt Schilling were the only starters with ERAs better than league average, and Papelbon and Okajima were dominant in the pen.
Offense: Again, pretty top heavy. The top of order was the best in the league, while the bottom four was nothing but average.
2006: St. Louis Cardinals
Pitching: A bunch of average starters and a dominant bullpen did the trick for the Cardinals (remember Carpenter was hurt by the playoffs).
Offense: Albert Pujols and a bunch of average, so-so hitters were all the Cards had. You really have to chalk the Cards' win up to a hot streak at the right time.
2005: Chicago White Sox
Pitching: This was a team with tremendous depth in their pitching staff. Four starters with an ERA+ of 116 or better, and a bullpen with five relievers better than that 116 mark.
Offense: Paul Konerko and Jermaine Dye were outstanding in the middle of the order, and the rest of the lineup was populated by solid, average hitters (starting to see the pattern?).
2004: Boston Red Sox
Pitching: Very similar makeup to the '07 team, though different players. Schilling and Pedro were dominant in the rotation, while the rest of the guys were average at best. Keith Foulke was dominant, but the rest of the pen was shaky.
Offense: This was a dominant offensive team. Five hitters hit .295 or better, and their #9 hitter, Mark Bellhorn, hit 17 homers and drove in 82.
2003: Florida Marlins
Pitching: Five solid, but not great, starters led the pitching staff. The bullpen had two guys - Bradon Looper and Uggie Urbina that were pretty good, and the rest of the pen was horrible.
Offense: Again, two big bashers led an average lineup - Derek Lee and Mike Lowell were the heart and soul of the lineup. The rest of the lineup wasn't bad, just nothing special.
2002: Anaheim Angels
Pitching: A solid, but unspectacular starting staff was aided by a dominant bullpen. K-Rod put the finishing touches on one of the best bullpens of the modern era when he came up as a 20 year old in September to blow everyone away.
Offense: Troy Glaus and Garrett Anderson had very good years in the middle of the lineup, and the rest of the lineup were filled out with workman-like guys such as Scott Spiezio, David Eckstein and Adam Kennedy.
2001: Arizona Diamondbacks
Pitching: You can't get much more top heavy then the DBack's pitching staff was. It was Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling, and everyone was else was either below average or just plain horrible.
Offense: The DBacks offense was all about Luis Gonzalez - his 128 runs were 62 more than the next DBack (Reggie Sanders), his 142 RBI were 52 more than the next closest (Sanders), and his 57 homers were 24 more than his closest teammate (Sanders again). Once again, the offense was two big boppers in the middle of the lineup, and a bunch of no-namers surrounding them.
What we can learn from this:
Pitching: First off, with the possible exception of the '03 Marlins, every other team had a dominant closer and reliable setup man. As far as the starting staff goes, its a pretty even split between teams with top of the line guys who head the staff, and teams who are solid throughout the rotation. The Angels, Marlins and Cardinals have proven that you don't have to have that Cy Young candidate pitcher to win it all.
Offense: This is more clear. Other than the '04 Red Sox, these have not been dominant offensive teams who have won it all. What each team has had is two guys in the middle of the lineup who have big years. The rest of the lineup is made up of servicable, decent guys who will hold their own. They aren't automatic outs (you can't give away outs in the postseason), but the World Series is not won with nine guys bashing homeruns all over the park.
So who is set up to win this year based on this formula?
AL:
Boston: I'm not convinced that Lowell can repeat his production from last year, but Manny should come up big in his walk year to give the Sox a dynamic duo with Ortiz in the middle of the lineup. The pitching staff has the horses in the pen with Okajima and Papelbon, but the rotation is the question mark. The key here is Matsuzaka - can he be the #2 starter the Sox need?
Yankees: Again, the offense is not the question. If the Yankees can stay healthy and get something from first base, they could score 1000 runs this season. The question marks are in the pitching staff. Who will be that top setup man for Mariano Rivera? The rotation should be fine, but it may take some time to sort out who is for real out of the contenders for the last 2-3 spots in the rotation.
Cleveland: The lineup features a bunch of pretty good hitters, but someone will have to step up to that elite level for the Indians to fit the model. Travis Hafner has done it in the past, but was certainly off last season. Grady Sizemore, Victor Martinez, Jhonny Peralta and Ryan Garko are all young guys who could be big-time hitters.
The rotation fits with the DBacks model - two exceptional guys in Sabathia and Carmona will win the big ones. But can a team with Joe Borowski as its closer really win it all? I doubt it.
Detroit: Another team like the '04 Sox with a 1-9 lineup. They have the two dominant hitters in the middle in Miggy and Magglio, but their #9 hitter should hit 20 homeruns this year (Marcus Thames). The pitching staff is just as good - if Dontrelle Willis and Jeremy Bonderman come back from off years the team will be strong 1-5 in the rotation, but no Cy Young candidates (with the possible exception of Justin Verlander). Worst case, the bullpen will be strong again once Joel Zumaya comes back sometime around the All-Star break.
Seattle: The Mariners just don't have the offense to fit the model. Who are the two guys in the middle of the lineup to strike fear into the hearts of opposing pitching staffs? Ichiro could be one, but who else? Richie Sexson? He hit .205 last year. Adrian Beltre? He has one season with more than 26 home runs. The pitching staff is set up well in the rotation, but question marks in the bullpen behind closer JJ Putz also eliminate the Mariners from championship contention.
LA Angels: They are still operating off the same model that won it all for them in '02 - a solid 1-5 rotation and a dominant bullpen. The problem is that they still haven't found a Robin to team with their batman - Vladimir Guerrero. With Guerrero seemingly on the downside, time is running out.
NL:
Philadelphia: This is a team that fits the model pretty well. A strong front of the rotation, big hitters in the middle of the lineup, and good supporting players surrounding them. The question mark with this team is the bullpen. Can Brad Lidge be that dominant closer again now that he is out of Houston? (I say yes - his peripherals still point to a guy with dominant stuff). And can Tom Gordon be a reliable setup man at age 40? (I say no way).
Mets: This team fits the model as well or better than the Phillies. Dominant 1-2 punch in the middle of the lineup? Yes - Carlos Beltran and David Wright. The rest of the lineup filled with decent complementary players? Yup - veterans like Luis Castillo, Carlos Delgado, not to mention Jose Reyes at the top of the order. Rotation? With Johan and Pedro at the front they have no problem there. Bullpen? Billy Wagner is still listed in every poll as the hardest thrower in the league, and Aaron Heilman has been consistently good at getting him the ball. The only real question with the Mets is health - Pedro, Delgado, and setup man Duanar Sanchez all have health issues that could knock the Mets off the top of their division.
Cubs: The lineup actually has three dominant hitters - Derrek Lee, Alfonso Soriano, and Aramis Ramirez. The pitching staff is the problem. An unproven closer and a #2 starter (Ted Lilly) who has only been average throughout his career make the Cubs a long shot to win it all.
Arizona: The pitching is definitely there, especially with the acquisition of Danny Haren. The issue is with the lineup. Right now, there isn't anyone to fill that role of elite hitter who pitchers don't want to face. Chris Young and Justin Upton will eventually be that two-some, but they are not there yet. This team is probably one year away from being the team to beat in the NL, though they will probably win the division again.
Colorado: The rotation fits the model of having five solid starters, and the bullpen is dominant at the back end with Manny Corpas and Brian Fuentes. Matt Holliday and Troy Tulowitzki form the fearsome middle of the order, giving the Rockies all the ingredients of contending for another NL Pennant.
O.k., so based on the look at what it takes to win it all, here are my rankings:
Have What it Takes:
Boston
Detroit
Yankees
Philadelphia
Mets
Colorado
Second Tier (One Player Away):
LA Angels
Arizona
Cleveland
Exit Left (First round Fodder for the real contenders):
Cubs
Seattle
Let's look at how the recent champions have been built -
2007: Boston Red Sox
Pitching: Top heavy both in their rotation and their bullpen. Josh Beckett and Curt Schilling were the only starters with ERAs better than league average, and Papelbon and Okajima were dominant in the pen.
Offense: Again, pretty top heavy. The top of order was the best in the league, while the bottom four was nothing but average.
2006: St. Louis Cardinals
Pitching: A bunch of average starters and a dominant bullpen did the trick for the Cardinals (remember Carpenter was hurt by the playoffs).
Offense: Albert Pujols and a bunch of average, so-so hitters were all the Cards had. You really have to chalk the Cards' win up to a hot streak at the right time.
2005: Chicago White Sox
Pitching: This was a team with tremendous depth in their pitching staff. Four starters with an ERA+ of 116 or better, and a bullpen with five relievers better than that 116 mark.
Offense: Paul Konerko and Jermaine Dye were outstanding in the middle of the order, and the rest of the lineup was populated by solid, average hitters (starting to see the pattern?).
2004: Boston Red Sox
Pitching: Very similar makeup to the '07 team, though different players. Schilling and Pedro were dominant in the rotation, while the rest of the guys were average at best. Keith Foulke was dominant, but the rest of the pen was shaky.
Offense: This was a dominant offensive team. Five hitters hit .295 or better, and their #9 hitter, Mark Bellhorn, hit 17 homers and drove in 82.
2003: Florida Marlins
Pitching: Five solid, but not great, starters led the pitching staff. The bullpen had two guys - Bradon Looper and Uggie Urbina that were pretty good, and the rest of the pen was horrible.
Offense: Again, two big bashers led an average lineup - Derek Lee and Mike Lowell were the heart and soul of the lineup. The rest of the lineup wasn't bad, just nothing special.
2002: Anaheim Angels
Pitching: A solid, but unspectacular starting staff was aided by a dominant bullpen. K-Rod put the finishing touches on one of the best bullpens of the modern era when he came up as a 20 year old in September to blow everyone away.
Offense: Troy Glaus and Garrett Anderson had very good years in the middle of the lineup, and the rest of the lineup were filled out with workman-like guys such as Scott Spiezio, David Eckstein and Adam Kennedy.
2001: Arizona Diamondbacks
Pitching: You can't get much more top heavy then the DBack's pitching staff was. It was Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling, and everyone was else was either below average or just plain horrible.
Offense: The DBacks offense was all about Luis Gonzalez - his 128 runs were 62 more than the next DBack (Reggie Sanders), his 142 RBI were 52 more than the next closest (Sanders), and his 57 homers were 24 more than his closest teammate (Sanders again). Once again, the offense was two big boppers in the middle of the lineup, and a bunch of no-namers surrounding them.
What we can learn from this:
Pitching: First off, with the possible exception of the '03 Marlins, every other team had a dominant closer and reliable setup man. As far as the starting staff goes, its a pretty even split between teams with top of the line guys who head the staff, and teams who are solid throughout the rotation. The Angels, Marlins and Cardinals have proven that you don't have to have that Cy Young candidate pitcher to win it all.
Offense: This is more clear. Other than the '04 Red Sox, these have not been dominant offensive teams who have won it all. What each team has had is two guys in the middle of the lineup who have big years. The rest of the lineup is made up of servicable, decent guys who will hold their own. They aren't automatic outs (you can't give away outs in the postseason), but the World Series is not won with nine guys bashing homeruns all over the park.
So who is set up to win this year based on this formula?
AL:
Boston: I'm not convinced that Lowell can repeat his production from last year, but Manny should come up big in his walk year to give the Sox a dynamic duo with Ortiz in the middle of the lineup. The pitching staff has the horses in the pen with Okajima and Papelbon, but the rotation is the question mark. The key here is Matsuzaka - can he be the #2 starter the Sox need?
Yankees: Again, the offense is not the question. If the Yankees can stay healthy and get something from first base, they could score 1000 runs this season. The question marks are in the pitching staff. Who will be that top setup man for Mariano Rivera? The rotation should be fine, but it may take some time to sort out who is for real out of the contenders for the last 2-3 spots in the rotation.
Cleveland: The lineup features a bunch of pretty good hitters, but someone will have to step up to that elite level for the Indians to fit the model. Travis Hafner has done it in the past, but was certainly off last season. Grady Sizemore, Victor Martinez, Jhonny Peralta and Ryan Garko are all young guys who could be big-time hitters.
The rotation fits with the DBacks model - two exceptional guys in Sabathia and Carmona will win the big ones. But can a team with Joe Borowski as its closer really win it all? I doubt it.
Detroit: Another team like the '04 Sox with a 1-9 lineup. They have the two dominant hitters in the middle in Miggy and Magglio, but their #9 hitter should hit 20 homeruns this year (Marcus Thames). The pitching staff is just as good - if Dontrelle Willis and Jeremy Bonderman come back from off years the team will be strong 1-5 in the rotation, but no Cy Young candidates (with the possible exception of Justin Verlander). Worst case, the bullpen will be strong again once Joel Zumaya comes back sometime around the All-Star break.
Seattle: The Mariners just don't have the offense to fit the model. Who are the two guys in the middle of the lineup to strike fear into the hearts of opposing pitching staffs? Ichiro could be one, but who else? Richie Sexson? He hit .205 last year. Adrian Beltre? He has one season with more than 26 home runs. The pitching staff is set up well in the rotation, but question marks in the bullpen behind closer JJ Putz also eliminate the Mariners from championship contention.
LA Angels: They are still operating off the same model that won it all for them in '02 - a solid 1-5 rotation and a dominant bullpen. The problem is that they still haven't found a Robin to team with their batman - Vladimir Guerrero. With Guerrero seemingly on the downside, time is running out.
NL:
Philadelphia: This is a team that fits the model pretty well. A strong front of the rotation, big hitters in the middle of the lineup, and good supporting players surrounding them. The question mark with this team is the bullpen. Can Brad Lidge be that dominant closer again now that he is out of Houston? (I say yes - his peripherals still point to a guy with dominant stuff). And can Tom Gordon be a reliable setup man at age 40? (I say no way).
Mets: This team fits the model as well or better than the Phillies. Dominant 1-2 punch in the middle of the lineup? Yes - Carlos Beltran and David Wright. The rest of the lineup filled with decent complementary players? Yup - veterans like Luis Castillo, Carlos Delgado, not to mention Jose Reyes at the top of the order. Rotation? With Johan and Pedro at the front they have no problem there. Bullpen? Billy Wagner is still listed in every poll as the hardest thrower in the league, and Aaron Heilman has been consistently good at getting him the ball. The only real question with the Mets is health - Pedro, Delgado, and setup man Duanar Sanchez all have health issues that could knock the Mets off the top of their division.
Cubs: The lineup actually has three dominant hitters - Derrek Lee, Alfonso Soriano, and Aramis Ramirez. The pitching staff is the problem. An unproven closer and a #2 starter (Ted Lilly) who has only been average throughout his career make the Cubs a long shot to win it all.
Arizona: The pitching is definitely there, especially with the acquisition of Danny Haren. The issue is with the lineup. Right now, there isn't anyone to fill that role of elite hitter who pitchers don't want to face. Chris Young and Justin Upton will eventually be that two-some, but they are not there yet. This team is probably one year away from being the team to beat in the NL, though they will probably win the division again.
Colorado: The rotation fits the model of having five solid starters, and the bullpen is dominant at the back end with Manny Corpas and Brian Fuentes. Matt Holliday and Troy Tulowitzki form the fearsome middle of the order, giving the Rockies all the ingredients of contending for another NL Pennant.
O.k., so based on the look at what it takes to win it all, here are my rankings:
Have What it Takes:
Boston
Detroit
Yankees
Philadelphia
Mets
Colorado
Second Tier (One Player Away):
LA Angels
Arizona
Cleveland
Exit Left (First round Fodder for the real contenders):
Cubs
Seattle
Friday, February 8, 2008
Bedard Deal Finally Done
The deal has finally gotten done; Erik Bedard is a Mariner. Most websites are lauding this deal because the Orioles got good value for Bedard. But the AP article says "The departure of Bedard is yet another move to youth by the Orioles under president of baseball operations Andy MacPhail."
Um, there so many problems with that reasoning. Let's just talk about three big ones -
1.) Bedard is 28 and two years from free agency. A 'youth movement' will conceivably reach its conclusion by the time Bedard reaches his thirty-first birthday - in other words, at the time that Bedard reaches his prime.
2.) The Johan Santana saga has shown us that a pitcher one year from free agency has just as much value as a pitcher two years away. The Orioles would have lost nothing by keeping Bedard for a year.
3.) The Orioles are competing in a division that features young star pitchers such as Josh Beckett, Chien-Ming Wang and Roy Halladay, plus super prospects Jaba Chamberlain, Phillip Hughes, Clay Buckholz and Jon Lester. In order to compete with the Yankees and Sox, the Orioles are going to have to match those arms. But there is very little help on the way. Their best starter now has 116 major league starts under his belt, is nine games under .500, and a career ERA of 4.99. And there is very little hope on the horizon. None of the Orioles pitching prospects rates in Baseball America's Top 50 (all of the guys listed above have been on the list).
So let's fast forward two years. The Orioles have presumably been successful in their youth movement and are ready to contend. But what do they need? They need a top of the rotation starter to match up against the Yankees and Red Sox aces. And they let one get away.
Adam Jones may end up to be a periennial All-Star. But while the Orioles got good value for Bedard, the deal was still a bad decision by Andy McPhail. There is no comparable value for a young ace pitcher. Teams that have designs on winning, and supposedly have monetary resources, have no business trading away pitchers like Bedard.
Up next for the Orioles - trade the heart and soul of their lineup - second baseman Brian Roberts. Sad.
Um, there so many problems with that reasoning. Let's just talk about three big ones -
1.) Bedard is 28 and two years from free agency. A 'youth movement' will conceivably reach its conclusion by the time Bedard reaches his thirty-first birthday - in other words, at the time that Bedard reaches his prime.
2.) The Johan Santana saga has shown us that a pitcher one year from free agency has just as much value as a pitcher two years away. The Orioles would have lost nothing by keeping Bedard for a year.
3.) The Orioles are competing in a division that features young star pitchers such as Josh Beckett, Chien-Ming Wang and Roy Halladay, plus super prospects Jaba Chamberlain, Phillip Hughes, Clay Buckholz and Jon Lester. In order to compete with the Yankees and Sox, the Orioles are going to have to match those arms. But there is very little help on the way. Their best starter now has 116 major league starts under his belt, is nine games under .500, and a career ERA of 4.99. And there is very little hope on the horizon. None of the Orioles pitching prospects rates in Baseball America's Top 50 (all of the guys listed above have been on the list).
So let's fast forward two years. The Orioles have presumably been successful in their youth movement and are ready to contend. But what do they need? They need a top of the rotation starter to match up against the Yankees and Red Sox aces. And they let one get away.
Adam Jones may end up to be a periennial All-Star. But while the Orioles got good value for Bedard, the deal was still a bad decision by Andy McPhail. There is no comparable value for a young ace pitcher. Teams that have designs on winning, and supposedly have monetary resources, have no business trading away pitchers like Bedard.
Up next for the Orioles - trade the heart and soul of their lineup - second baseman Brian Roberts. Sad.
Thursday, February 7, 2008
$2 Billion Just Doesn't Go As Far As It Used To
The inevitable cost overruns have pushed the combined cost of the new stadiums in New York at close to $2 billion! Now, both stadiums look nice - check them out here and here - and come with all the bells and whistles (how many times have you wished that a stadium had a martini bar?), but it got me wondering what you could get for $2 billion.
You could pay for -
10 - days of war in Iraq
869,954 - Big screen televisions
133 - Years of salary for the Florida Marlins
74 - Years of Alex Rodriguez's salary
11,430 - 2007 Ferrari F430 Coupes
21, 276 - Homes in Kokomo, Indiana
1,200 - feet of road in Boston's Big Dig project
And the kicker -
40,000 - Teacher's salaries for one year
Gotta give the Yankees credit for one thing, though. They have rejected slapping a corporate name on the new stadium. Somehow, the Yankees playing in Pizza Hut Park just seems disrespectful to the history of baseball.
You could pay for -
10 - days of war in Iraq
869,954 - Big screen televisions
133 - Years of salary for the Florida Marlins
74 - Years of Alex Rodriguez's salary
11,430 - 2007 Ferrari F430 Coupes
21, 276 - Homes in Kokomo, Indiana
1,200 - feet of road in Boston's Big Dig project
And the kicker -
40,000 - Teacher's salaries for one year
Gotta give the Yankees credit for one thing, though. They have rejected slapping a corporate name on the new stadium. Somehow, the Yankees playing in Pizza Hut Park just seems disrespectful to the history of baseball.
NL Central: Who Is Better and Who Is Worse?
1.) Chicago Cubs (85-77)
Additions: OF Kosuke Fukudome
Subtractions: OF Jacque Jones, OF Cliff Floyd, C Jason Kendall. SP Mark Prior
Net: +3. A quiet offseason for the Cubs, after they mortgaged their future last year. Fukodome is a big upgrade in the outfield, and the Cubs didn't really lose anything that mattered.
2.) Milwaukee Brewers (83-79)
Additions: RP Eric Gagne, RP Salamon Torres, C Jason Kendall, RP Guillermo Mota, OF Mike Cameron, RP David Riske
Subtractions: C Johnny Estrada, OF Geoff Jenkins, RP Francisco Cordero, RP Scott Linebrink, RP Matt Wise
Net: +2. A lot of moves, especially in the bullpen, but they have done nothing really to get better. The on exception is the signing of Mike Cameron. He improves their defense immensely, not just with his own work in center, but his signing allows the Brewers to get Ryan Braun in the outfield where he belongs.
3.) St. Louis Cardinals (78-84)
Additions: SP Matt Clement, SS Cesar Izturis
Subtractions: Of Jim Edmonds, SS David Eckstein, RP Troy Percival
Net: -3. Coming off a mediocre season, the Cards' big move was to sign a 33 year old pitcher who hasn't pitched since June 14, 2006. Talk about underwhelming.
4.) Houston Astros (73-89)
Additions: RP Jose Valverde, SS Miquel Tejada, 2B Kaz Matsui, OF Michael Bourn, RP Geoff Geary, OF Darin Erstad
Subtractions: 2B Craig Biggio, IF Chris Burke, RP Chad Qualls, OF Luke Scott, RP Brad Lidge, SS Adam Everett, SP Jason Jennings
Net: +6. I like what the Astros have done. Bourn is a dynamic leadoff hitter, Geary and Valverde give the Astros a top notch pen, and Matsui is a solid #2 hitter. The big gamble, and the key to their season, is Tejada. Can he still be a middle of the lineup force? Or is last season's power outage the start of a downward trend? And finally, will his legal troubles keep him off the field? If Tejeda lives up to his reputation, Houston could have put themselves in the middle of the Central race.
5.) Cincinnati Reds (72-90)
Additions: SP Edinson Volquez, RP Francisco Cordero, RP Jeremy Affeldt
Subtractions: OF Josh Hamilton
Net: +4. The Reds needed to improve their pitching, and they have done that. Their 4.94 team ERA was next to last in the league last season, and they needed to get some good arms. Volquez has what scouts call 'electric stuff', and Cordero is a proven, solid closer coming off a great season. Their pitching is much better, but still probably only good for about a .500 ballclub.
The NL Central has the makings of being a very fun division to watch in 2008. The Cubs are certainly the team to beat, but the rest of the division is full of good young players who could make a run at things. I'll go out on a limb with one prediction - the Cards will barely keep themselves above the Pirates and finish in fifth place. The rest of the division has passed them by.
Additions: OF Kosuke Fukudome
Subtractions: OF Jacque Jones, OF Cliff Floyd, C Jason Kendall. SP Mark Prior
Net: +3. A quiet offseason for the Cubs, after they mortgaged their future last year. Fukodome is a big upgrade in the outfield, and the Cubs didn't really lose anything that mattered.
2.) Milwaukee Brewers (83-79)
Additions: RP Eric Gagne, RP Salamon Torres, C Jason Kendall, RP Guillermo Mota, OF Mike Cameron, RP David Riske
Subtractions: C Johnny Estrada, OF Geoff Jenkins, RP Francisco Cordero, RP Scott Linebrink, RP Matt Wise
Net: +2. A lot of moves, especially in the bullpen, but they have done nothing really to get better. The on exception is the signing of Mike Cameron. He improves their defense immensely, not just with his own work in center, but his signing allows the Brewers to get Ryan Braun in the outfield where he belongs.
3.) St. Louis Cardinals (78-84)
Additions: SP Matt Clement, SS Cesar Izturis
Subtractions: Of Jim Edmonds, SS David Eckstein, RP Troy Percival
Net: -3. Coming off a mediocre season, the Cards' big move was to sign a 33 year old pitcher who hasn't pitched since June 14, 2006. Talk about underwhelming.
4.) Houston Astros (73-89)
Additions: RP Jose Valverde, SS Miquel Tejada, 2B Kaz Matsui, OF Michael Bourn, RP Geoff Geary, OF Darin Erstad
Subtractions: 2B Craig Biggio, IF Chris Burke, RP Chad Qualls, OF Luke Scott, RP Brad Lidge, SS Adam Everett, SP Jason Jennings
Net: +6. I like what the Astros have done. Bourn is a dynamic leadoff hitter, Geary and Valverde give the Astros a top notch pen, and Matsui is a solid #2 hitter. The big gamble, and the key to their season, is Tejada. Can he still be a middle of the lineup force? Or is last season's power outage the start of a downward trend? And finally, will his legal troubles keep him off the field? If Tejeda lives up to his reputation, Houston could have put themselves in the middle of the Central race.
5.) Cincinnati Reds (72-90)
Additions: SP Edinson Volquez, RP Francisco Cordero, RP Jeremy Affeldt
Subtractions: OF Josh Hamilton
Net: +4. The Reds needed to improve their pitching, and they have done that. Their 4.94 team ERA was next to last in the league last season, and they needed to get some good arms. Volquez has what scouts call 'electric stuff', and Cordero is a proven, solid closer coming off a great season. Their pitching is much better, but still probably only good for about a .500 ballclub.
The NL Central has the makings of being a very fun division to watch in 2008. The Cubs are certainly the team to beat, but the rest of the division is full of good young players who could make a run at things. I'll go out on a limb with one prediction - the Cards will barely keep themselves above the Pirates and finish in fifth place. The rest of the division has passed them by.
Orioles are now the worst-run team in baseball
Supposedly, the Erik Bedard to the Mariners deal is finally going to be completed on Friday. Don't hold your breath. The Orioles seem to have a real hard actually completing a deal. They have been working on this deal, and the deal to send Brian Roberts to the Cubs, for over a month. And nothing has gotten done. Some blame Peter Angelos , but the baseball people also need to take some of the blame. Why does getting Angelos' approval wait until the last minute? What else do the Orioles have to accomplish? They have already waited too long to trade Bedard - the smart play would have been to play off the Mets and the Mariners to get the best deal. Now that the Twins acted first, the Orioles really only have one serious player.
If you can't work out a deal for a 28 year old lefty All-Star, or a 30 year old All-Star second baseman, then you shouldn't be working in the big leagues.
If you can't work out a deal for a 28 year old lefty All-Star, or a 30 year old All-Star second baseman, then you shouldn't be working in the big leagues.
Schilling Hurt, Bill Smith Committed
Bill Smith held out all winter for one of the big three - the Red Sox, Yankees, or Mets to blink and offer up a truckload of top prospects for Johan. Unfortunately, none of them did. Smith finally blinked and took the best offer out there - the Mets deal. Now, it looks like he should have held out one more week. The Red Sox suddenly have a hole to fill in their rotation. One more week, and the Twins could have had their perfect deal. Smith has to be kicking himself.
But how much does the loss of Schilling really hurt the Sox? Probably not too much. Their current rotation now features Josh Beckett, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Tim Wakefield, Jim Lester and Clay Buckholz. A solid, top notch rotation. But depth is the concern. If one of those guys get hurt, especially Beckett or Matsuzaka, the Sox could be in trouble. Schilling at this point is nothing more than a #3-4 starter, but he still offers a solid starter to run out there in the playoffs. Now, the Sox will have to give one of the young guys a chance. Risky, but certainly not a death blow.
But how much does the loss of Schilling really hurt the Sox? Probably not too much. Their current rotation now features Josh Beckett, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Tim Wakefield, Jim Lester and Clay Buckholz. A solid, top notch rotation. But depth is the concern. If one of those guys get hurt, especially Beckett or Matsuzaka, the Sox could be in trouble. Schilling at this point is nothing more than a #3-4 starter, but he still offers a solid starter to run out there in the playoffs. Now, the Sox will have to give one of the young guys a chance. Risky, but certainly not a death blow.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Analyzing the Santana Contract
The details have emerged about Johan Santana's megadeal with the Mets. Here are the details:
2008: $19m
2009: $20m
2010: $21m
2011: $22.5m
2012: $24m
2013: $25.5m
2014: $25m vesting option or $5.5m buyout
Total: $157m
Some of the money is deferred at a low interest rate, so the real value of the deal is somewhere around $137.5m.
The deal is probably the best the Mets could do under the circumstances. The fact that Omar Minaya got Santana to budge at all off his initial asking price of 7 years and $24m per is an accomplishment. But it also shows how much Johan wanted to get the deal done as well.
As I said here, there isn't a good history for giving star pitchers huge contracts. Peter Gammons believes that Santana should be an exception:
The delivery and arm speed that make his changeup so great shouldn't diminish in the seven years of his contract with the Mets, barring a freak injury.
I'm not convinced that ANY pitcher should warrant a contract that length. Its just too high a risk. But Barry Zito set the market last year. Now, Santana and Carlos Zambrano have reaped the benefits, and C.C. Sabathia will not be far behind.
2008: $19m
2009: $20m
2010: $21m
2011: $22.5m
2012: $24m
2013: $25.5m
2014: $25m vesting option or $5.5m buyout
Total: $157m
Some of the money is deferred at a low interest rate, so the real value of the deal is somewhere around $137.5m.
The deal is probably the best the Mets could do under the circumstances. The fact that Omar Minaya got Santana to budge at all off his initial asking price of 7 years and $24m per is an accomplishment. But it also shows how much Johan wanted to get the deal done as well.
As I said here, there isn't a good history for giving star pitchers huge contracts. Peter Gammons believes that Santana should be an exception:
The delivery and arm speed that make his changeup so great shouldn't diminish in the seven years of his contract with the Mets, barring a freak injury.
I'm not convinced that ANY pitcher should warrant a contract that length. Its just too high a risk. But Barry Zito set the market last year. Now, Santana and Carlos Zambrano have reaped the benefits, and C.C. Sabathia will not be far behind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
