Saturday, January 27, 2007
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Boomer?
All along, I've read that David Wells will only sign with a West Coast team (presumably the Padres), but this article indicates that he'd be willing to go to Toronto. How 'bout the Mets? He's a better option than Jorge Sosa.
All along, I've read that David Wells will only sign with a West Coast team (presumably the Padres), but this article indicates that he'd be willing to go to Toronto. How 'bout the Mets? He's a better option than Jorge Sosa.
Saturday, January 13, 2007
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sign of the apocalypse: Todd Pratt signs minor league deal with the Yankees.
Sign of the apocalypse: Todd Pratt signs minor league deal with the Yankees.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
$10.8 million for Scott Schoeneweis? Scott Schoeneweis? The same Scott Schoeneweis who had a 4.88 ERA last year, with a 29:24 K:BB ratio? Sure, he can get lefties out, but so can Feliciano. Heck, once Mota is back from his suspension, will Schoeneweis even belong on the roster? Wagner, Heilman, Sanchez, Mota, Feliciano, and Burgos are all probably more deserving of a roster spot. And, worst of all, we could have just kept Bradford for the same price. A lot of Omar's minor moves have worked out quite well, so maybe he deserves the benefit of doubt, but this seems like a huge waste of money. If Feliciano is about to be traded, then I understand the deal, but otherwise, I'm a bit puzzled.
Other news:
-John Thomson didn't come to the Mets because he hates Paul Lo Duca.
-The Reds acquired Jeff Keppinger.
-Barry Bonds took amphetamines.
Other news:
-John Thomson didn't come to the Mets because he hates Paul Lo Duca.
-The Reds acquired Jeff Keppinger.
-Barry Bonds took amphetamines.
Friday, January 05, 2007
Yeah, Arizona's rotation should be pretty decent next year, with Webb and Johnson 1-2, not to mention Livan 3 and Doug Davis 4. Granted those two aren't what they used to be, but Livan can eat up some major innings, and Davis isn't too shabby for a #4.
That Zito signing was so ridiculous; it threw the whole market out of whack. Like they're saying, if Zito got $18 mil annually, what will Johan get, $25 mil? I mean, if you were the Mets, would you shell out 7 yr-$175 mil for him?
I agree about the Milledge-Blanton deal too. I'm not really sold on him, not to mention he's a nut, but I think they could do better than Blanton for him. I mean, I don't know who else will be on the market come July, but there will probably be someone better than Blanton.
That Zito signing was so ridiculous; it threw the whole market out of whack. Like they're saying, if Zito got $18 mil annually, what will Johan get, $25 mil? I mean, if you were the Mets, would you shell out 7 yr-$175 mil for him?
I agree about the Milledge-Blanton deal too. I'm not really sold on him, not to mention he's a nut, but I think they could do better than Blanton for him. I mean, I don't know who else will be on the market come July, but there will probably be someone better than Blanton.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
The FAN is reporting that the rumored Randy Johnson trade is a done deal. Johnson to the DBacks for Luis Vizcaino and three prospects (the Yanks are adding a lot of minor league arms this offseason).
Unless they're extremely confident they can sign Clemens, the apparent desperation to dump the Big Unit is a mistake. Even at the age of 42, Johnson made 33 starts last year with a K:BB ratio of 172:60. Sure, his ERA was 5.00, but
this post by Nate Silver indicates that was largely due to bad luck. Before the trade, PECOTA projected Johnson to be the Yankees' ace in 2007.
In return, the Yanks are receiving a pretty good reliever and some mediocre prospects. The three prospects were ranked as the 18th, 19th, and 20th best prospects in the DBacks system by John Sickels, all receiving a C+. No list I've seen ranks them in the top 10. Here's the relevant excerpt from Sickels:
18. Alberto Gonzalez, SS, C+ (good glove)
19. Steven Jackson, RHP, C+ (excellent season in Double-A following mechanical rebuild)
20. Ross Ohlendorf, RHP, C+ (sleeper who throws strikes)
The DBacks, on the other hand, with a 1-2 of Webb and Johnson have greatly improved their odds in the wide open NL West.
Unless they're extremely confident they can sign Clemens, the apparent desperation to dump the Big Unit is a mistake. Even at the age of 42, Johnson made 33 starts last year with a K:BB ratio of 172:60. Sure, his ERA was 5.00, but
this post by Nate Silver indicates that was largely due to bad luck. Before the trade, PECOTA projected Johnson to be the Yankees' ace in 2007.
In return, the Yanks are receiving a pretty good reliever and some mediocre prospects. The three prospects were ranked as the 18th, 19th, and 20th best prospects in the DBacks system by John Sickels, all receiving a C+. No list I've seen ranks them in the top 10. Here's the relevant excerpt from Sickels:
18. Alberto Gonzalez, SS, C+ (good glove)
19. Steven Jackson, RHP, C+ (excellent season in Double-A following mechanical rebuild)
20. Ross Ohlendorf, RHP, C+ (sleeper who throws strikes)
The DBacks, on the other hand, with a 1-2 of Webb and Johnson have greatly improved their odds in the wide open NL West.
Time to panic?
I'm glad the Mets didn't spend $126 million on Barry Zito. Barry Zito is not a dominant enough pitcher to justify that kind of salary. But, missing out on Zito at this late stage in the game leaves the Mets with a gaping hole in their rotation. Current candidates for the #5 spot include Dave Williams, Jason Vargas, Alay Soler, Mike Pelfrey, and Philip Humber. Pelfrey and Humber are both excellent prospects, but it doesn't seem that either is ready to make the jump to the majors on Opening Day. None of the other three guys have anything in their track record to instill any sense of confidence that they can handle the job. Also, there are some other question marks in the rotation (which Oliver Perez will show up?, will El Duque stay healthy?), so Williams/Vargas/Soler may be needed to fill other holes. The options available on the free agent market are less than thrilling, so there's been speculation that the Mets may make a trade, with Joe Blanton being one of the leading candidates. Should the Mets deal Lastings Milledge for Blanton (or a similar pitcher)?
On one hand, prospects are rarely sure things. A perusal of this list of the top prospects from 2002 shows just how hard it is to project player development. So, while David Wright and Jose Reyes have demonstrated just how valuable developing players through the system can be, not every prospect turns into David Wright or Jose Reyes. Looking at Milledge specifically, there are some reasons to doubt his development. His tools have always been evident, but his production over the years hasn't matched them. He failed to produce in his brief stint in the majors last year, and he clearly has some maturity issues. Also, the Mets have two other strong outfield prospects.
On the other hand, everyone seems to agree that Milledge still has a very high ceiling. And according to Nate Silver, his production at AAA last year was excellent. I find it hard to believe that Norfolk is that hard to hit in, but Nate knows far more about projecting performance than any of us, so I'll cut him some slack.
In the end, I think a Milledge-Blanton deal would be a big mistake. Most importantly, it seems that Milledge's market value has slipped (and if Nate is to be believed, undeservedly so). The Mets shouldn't sell low. If Milledge has a strong first half in the minors, he can probably fetch a lot more at the trade deadline than he can now. Secondly, Blanton simply isn't enough of an impact player (he's averaged about 5 Ks per 9 innings the last two seasons) to trade a top prospect for. If the Mets are going to deal Milledge, why do it for a pitcher who's merely good, without the potential to be any better? Sure, Blanton will help the team get through the first half of this season, but once October rolls around, with Pedro (and possibly Pelfrey and Humber) around, Blanton may not even make the playoff rotation. If the Mets are determined to trade Milledge, they'll be better off holding onto him to use as a chip to land a premier player. For instance, the best pitcher in baseball may be available next offseason, or at the trading deadline if the Twins are out of the race. Why not plug the hole in the rotation with someone like Tomo Ohka, Chan Ho Park, or Brian Lawrence, and hold onto Lastings until someone better is available down the road.
I'm glad the Mets didn't spend $126 million on Barry Zito. Barry Zito is not a dominant enough pitcher to justify that kind of salary. But, missing out on Zito at this late stage in the game leaves the Mets with a gaping hole in their rotation. Current candidates for the #5 spot include Dave Williams, Jason Vargas, Alay Soler, Mike Pelfrey, and Philip Humber. Pelfrey and Humber are both excellent prospects, but it doesn't seem that either is ready to make the jump to the majors on Opening Day. None of the other three guys have anything in their track record to instill any sense of confidence that they can handle the job. Also, there are some other question marks in the rotation (which Oliver Perez will show up?, will El Duque stay healthy?), so Williams/Vargas/Soler may be needed to fill other holes. The options available on the free agent market are less than thrilling, so there's been speculation that the Mets may make a trade, with Joe Blanton being one of the leading candidates. Should the Mets deal Lastings Milledge for Blanton (or a similar pitcher)?
On one hand, prospects are rarely sure things. A perusal of this list of the top prospects from 2002 shows just how hard it is to project player development. So, while David Wright and Jose Reyes have demonstrated just how valuable developing players through the system can be, not every prospect turns into David Wright or Jose Reyes. Looking at Milledge specifically, there are some reasons to doubt his development. His tools have always been evident, but his production over the years hasn't matched them. He failed to produce in his brief stint in the majors last year, and he clearly has some maturity issues. Also, the Mets have two other strong outfield prospects.
On the other hand, everyone seems to agree that Milledge still has a very high ceiling. And according to Nate Silver, his production at AAA last year was excellent. I find it hard to believe that Norfolk is that hard to hit in, but Nate knows far more about projecting performance than any of us, so I'll cut him some slack.
In the end, I think a Milledge-Blanton deal would be a big mistake. Most importantly, it seems that Milledge's market value has slipped (and if Nate is to be believed, undeservedly so). The Mets shouldn't sell low. If Milledge has a strong first half in the minors, he can probably fetch a lot more at the trade deadline than he can now. Secondly, Blanton simply isn't enough of an impact player (he's averaged about 5 Ks per 9 innings the last two seasons) to trade a top prospect for. If the Mets are going to deal Milledge, why do it for a pitcher who's merely good, without the potential to be any better? Sure, Blanton will help the team get through the first half of this season, but once October rolls around, with Pedro (and possibly Pelfrey and Humber) around, Blanton may not even make the playoff rotation. If the Mets are determined to trade Milledge, they'll be better off holding onto him to use as a chip to land a premier player. For instance, the best pitcher in baseball may be available next offseason, or at the trading deadline if the Twins are out of the race. Why not plug the hole in the rotation with someone like Tomo Ohka, Chan Ho Park, or Brian Lawrence, and hold onto Lastings until someone better is available down the road.
Monday, December 25, 2006
Thursday, December 21, 2006
John Sickels' take on the Mets Prospects.
Very similar to Prospectus' top 10. In fact, the same 10 people are in the top 10, with some minor movement. Sickels seems a little less enthusiastic about Humber and Carlos Gomez, and has Soler a lot lower down. But the general conclusion is the same: the Mets have 4 big prospects (Fernando Martinez, Pelfrey, Humber, and Gomez) and a lot of question marks after that.
Very similar to Prospectus' top 10. In fact, the same 10 people are in the top 10, with some minor movement. Sickels seems a little less enthusiastic about Humber and Carlos Gomez, and has Soler a lot lower down. But the general conclusion is the same: the Mets have 4 big prospects (Fernando Martinez, Pelfrey, Humber, and Gomez) and a lot of question marks after that.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Damn you Ryan, you beat me to all the news I was going to post.
Anyway, I think the Mets should at least see if Giles would be interested in coming over. Most people seem to think the reason he had a down year (besides the injuries) was because he hated hitting leadoff. Well, no prob for the Mets, they have a pretty good leadoff guy as it is. I would definitely look at giving him 4 yr/$20-24 mil. Personally, I have a hard time thinking that Valentin will be able to produce again this year, so they should at least look into it. I wouldn't have a problem with them getting Pineiro either; once again, I think if he can stay healthy, he can actually be quite serviceable.
Now the thing about the posting fee with D-Mat: doesn't the fee go to his Japanese club? I mean, he's not going to be getting a piece of that, right? So what does that have to do with him?
Zambrano non-tendered? Shocker.
Anyway, I think the Mets should at least see if Giles would be interested in coming over. Most people seem to think the reason he had a down year (besides the injuries) was because he hated hitting leadoff. Well, no prob for the Mets, they have a pretty good leadoff guy as it is. I would definitely look at giving him 4 yr/$20-24 mil. Personally, I have a hard time thinking that Valentin will be able to produce again this year, so they should at least look into it. I wouldn't have a problem with them getting Pineiro either; once again, I think if he can stay healthy, he can actually be quite serviceable.
Now the thing about the posting fee with D-Mat: doesn't the fee go to his Japanese club? I mean, he's not going to be getting a piece of that, right? So what does that have to do with him?
Zambrano non-tendered? Shocker.
Matsuzaka signs?
If SI is to be believed, the Sox and Matsuzaka agreed to a 6 year, $52 million deal, with incentives that could go up to $60 million.
My quick reaction is that this is a pretty good deal for the Sox. When you add in the posting fee, this works out to $17-18.5 million (varying with the incentives). But, the $51 million posting fee isn't subject to the 40% luxury tax. Assuming that the Sox exceed the luxury tax threshold each of the next 6 years (which is admittedly a pretty big assumption), then it's really just around $14-15 million a year. The posting fee is being paid up-front, so to fairly compare this to other free agent deals, the time value of money needs to be taken into account. My very rough calculation is that another $1 million should be added per year.
So, the final result is the approximate equivalent of $15-16 million a year for 6 years. That's right in line with what's being talked about for Zito. Based on everything I've read, I think the odds are Matsuzaka winds up being a better pitcher than Zito. Of course, there's a risk associated with a player who's never played in the majors. Hard to put a dollar figure on that, but I think he'll succeed and that the overall money being spent puts the deal right in line with the way the market is behaving.
Additionally, there's added value to having a premiere Japanese player. I read a Jon Heyman article awhile back that said the Yankees make around $5 million extra a year in marketing/licensing/branding money from the Japanese market. Assuming that's true (I have no idea if it is) and that the Sox can pull off the same thing (some of the $5 mill may be due to Matsui being an every day player and him playing in NYC), then the deal looks very good.
If SI is to be believed, the Sox and Matsuzaka agreed to a 6 year, $52 million deal, with incentives that could go up to $60 million.
My quick reaction is that this is a pretty good deal for the Sox. When you add in the posting fee, this works out to $17-18.5 million (varying with the incentives). But, the $51 million posting fee isn't subject to the 40% luxury tax. Assuming that the Sox exceed the luxury tax threshold each of the next 6 years (which is admittedly a pretty big assumption), then it's really just around $14-15 million a year. The posting fee is being paid up-front, so to fairly compare this to other free agent deals, the time value of money needs to be taken into account. My very rough calculation is that another $1 million should be added per year.
So, the final result is the approximate equivalent of $15-16 million a year for 6 years. That's right in line with what's being talked about for Zito. Based on everything I've read, I think the odds are Matsuzaka winds up being a better pitcher than Zito. Of course, there's a risk associated with a player who's never played in the majors. Hard to put a dollar figure on that, but I think he'll succeed and that the overall money being spent puts the deal right in line with the way the market is behaving.
Additionally, there's added value to having a premiere Japanese player. I read a Jon Heyman article awhile back that said the Yankees make around $5 million extra a year in marketing/licensing/branding money from the Japanese market. Assuming that's true (I have no idea if it is) and that the Sox can pull off the same thing (some of the $5 mill may be due to Matsui being an every day player and him playing in NYC), then the deal looks very good.
People of note who were non-tendered yesterday, and are now free agents:
Marcus Giles
Chris Reitsma
Victor Zambrano
Jorge Sosa
Joel Pineiro
Brandon Claussen
Rick Ankiel
The two most interesting names are on the list because the Braves are too damn cheap.
Everyone seems to think Giles is going to San Diego to join his brother and fill the whole left by the Barfield trade. The appeal of playing with his brother may be too much to overcome, but there should be other teams with interest. He's coming off a weak year, but his offensive track record is impressive and he's still in his prime. Do the Red Sox really want to count on Pedroia?
I'm not sure what Reitsma's injury status is, but he could be a nice addition to a team's bullpen.
Pineiro is also coming off a bad year, but there are a lot of teams (including the Mets) with holes in their rotations.
Marcus Giles
Chris Reitsma
Victor Zambrano
Jorge Sosa
Joel Pineiro
Brandon Claussen
Rick Ankiel
The two most interesting names are on the list because the Braves are too damn cheap.
Everyone seems to think Giles is going to San Diego to join his brother and fill the whole left by the Barfield trade. The appeal of playing with his brother may be too much to overcome, but there should be other teams with interest. He's coming off a weak year, but his offensive track record is impressive and he's still in his prime. Do the Red Sox really want to count on Pedroia?
I'm not sure what Reitsma's injury status is, but he could be a nice addition to a team's bullpen.
Pineiro is also coming off a bad year, but there are a lot of teams (including the Mets) with holes in their rotations.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Why does Jose Valentin switch-hit?
Jose Valentin is a switch hitter. Against right-handed pitchers, he hits from the left side of the plate. During his career, his OPS in these situations is .821. Last year, it was .879. Against left-handed pitchers, he hits from the right side. During his career, his OPS in these situations is .585. Last year, it was .599. In these situations, he hasn't had an OPS of even .700 in any season since his rookie year, when he only had 19 at-bats. Just to make clear how significant the difference is, here's his career performance from each side, prorated to 650 plate appearance (approx. 1 full season):
Valentin has played most of his career at shortstop, so let's compare those numbers to a couple of shortstops of his generation. Miguel Tejada's career OPS is .822. Rey Ordonez's career OPS is .599. So, from the left side of the plate, he has hit like Miguel Tejada, and from the right side, he's hit worse than Rey Ordonez. You'd think this huge gap would be enough to convince Valentin to stop switch hitting, and simply hit from the left side against all pitchers.
And in 2005, Valentin was finally convinced. He hit from the left side the whole season. Against southpaws, he had his best season ever, with an .891 OPS! He only had 19 at-bats against lefties, but it still seemed pretty convincing. Despite his unprecedented success, in 2006, he went back to switch hitting. Predictably, he did poorly against lefties, with the aformentioned .599 OPS. In one at-bat last season, he decided to give hitting lefty against lefty another chance, and he hit a homerun! But, then he went back to switch hitting.
Why does he continue to insist on switch hitting? It seems insane!
Hmmm, here's one possible explanation. Over his career, Valentin has been very consistent from the left side of the plate. His highest OPS season was .880 and his second lowest was .758. The one outlier was 2005, the year he ditched switch hitting, when his OPS in such situations was .546. Maybe Valentin thinks that suddenly facing lefties from the left side somehow hurt his timing against righties.
Jose Valentin is a switch hitter. Against right-handed pitchers, he hits from the left side of the plate. During his career, his OPS in these situations is .821. Last year, it was .879. Against left-handed pitchers, he hits from the right side. During his career, his OPS in these situations is .585. Last year, it was .599. In these situations, he hasn't had an OPS of even .700 in any season since his rookie year, when he only had 19 at-bats. Just to make clear how significant the difference is, here's his career performance from each side, prorated to 650 plate appearance (approx. 1 full season):
| H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | Avg | OBP | Slg | OPS | |
| LHB vs. RHP | 144 | 33 | 4 | 30 | 93 | 66 | 129 | .253 | .332 | .489 | .821 |
| RHB vs. LHP | 116 | 20 | 2 | 9 | 51 | 59 | 151 | .205 | .281 | .304 | .585 |
Valentin has played most of his career at shortstop, so let's compare those numbers to a couple of shortstops of his generation. Miguel Tejada's career OPS is .822. Rey Ordonez's career OPS is .599. So, from the left side of the plate, he has hit like Miguel Tejada, and from the right side, he's hit worse than Rey Ordonez. You'd think this huge gap would be enough to convince Valentin to stop switch hitting, and simply hit from the left side against all pitchers.
And in 2005, Valentin was finally convinced. He hit from the left side the whole season. Against southpaws, he had his best season ever, with an .891 OPS! He only had 19 at-bats against lefties, but it still seemed pretty convincing. Despite his unprecedented success, in 2006, he went back to switch hitting. Predictably, he did poorly against lefties, with the aformentioned .599 OPS. In one at-bat last season, he decided to give hitting lefty against lefty another chance, and he hit a homerun! But, then he went back to switch hitting.
Why does he continue to insist on switch hitting? It seems insane!
Hmmm, here's one possible explanation. Over his career, Valentin has been very consistent from the left side of the plate. His highest OPS season was .880 and his second lowest was .758. The one outlier was 2005, the year he ditched switch hitting, when his OPS in such situations was .546. Maybe Valentin thinks that suddenly facing lefties from the left side somehow hurt his timing against righties.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Rafael Soriano for Horacio Ramirez? WHAT?
That is easily the worst/best trade of the offseason. In fact, I'm struggling to think of the last time a trade seemed so obviously lopsided. Soriano is a very good reliever. He had a 2.25 ERA last year, with a 65/21 K/BB ratio in 60 innings. Horacio has somehow kept his ERAs in the 4s, but his peripherals have always been terrible (career 248/200 in 521 innings). I'd be surprised if his ERA is under 5. Fucking Braves!
That is easily the worst/best trade of the offseason. In fact, I'm struggling to think of the last time a trade seemed so obviously lopsided. Soriano is a very good reliever. He had a 2.25 ERA last year, with a 65/21 K/BB ratio in 60 innings. Horacio has somehow kept his ERAs in the 4s, but his peripherals have always been terrible (career 248/200 in 521 innings). I'd be surprised if his ERA is under 5. Fucking Braves!
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
From Joe Sheehan's chat at Prospectus:
Q: Most entertaining person you've talked to at the Winter Meetings is...
Joe Sheehan: Omar Minaya. It's not close.
Q: Most entertaining person you've talked to at the Winter Meetings is...
Joe Sheehan: Omar Minaya. It's not close.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)