BaseballProspectus has but out its ranking of farm systems going into 2008. #1 (and by a mile; maybe a couple of miles) are the Tampa Bay Rays - that's why people are so high on their potential. The Orioles have moved up from the #18 spot to #10 and there's a good chance that they'll move up to the top 5-6 by next year.
"10. Baltimore Orioles
Last Year's Ranking: 18
Why They're Up: They drafted the best college position player in Matt Wieters, and added a ton of talent in the Erik Bedard trade.
Strengths: Right-handers who throw hard; power prospects; just on his own, Wieters makes catching a strength.
Weaknesses: Athletic position players, especially in the middle infield and center field.
Outlook for 2009 Ranking: They could be up if third baseman Billy Rowell and right-hander Brandon Erbe can return to previous form."
If Adam Jones had gotten a few less at-bats in the majors last year (and was still considered a prospect) then the athletic position player in centerfield weakness would be gone. A trade for the Cubs' Ronny Cedeno and Eric Patterson (as I have proposed) would take care of the middle infield positions.
A perfectly reasonable line-up projection for 2010:
Eric Patterson (2B) (Cubs)
Matt Wieters (C)
Nick Markakis (RF)
Adam Jones (CF)
Nolan Reimold (LF)
Billy Rowell (3B)
Brandon Snyder (1B)
Mike Costanzo (DH) (Luke Scott could still be with the team. He's a better version of Mike and would hit 5th)
Ronny Cedeno (SS) (Cubs)
That has some potential - no real MVP candidates, but a solid line-up. It has a good balance of lefties (Patterson, Wieters (B), Markakis, Rowell, Costanzo) and rights (the rest + Wieters again), batting average (Wieters, Markakis, Snyder), OBP (Patterson, Weiters, Markakis, Reimold, Snyder, Costanzo), power (1-8, really as Patterson has some pop for a second baseman. Snyder may not have the usual HR totals for 1B, but it should be better than Millar), and speed (Patterson, Markakis, Jones, Cedeno).
And talk about rotation options (ranked very roughly in order):
Chris Tillman
Adam Loewen
Chorye Spoone
Radhames Liz
Sean Gallagher (Cubs)
Jake Arrietta
Brandon Erbe
Peadro Beato
Garrett Olson
Tony Butler
Hayden Penn
Troy Patton
Matt Albers
David Hernandez
Tim Bascom
Zach Britton
Brad Bergesen
Jake Renshaw
Jason Berken
It might not have a true ace, but there aren't very many of those around (definitely less than 30). I think that you could put a rotation together from these guys this year and it wouldn't be the worst in baseball by much (if at all). That's 19 guys and the O's only need 5 (at most). There are a lot of guys who top out as #3 starters, but having a #3 type at #2 is offset by having #3 types at 4 and 5 - it gives the team a good chance to win every day.
And what a power bullpen:
James Hoey (high-end velocity: 97mph+)
Bob McCrory (97+)
Kam Mickolio (95+ with sink)
Dennis Sarfate (96+)
That's just the guys who are relief pitchers now. If Liz (97+) moves to the pen (and there's a pretty good chance of that) along with possibly Erbe (98+) (his motion may make him more effective in short appearances) and Butler (95+ as a reliever) (if he has no place in the rotation) then that's 7 guys coming in after the starters who can all throw 95+. Do I think such a team would be the best in the league, or even the division? No, but it's a hell of a start.
I'll do a write-up of some of the team's top prospects at some point in the future.
Read more ...
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
2008 Music Releases
Let's take a quick break from the regularly scheduled baseball talk for some of 2008's music releases.
First up: Real Emotional Trash by Stephen Malkmus & The Jicks.
I was pretty disappointed by this album on my first listen. My expectations were probably too high, as his self-titled from 2001 and 2005's Face The Truth are two of my favorite albums. I should have kept in mind that Pig Lib (which isn't a bad album, but is more "eh", minus "Do Not Feed The Oysters") came in between the two. After the first listen I said that the album (RET) was OK, but that I doubted it would make my top 10 for the year.
[This is probably going to be similar to 2006 when I said the same thing about the Decemberists' The Crane Wife before it ended up eventually being #2. I had heard some things about the album that didn't sound good and my first few listens were marred by my pre-conceived notions. I'd say now that The Crane Wife is a more solid album than their 2005 release Picaresque, but I still like the latter better. (It's pretty much the same situation as the first two Shins albums. I'd say that I like Oh, Inverted World better because it has some of my favorite songs on it, but Chutes Too Narrow is the more consistent album - it flows better from song to song and there isn't anything that I want to skip when I hear it.) Anyway, Real Emotional Trash is (unless there happen to be a ton of great releases this year) going to be pretty high at years' end.]
After 4-5 listens, I'm started to see that it is much better than I originally thought, but still a couple of notches below Stephen Malkmus and Face The Truth. A lot of the songs are pretty long - too long even - and I think it might have been better if he had taken about 30 seconds off of each song and added another track or two. The length is due partially to all of the instrumental interludes. I understand that it's well within his rights to jam as much as he wants, but it does get a bit excessive. On Face The Truth there was a long guitar part in "No More Shoes" which I really enjoyed. The difference is that that one was more dynamic - I found myself listening to the song just to here it sometimes - but on this album it just seems to serve to make the songs longer or to set up some singing parts (when he gets back to singing after the break in "Hopscotch Willie" it works really well, but it could have been shortened by a bit).
Malkmus has always had a talent for writing lyrics that get stuck in your head (he has said that sometimes he puts words/lines together because they sound good as opposed to having any real meaning) and for me this is most evident on "Cold Son". I think that song stands up there with any of his prior ones - the two lines near the beginning and end of the song "The conjecture is reject the rose" and "Defy conjecture and accept the rose" really make me want to listen to it for some reason.
I've heard that a lot of people really like the first track "Dragonfly Pie", but I don't really see it - the guitar is a bit too menacing sounding for me, though it's still not bad. The build-up on the title-track is pulled off pretty well, but it does take 6 minutes. "Out Of Reach" reminds me of some of his slower songs from back in the Pavement days, and he gets points for having a song called "Baltimore" on there (and bonus points for it being pretty good but, again, too long at over 6 minutes - the end could have been cut down some). "Gardenia" is the shortest track on the album at 2:53 and it's a pretty standard catchy Malkmus pop-type song, though nothing terribly special. The female backing was an interesting touch - not something I remember hearing from him before. "Elmo Delmo" is largely forgettable, but "We Can't Help You" is OK (with some more female backing - they're just "Na, na's" but it's still a nice addition). The last track "Wicked Wanda" actually has the female back-up singing some words, but it's pretty much in the same boat as the last track (not bad, but not that great). This is the first album he's put out that I consider to be by Stephen Malkmus & The Jicks. It's really a band effort.
Overall: It sounds like I'm being pretty hard on the album, it's actually pretty good. My opinions of it are similar to the ones I had about Built To Spill's last one You In Reverse (2006), even though I like the latter better. Whenever I listened to it I enjoyed it, and I liked a lot of the songs individually, but I rarely found myself reaching for it. If it was released by "Joe Band" then I would have probably had a much higher opinion of it. As it is, minus a couple of songs in particular ("Hopscotch Willie" and "Cold Son") I'll probably turn to Face The Truth (or "Night Society" on the Silver Jews' American Water - which is my favorite instrumental song ever (take that Classical music!)) to hear Malkmus rock, or Stephen Malkmus to hear him have fun. It's still #1 so far this year, though.
Next: Destroyer's Trouble In Dream
Same thing as Malkmus - an artist I really like releases an album after I thought their previous one was excellent and so I'm a bit let down. Destroyer's Rubies was my favorite album of 2006 (mostly on the strength of the first half, which is fantastic) and Streethawk: A Seduction (2001) is also really good, but this one is more in line with This Night (2002), which had some OK songs but was, on the whole, kind of boring. "Dark Leaves From A Thread" is more like the best Destroyer tracks - catchy and changing (loud to soft guitars, tempo increases, surprise paino solo, etc.). Bejar has the same talent as Malkmus for writing memorable lyrics (like all 9 minutes 25 seconds worth for "Rubies" - it starts out with "Dueling cyclones jack-knife, they got eyes for your wife") but for some reason that doesn't come through as much this time. The guitar is more subdued than on Rubies, but that wouldn't be an issue at all if something else came up to take its place. "Foam Hands" is a slower number in the vein of Rubies' "Painter In Your Pocket", except that the latter builds up to a pretty rockin' finish whereas "Foam Hands" gets louder, but still kind of just peters out. "Shooting Rockets" is 8 minutes long, but there's no pay-off for your patience. It's kind of difficult to effectively distinguish the last few songs from one another (and, worse than that, I don't really care to).
Everything kind of sounds the same - in that bad way of saying "the same". It doesn't go from louder piano driven song ("The Very Modern Dance") to a more standard rocker ("The Crossover", which happens to get stuck in my head every morning when the crossing-guard yells "Crossover" to me at the cross-walk from the parking lot. Cross.) to a more acoustic-guitar piece ("Helena") to a slower guitar/piano-led one (the excellent "Farrar, Straus, And Giroux (Sea Of Tears)"), like on Streethawk: A Seduction.
Overall: Again, if this was released by a no-name band then I would think it was OK (though probably still not that great) but I was looking forward to it too much. This has that "dynamic" problem that I associated with the instrumental sections on the Malkmus album. I don't think this is technically the correct way to describe it, but to me that means that it becomes a passive listening experience (background music that I don't pay much attention to) as opposed to an active one - it's not something I want to listen to in the car if I'm driving myself. I'll probably give it a few more chances (in all likelihood, a spin or two more than it deserves) because I want to like it, but I doubt it'll move up much.
And last, but not least: Vampire Weekend's self-titled debut.
Everyone seems to love this one - I've heard that it's even been seen on MTV (or something related to it), but I won't hold that against it. It seems to often be compared to Paul Newman's Graceland, but since I'm not too familiar with that album I guess I don't have an easy go-to here. The style on Vampire Weekend is light and fun sounding with some interesting instrumentation (which is apparently influenced by African pop and Western Classical music). None of the lyrics add much for me, but they certainly don't detract from my enjoyment of this album. All of the songs are catchy and nice to listen to (it hasn't happened yet, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of them start popping into my head at random times in the future). I'm not going to go delve too deeply into them individually, because I don't think that will add anything. I will say that I can see why "Oxford Comma" made Rolling Stone's list of best songs from 2007 (#67) and "Walcott" has some really nice strings.
While listening to the album I find myself thinking that this part or that sounds just like something I've heard before but I can't quite put my finger on it - being able to create that sense of familiarity with a style that's not exactly common is admirable.
Overall: I don't think the hype quite matches the product. Yeah, it's really enjoyable to listen to but it's not far and away better than everything else ever (or even this year). As long as it stands up to repeated listens, I think it'll still be up there at the end of 2008. Read more ...
First up: Real Emotional Trash by Stephen Malkmus & The Jicks.
I was pretty disappointed by this album on my first listen. My expectations were probably too high, as his self-titled from 2001 and 2005's Face The Truth are two of my favorite albums. I should have kept in mind that Pig Lib (which isn't a bad album, but is more "eh", minus "Do Not Feed The Oysters") came in between the two. After the first listen I said that the album (RET) was OK, but that I doubted it would make my top 10 for the year.
[This is probably going to be similar to 2006 when I said the same thing about the Decemberists' The Crane Wife before it ended up eventually being #2. I had heard some things about the album that didn't sound good and my first few listens were marred by my pre-conceived notions. I'd say now that The Crane Wife is a more solid album than their 2005 release Picaresque, but I still like the latter better. (It's pretty much the same situation as the first two Shins albums. I'd say that I like Oh, Inverted World better because it has some of my favorite songs on it, but Chutes Too Narrow is the more consistent album - it flows better from song to song and there isn't anything that I want to skip when I hear it.) Anyway, Real Emotional Trash is (unless there happen to be a ton of great releases this year) going to be pretty high at years' end.]
After 4-5 listens, I'm started to see that it is much better than I originally thought, but still a couple of notches below Stephen Malkmus and Face The Truth. A lot of the songs are pretty long - too long even - and I think it might have been better if he had taken about 30 seconds off of each song and added another track or two. The length is due partially to all of the instrumental interludes. I understand that it's well within his rights to jam as much as he wants, but it does get a bit excessive. On Face The Truth there was a long guitar part in "No More Shoes" which I really enjoyed. The difference is that that one was more dynamic - I found myself listening to the song just to here it sometimes - but on this album it just seems to serve to make the songs longer or to set up some singing parts (when he gets back to singing after the break in "Hopscotch Willie" it works really well, but it could have been shortened by a bit).
Malkmus has always had a talent for writing lyrics that get stuck in your head (he has said that sometimes he puts words/lines together because they sound good as opposed to having any real meaning) and for me this is most evident on "Cold Son". I think that song stands up there with any of his prior ones - the two lines near the beginning and end of the song "The conjecture is reject the rose" and "Defy conjecture and accept the rose" really make me want to listen to it for some reason.
I've heard that a lot of people really like the first track "Dragonfly Pie", but I don't really see it - the guitar is a bit too menacing sounding for me, though it's still not bad. The build-up on the title-track is pulled off pretty well, but it does take 6 minutes. "Out Of Reach" reminds me of some of his slower songs from back in the Pavement days, and he gets points for having a song called "Baltimore" on there (and bonus points for it being pretty good but, again, too long at over 6 minutes - the end could have been cut down some). "Gardenia" is the shortest track on the album at 2:53 and it's a pretty standard catchy Malkmus pop-type song, though nothing terribly special. The female backing was an interesting touch - not something I remember hearing from him before. "Elmo Delmo" is largely forgettable, but "We Can't Help You" is OK (with some more female backing - they're just "Na, na's" but it's still a nice addition). The last track "Wicked Wanda" actually has the female back-up singing some words, but it's pretty much in the same boat as the last track (not bad, but not that great). This is the first album he's put out that I consider to be by Stephen Malkmus & The Jicks. It's really a band effort.
Overall: It sounds like I'm being pretty hard on the album, it's actually pretty good. My opinions of it are similar to the ones I had about Built To Spill's last one You In Reverse (2006), even though I like the latter better. Whenever I listened to it I enjoyed it, and I liked a lot of the songs individually, but I rarely found myself reaching for it. If it was released by "Joe Band" then I would have probably had a much higher opinion of it. As it is, minus a couple of songs in particular ("Hopscotch Willie" and "Cold Son") I'll probably turn to Face The Truth (or "Night Society" on the Silver Jews' American Water - which is my favorite instrumental song ever (take that Classical music!)) to hear Malkmus rock, or Stephen Malkmus to hear him have fun. It's still #1 so far this year, though.
Next: Destroyer's Trouble In Dream
Same thing as Malkmus - an artist I really like releases an album after I thought their previous one was excellent and so I'm a bit let down. Destroyer's Rubies was my favorite album of 2006 (mostly on the strength of the first half, which is fantastic) and Streethawk: A Seduction (2001) is also really good, but this one is more in line with This Night (2002), which had some OK songs but was, on the whole, kind of boring. "Dark Leaves From A Thread" is more like the best Destroyer tracks - catchy and changing (loud to soft guitars, tempo increases, surprise paino solo, etc.). Bejar has the same talent as Malkmus for writing memorable lyrics (like all 9 minutes 25 seconds worth for "Rubies" - it starts out with "Dueling cyclones jack-knife, they got eyes for your wife") but for some reason that doesn't come through as much this time. The guitar is more subdued than on Rubies, but that wouldn't be an issue at all if something else came up to take its place. "Foam Hands" is a slower number in the vein of Rubies' "Painter In Your Pocket", except that the latter builds up to a pretty rockin' finish whereas "Foam Hands" gets louder, but still kind of just peters out. "Shooting Rockets" is 8 minutes long, but there's no pay-off for your patience. It's kind of difficult to effectively distinguish the last few songs from one another (and, worse than that, I don't really care to).
Everything kind of sounds the same - in that bad way of saying "the same". It doesn't go from louder piano driven song ("The Very Modern Dance") to a more standard rocker ("The Crossover", which happens to get stuck in my head every morning when the crossing-guard yells "Crossover" to me at the cross-walk from the parking lot. Cross.) to a more acoustic-guitar piece ("Helena") to a slower guitar/piano-led one (the excellent "Farrar, Straus, And Giroux (Sea Of Tears)"), like on Streethawk: A Seduction.
Overall: Again, if this was released by a no-name band then I would think it was OK (though probably still not that great) but I was looking forward to it too much. This has that "dynamic" problem that I associated with the instrumental sections on the Malkmus album. I don't think this is technically the correct way to describe it, but to me that means that it becomes a passive listening experience (background music that I don't pay much attention to) as opposed to an active one - it's not something I want to listen to in the car if I'm driving myself. I'll probably give it a few more chances (in all likelihood, a spin or two more than it deserves) because I want to like it, but I doubt it'll move up much.
And last, but not least: Vampire Weekend's self-titled debut.
Everyone seems to love this one - I've heard that it's even been seen on MTV (or something related to it), but I won't hold that against it. It seems to often be compared to Paul Newman's Graceland, but since I'm not too familiar with that album I guess I don't have an easy go-to here. The style on Vampire Weekend is light and fun sounding with some interesting instrumentation (which is apparently influenced by African pop and Western Classical music). None of the lyrics add much for me, but they certainly don't detract from my enjoyment of this album. All of the songs are catchy and nice to listen to (it hasn't happened yet, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of them start popping into my head at random times in the future). I'm not going to go delve too deeply into them individually, because I don't think that will add anything. I will say that I can see why "Oxford Comma" made Rolling Stone's list of best songs from 2007 (#67) and "Walcott" has some really nice strings.
While listening to the album I find myself thinking that this part or that sounds just like something I've heard before but I can't quite put my finger on it - being able to create that sense of familiarity with a style that's not exactly common is admirable.
Overall: I don't think the hype quite matches the product. Yeah, it's really enjoyable to listen to but it's not far and away better than everything else ever (or even this year). As long as it stands up to repeated listens, I think it'll still be up there at the end of 2008. Read more ...
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Adam Jones vs. Failed Outfield Prospects
Many players have the necessary tools to be successful, but they don’t always turn them into the skills needed to put up good numbers. I also think you need to take injuries out of the equation (unless there is a good reason to believe the player is extra vulnerable). Any player can get hurt any have their career not go where it should have.
Jeffrey Hammonds: Rushed to the big leagues – spent 60 games in AA and AAA before coming up to the Majors. He hit OK (.311/.333/.483) in AAA (as a 22 year-old) in a small number of games but never showed much plate discipline or even that much power. He was still an above average hitter as a rookie in ’93 and in ’94. Had limited playing time ’95 and ’96 (injuries?) but was a solid player for almost his entire career (OPS+ [On-base plus Slugging above league average 100 = average] of 111, 111, 114, 111, 91, 93, 96 from ’97 to ’03 for a career OPS+ of 99]. If that was combined with excellent defense from CF instead of slightly below average defense from all three OF positions then his offense would have been acceptable. He just wasn’t the impact player he was “supposed” to be.
Averaging his 6 best years gives an annual WARP3 (Wins Above Replacement Player (total on-field contributions adjusted for league difficulty, park effects, era, games played, etc)) of 3.4. Bedard was worth 8.1 wins last year, so 6 years of Jeffrey Hammonds (20.4) could certainly be worth more than 2 of Bedard (16.2), if neither was hurt.
Corey Patterson: Spent only 89 games in AAA in ’01 (as a 21 year-old) before being brought up full-time, even though he only hit .253/.308/.387. That followed a year in AA of .261/.329/.491. He got worse every year in the minors but was advanced anyway. Still is a solid MLB player providing good defense, some speed, and a little bit of power.
He has had an average WARP3 score of 4.6 the last couple years. Over 6 years that’s 27.6 – well ahead of Bedard’s 16.2 over 2.
Darnell McDonald: Never hit particularly well at any level of the minors until he had repeated the level or was older than his competition. Even then, he never showed all that much power. It was clear that he wasn’t going to be an impact player in the majors.
Adam Jones: As a 21 year-old in AAA he hit .314/.382/.586 with 25 HR in 101 games in a park that depresses HR by 15%. Adjusting his league difficulty to the MLB level yields .291/.341/.488, with about 40(!) HR. (AAA is about 90% the difficulty of MLB in general, and it was a pitchers’ league). Jones was probable one of the 5 best players in AAA last year.
As a 20 year-old in AAA he hit .287/.345/.484. He has made a major step forward 3 years in a row – that isn’t something you see very often.
(For comparison’s sake) Torii Hunter: As a 21 year-old in AA he hit .231/.301/.338. As a 22 year-old in AA he hit .282/.324/.438 before moving up and hitting .337/.344/.543 in AAA (in 26 games). Hit .255/.309/.380 in the majors at 23 and was sent down to the minors again for 55 games as a 24 year-old.
Adam Jones hit better as a 20 year-old in AAA than Hunter did as a 22 year-old in AA.
It’s not just the tools that everyone believes in. Jones’ stats back it up the way they didn’t for those other guys (minus Hunter two years later). That’s why I’m so confident is his ability to produce at the major league level, even if his OBP isn’t going to be too high in ’08.
Jeff Bagwell for Larry Anderson wasn’t a bad trade in retrospect; it was pretty bad at the time since Bagwell’s minor were very good for someone his age in the league in which he played (He got on base and hit a ton of doubles). Boston didn’t realize that. Nobody would have said that he was a future HOFamer (hopefully), but it was fairly clear that he could be a good major league player.
It isn’t 100% possible to predict what a player will do, but it is possible to have a pretty good idea. When the scouting guys and the stat guys both say a player will be good it usually turns out to be true. [Edit: Except Andy Marte... nobody really saw that one coming.] Read more ...
Jeffrey Hammonds: Rushed to the big leagues – spent 60 games in AA and AAA before coming up to the Majors. He hit OK (.311/.333/.483) in AAA (as a 22 year-old) in a small number of games but never showed much plate discipline or even that much power. He was still an above average hitter as a rookie in ’93 and in ’94. Had limited playing time ’95 and ’96 (injuries?) but was a solid player for almost his entire career (OPS+ [On-base plus Slugging above league average 100 = average] of 111, 111, 114, 111, 91, 93, 96 from ’97 to ’03 for a career OPS+ of 99]. If that was combined with excellent defense from CF instead of slightly below average defense from all three OF positions then his offense would have been acceptable. He just wasn’t the impact player he was “supposed” to be.
Averaging his 6 best years gives an annual WARP3 (Wins Above Replacement Player (total on-field contributions adjusted for league difficulty, park effects, era, games played, etc)) of 3.4. Bedard was worth 8.1 wins last year, so 6 years of Jeffrey Hammonds (20.4) could certainly be worth more than 2 of Bedard (16.2), if neither was hurt.
Corey Patterson: Spent only 89 games in AAA in ’01 (as a 21 year-old) before being brought up full-time, even though he only hit .253/.308/.387. That followed a year in AA of .261/.329/.491. He got worse every year in the minors but was advanced anyway. Still is a solid MLB player providing good defense, some speed, and a little bit of power.
He has had an average WARP3 score of 4.6 the last couple years. Over 6 years that’s 27.6 – well ahead of Bedard’s 16.2 over 2.
Darnell McDonald: Never hit particularly well at any level of the minors until he had repeated the level or was older than his competition. Even then, he never showed all that much power. It was clear that he wasn’t going to be an impact player in the majors.
Adam Jones: As a 21 year-old in AAA he hit .314/.382/.586 with 25 HR in 101 games in a park that depresses HR by 15%. Adjusting his league difficulty to the MLB level yields .291/.341/.488, with about 40(!) HR. (AAA is about 90% the difficulty of MLB in general, and it was a pitchers’ league). Jones was probable one of the 5 best players in AAA last year.
As a 20 year-old in AAA he hit .287/.345/.484. He has made a major step forward 3 years in a row – that isn’t something you see very often.
(For comparison’s sake) Torii Hunter: As a 21 year-old in AA he hit .231/.301/.338. As a 22 year-old in AA he hit .282/.324/.438 before moving up and hitting .337/.344/.543 in AAA (in 26 games). Hit .255/.309/.380 in the majors at 23 and was sent down to the minors again for 55 games as a 24 year-old.
Adam Jones hit better as a 20 year-old in AAA than Hunter did as a 22 year-old in AA.
It’s not just the tools that everyone believes in. Jones’ stats back it up the way they didn’t for those other guys (minus Hunter two years later). That’s why I’m so confident is his ability to produce at the major league level, even if his OBP isn’t going to be too high in ’08.
Jeff Bagwell for Larry Anderson wasn’t a bad trade in retrospect; it was pretty bad at the time since Bagwell’s minor were very good for someone his age in the league in which he played (He got on base and hit a ton of doubles). Boston didn’t realize that. Nobody would have said that he was a future HOFamer (hopefully), but it was fairly clear that he could be a good major league player.
It isn’t 100% possible to predict what a player will do, but it is possible to have a pretty good idea. When the scouting guys and the stat guys both say a player will be good it usually turns out to be true. [Edit: Except Andy Marte... nobody really saw that one coming.] Read more ...
Hall of Fame Cases
I'm basing this entirely off of the stats. Winning a Gold Glove doesn't make you a good defender (see Jeter, Derek who is a terrible shortstop but should still probably make the HOF if he retired tomorrow), winning MVP's doesn't make you the league's best player (for a quick example; Jimmy Rollins this past year, who had a great year, but was behind David Wright, Albert Pujols [who's already close to being a borderline candidate], and Matt Holliday, while also making more outs in a season than anyone, ever), winning 20 games in front of a good defense with a good offense and bullpen to support you doesn't make you a great pitcher. I didn't watch these guys play, so there's no "you had to see him turn a double play" or "the guy could hit the ball a mile and had a great swing" arguments here.
Players from back-in-the-day aren't really my thing, so I wouldn't say this is at all a definitive picture of their candidacy. They're my opinions based on about 10 minutes of research a piece. It did make for an interesting lunch/break though.
Orlando Cepeda:
Had 3 great years, 3/4 more very good ones, and that's mostly it.
Hit for good power for his time with solid batting average and on-base percentage. Didn't really add anything with the glove, and it was probably a minus over the course of his career.
He's better than some other HOF first-basemen, but comes out worse then Keith Hernandez (very good OBP and very good defense), Will Clark (underrated hitter and good defense), Don Mattingly (better peak and great defense), and a few others. In fact, Fred McGriff had a better career, though his best years weren't quite as impressive.
Overall - Not a Hall Of Famer. First base isn't all about slugging, and that in and of itself doesn't necessarily make you one of the all-time greats.
Bill Mazeroski:
OBP < .300 for his career, and that's with a fairly high number of intentional walks. The guy couldn't really hit. Great glove though.
Bobby Grich, Lou Whitaker, and Willie Randolph were all better; the first 2 by a pretty good margin. Second base is a pretty stacked position in the HOF, and it can be argued that the guy who was the best ever at fielding his position deserves to be there.
Overall - Borderline; There are worse Hall Of Famers, but his overall contribution just wasn't quite enough in my book. He must have been a pleasure to watch with the glove, though.
Billy Williams:
He was consistently a very good to great hitter for almost his entire career and even added a bit with the glove. Since I'm on left fielders, Albert Belle was so good while he was playing that he should probably get in, though he's borderline overall. Billy Williams' career was better than Belle's by a larger margin than Belle's over Jim Rice's. Also of note: Rice wasn't even the best player in his own outfield as teammate Dwight Evans is actually a deserving candidate, and was much better than Rice.
Overall - Hall Of Famer.
Phil Rizzuto:
Had an outstanding year in 1950; BA .324 OBP .418 SLG .439 with great defense. Had a couple more really good years, and a few good ones, and that's it. Was done contributing to his team by age 35, and had a few so-so years between the good ones, mostly due to a drop in his defensive play as his offense was generally not very good.
Better shortstops not in the Hall include Allan Trammell and Bill Dahlen, who should be in, Dave Concepcion who's borderline, and Tony Fernandez who shouldn't be there. Bert Campaneris is about in line with Rizzuto.
Overall - Not a Hall Of Famer. Worse choice than Cepeda.
Jim 'Catfish' Hunter:
The lack of 'Catfish' threw me off at first. I'm not really sure why he's in the HOF. He was done by 32. Pretty good control but a lack of strikeouts, gave up his share of homers, probably got a little lucky on giving up less hits. Below several non-HOF pitchers like Vida Blue, Ron Guidry, Frank Viola, Orel Hershiser, Dennis Martinez, Jimmy Key, David Cone, and Jack Morris (who's below Bret Saberhagen, Chuck Finley, Luis Tiant, Jim Kaat, Tommy John, Frank Tanana, and Bert Blyleven). John and Tanana are borderline, and Blyleven is one of the better pitchers of all time. Blyleven had better control than Hunter, a much higher K rate, and a much lower HR rate. He did give up more hits, but putting their ERAs in context has Blyleven coming out way ahead.
Hunter's win totals and playoff contributions don't really do anything for me.
Overall - Not a Hall Of Famer. Maybe if he hadn't gotten injured.
Pee Wee Reese:
Only Grich and Whitaker beat him out among non-HOF short stops. Had his best year in '42 and second best in '46, so had he not had to miss that time there really wouldn't be any place to argue. Very good peak through age 30, and then solid through 38.
Overall - Hall Of Famer.
Well that's it. The Veteran's Committee let in some undeserving candidates, and a few more were voted in. Some of these guys belong in the "Hall of Very Good" or what is now generally known amongst those who look at things the way I do as the "Ray Lankford Wing Of The Hall Of Fame". A revamped Veteran's Committee should eventually let in those guys that aren't going to get voted in but deserve to be. It's a shame Roger Clemens is who he is and did what he almost certainly did, as he may very well be the greatest pitcher of all time. Read more ...
Players from back-in-the-day aren't really my thing, so I wouldn't say this is at all a definitive picture of their candidacy. They're my opinions based on about 10 minutes of research a piece. It did make for an interesting lunch/break though.
Orlando Cepeda:
Had 3 great years, 3/4 more very good ones, and that's mostly it.
Hit for good power for his time with solid batting average and on-base percentage. Didn't really add anything with the glove, and it was probably a minus over the course of his career.
He's better than some other HOF first-basemen, but comes out worse then Keith Hernandez (very good OBP and very good defense), Will Clark (underrated hitter and good defense), Don Mattingly (better peak and great defense), and a few others. In fact, Fred McGriff had a better career, though his best years weren't quite as impressive.
Overall - Not a Hall Of Famer. First base isn't all about slugging, and that in and of itself doesn't necessarily make you one of the all-time greats.
Bill Mazeroski:
OBP < .300 for his career, and that's with a fairly high number of intentional walks. The guy couldn't really hit. Great glove though.
Bobby Grich, Lou Whitaker, and Willie Randolph were all better; the first 2 by a pretty good margin. Second base is a pretty stacked position in the HOF, and it can be argued that the guy who was the best ever at fielding his position deserves to be there.
Overall - Borderline; There are worse Hall Of Famers, but his overall contribution just wasn't quite enough in my book. He must have been a pleasure to watch with the glove, though.
Billy Williams:
He was consistently a very good to great hitter for almost his entire career and even added a bit with the glove. Since I'm on left fielders, Albert Belle was so good while he was playing that he should probably get in, though he's borderline overall. Billy Williams' career was better than Belle's by a larger margin than Belle's over Jim Rice's. Also of note: Rice wasn't even the best player in his own outfield as teammate Dwight Evans is actually a deserving candidate, and was much better than Rice.
Overall - Hall Of Famer.
Phil Rizzuto:
Had an outstanding year in 1950; BA .324 OBP .418 SLG .439 with great defense. Had a couple more really good years, and a few good ones, and that's it. Was done contributing to his team by age 35, and had a few so-so years between the good ones, mostly due to a drop in his defensive play as his offense was generally not very good.
Better shortstops not in the Hall include Allan Trammell and Bill Dahlen, who should be in, Dave Concepcion who's borderline, and Tony Fernandez who shouldn't be there. Bert Campaneris is about in line with Rizzuto.
Overall - Not a Hall Of Famer. Worse choice than Cepeda.
Jim 'Catfish' Hunter:
The lack of 'Catfish' threw me off at first. I'm not really sure why he's in the HOF. He was done by 32. Pretty good control but a lack of strikeouts, gave up his share of homers, probably got a little lucky on giving up less hits. Below several non-HOF pitchers like Vida Blue, Ron Guidry, Frank Viola, Orel Hershiser, Dennis Martinez, Jimmy Key, David Cone, and Jack Morris (who's below Bret Saberhagen, Chuck Finley, Luis Tiant, Jim Kaat, Tommy John, Frank Tanana, and Bert Blyleven). John and Tanana are borderline, and Blyleven is one of the better pitchers of all time. Blyleven had better control than Hunter, a much higher K rate, and a much lower HR rate. He did give up more hits, but putting their ERAs in context has Blyleven coming out way ahead.
Hunter's win totals and playoff contributions don't really do anything for me.
Overall - Not a Hall Of Famer. Maybe if he hadn't gotten injured.
Pee Wee Reese:
Only Grich and Whitaker beat him out among non-HOF short stops. Had his best year in '42 and second best in '46, so had he not had to miss that time there really wouldn't be any place to argue. Very good peak through age 30, and then solid through 38.
Overall - Hall Of Famer.
Well that's it. The Veteran's Committee let in some undeserving candidates, and a few more were voted in. Some of these guys belong in the "Hall of Very Good" or what is now generally known amongst those who look at things the way I do as the "Ray Lankford Wing Of The Hall Of Fame". A revamped Veteran's Committee should eventually let in those guys that aren't going to get voted in but deserve to be. It's a shame Roger Clemens is who he is and did what he almost certainly did, as he may very well be the greatest pitcher of all time. Read more ...
Jim Rice vs. Dwight Evans
For the Jim Rice vs Dwight Evans debate; Jim Rice's best season ('78) saw him go .315/.370/.600 with 46 HR and 139 RBI. One of Evans' best seasons ('82, though '81 in fewer games was better and '84 was about as good) saw him go .292/.402/.534 with 32 HR and 104 RBI. He also had 37 doubles vs Rice's 25, though Rice had the triples edge 15 to 7. The stike-outs are almost the same at 125(DE) and 126(JR) but Evans had twice as many walks 112 vs 58. OPS(on-base plus slugging) of .970 vs .936. One point of OBP is worth more than one point of Slugging, so their offensive contributions weren't that far apart. Just as an example, if those extra 54 walks that Evans had had been singles, he would have hit .350/.402/.572. I think that would have made it clear that their seasons were similar.
Rice had the better bat by a bit, but gave all that back on defense (Rice was only average that year (one of the few times he was even that good in his career) and Evans was a Gold Glover with a very good arm). Evans had three years of this quality to Rice's two, about equal numbers of good years, and many more years were he (Evans) actually contributed to his team. Rice's 46 HR led the league in '78, but Evans' 22 HR led the league in '81. Rice led the league in OPS once; Evans did it twice.
The career WARP3 numbers are 84.3 for Rice and 121.7 for Evans; "peak" WARP3 of 56.2 for Rice and 64.3 for Evans (he just had more top years); for JAWS score of 70.3 for Rice (below average (~85) for the HOF and pretty much in line with Jimmy Sheckford (who?)) and 93 for Evans (above average (~90) for HOF right fielders).
Rice had so many RBI largely as a byproduct of how many men were on base when he came up (thank you Wade Boggs and also Evans himself). Also, the only guy to lead the league in RBI during any of Rice's seasons in the HOF is Eddie Murray, so apparently being an RBI man in those days doesn't really mean that much to the HOF voters (the other never got even close to being elected).
Plus Rice was bad in the playoffs (while Evans was pretty darn good).
Rice also hit .277/.330/.459 on the road for his career.
(When I saw this I immediately went to look up Jay Gibbons' stats, as that line looked familiar. The year Jay drove in 100 runs ('03) because the O's sucked and so he was the clean-up hitter, he hit .277/.330/.456. Jim Rice on the road was basically Jay Gibbons from '03, empty RBI totals and all).
While he played Rice hit the ball well. He also made a lot of outs. (Only one player made more outs than he did from '75-'86) He grounded into over 50 more DPs than the second closest player during that time. Rice was so "feared", that Managers intentionally walked him less than 48 other players between 1974 and 1989, the span of Rice's career.
I don't even dislike Jim Rice or anything. I wish the O's had a hitter that good in left. The main problem I have is that several more deserving players aren't in who should be, and several more players who were better than or comparable to Rice shouldn’t get in but now may (which dilutes the HOF) or won't (which is really unfair to them). It's mostly a consistency issue, though there are some players in the HOF who are definitely worse than Rice, but two wrongs don't make a right, as they say. Read more ...
Rice had the better bat by a bit, but gave all that back on defense (Rice was only average that year (one of the few times he was even that good in his career) and Evans was a Gold Glover with a very good arm). Evans had three years of this quality to Rice's two, about equal numbers of good years, and many more years were he (Evans) actually contributed to his team. Rice's 46 HR led the league in '78, but Evans' 22 HR led the league in '81. Rice led the league in OPS once; Evans did it twice.
The career WARP3 numbers are 84.3 for Rice and 121.7 for Evans; "peak" WARP3 of 56.2 for Rice and 64.3 for Evans (he just had more top years); for JAWS score of 70.3 for Rice (below average (~85) for the HOF and pretty much in line with Jimmy Sheckford (who?)) and 93 for Evans (above average (~90) for HOF right fielders).
Rice had so many RBI largely as a byproduct of how many men were on base when he came up (thank you Wade Boggs and also Evans himself). Also, the only guy to lead the league in RBI during any of Rice's seasons in the HOF is Eddie Murray, so apparently being an RBI man in those days doesn't really mean that much to the HOF voters (the other never got even close to being elected).
Plus Rice was bad in the playoffs (while Evans was pretty darn good).
Rice also hit .277/.330/.459 on the road for his career.
(When I saw this I immediately went to look up Jay Gibbons' stats, as that line looked familiar. The year Jay drove in 100 runs ('03) because the O's sucked and so he was the clean-up hitter, he hit .277/.330/.456. Jim Rice on the road was basically Jay Gibbons from '03, empty RBI totals and all).
While he played Rice hit the ball well. He also made a lot of outs. (Only one player made more outs than he did from '75-'86) He grounded into over 50 more DPs than the second closest player during that time. Rice was so "feared", that Managers intentionally walked him less than 48 other players between 1974 and 1989, the span of Rice's career.
I don't even dislike Jim Rice or anything. I wish the O's had a hitter that good in left. The main problem I have is that several more deserving players aren't in who should be, and several more players who were better than or comparable to Rice shouldn’t get in but now may (which dilutes the HOF) or won't (which is really unfair to them). It's mostly a consistency issue, though there are some players in the HOF who are definitely worse than Rice, but two wrongs don't make a right, as they say. Read more ...
The Bedard Trade
[Written originally at the time of the trade.]
So Erik Bedard has (finally, officially) been traded to the Seattle Mariners for Adam Jones, Chris Tillman, George Sherrill, Tony Butler, and Kameron Mickolio. To give everyone some info. about the new O’s.
Adam Jones; 22 yr old CF, may eventually hit .300 with 30 HR 20 SB, great athlete, very good defense/arm
Had 1.002 On-base Plus Slugging (OPS) at AAA last year (in a pitchers’ park). Plate discipline isn’t there yet so he may struggle at first, but should be a league-average CF at minimum with a multiple time All-Star ceiling. Think Torii Hunter or even Vernon Wells. There might be more power though, as I’ve heard 40 HR as a projection. If he was eligible, he would be a top 10 Prospect overall, maybe as high as #6.
Along with Nolan Reimold in LF (soon) and Nick Markakis in RF, he will be part of a good/very good offensive and great defensive outfield (all 3 guys have the range for CF and the arms for RF). Jones for Bedard, straight-up, would have been defensible. Taking salaries into account, Jones will easily provide more to the O’s over the 6 years they have him under control than Bedard would for the next two.
Chris Tillman; 6’5 19 yr old RHP, Rated as Seattles #2 Prospect, #44 overall
Year In Review: Ignore the numbers--scouts walked away highly impressed with Tillman in his full-season debut.
The Good: Tillman is a highly projectable power pitcher. He has a loose, long frame and good mechanics, with a fastball that sits at 92-94 mph and touches 96, which should become a more regular occurrence as his body fills out. His overhand curveball is a true plus offering that he breaks hard through the zone. Scouts love his aggressiveness, and team officials praised his ability to survive as a teenager in one of the worst pitching environments around.
The Bad: Tillman simply needs a little polish. While he’s hardly wild, he needs to improve his command and control. Like many young pitchers, his changeup needs some improvement, but he does show some feel for the pitch, and it’s already gotten far better since he was drafted.
Fun Fact: In his last seven starts, Tillman had a 2.50 ERA and 47 strikeouts in 39 2/3 innings.
Perfect World Projection: Tillman’s ceiling is considerably high; if everything works out, he’s a number two starter.
Timetable: The Mariners are well known for pushing their prospects quickly, and Tillman will likely hit Double-A at some point in 2008.
Reasonable Ceiling: Chris Carpenter/John Lackey
“There Is No Such Thing As a Pitching Prospect”, but Tillman looks like a guy who could really take a step up in peoples’ eyes next year as his stats come around to meet his abilities.
George Sherrill; 30 yr old LHP (relief), low 90s, quality slider, 2.36 ERA, 11.2 K/9, 3.4 BB/9, 0.4 HR / 9 last year but only 45 IP in 73 games. Quality left-handed bullpen arm, though probably not going to be around for the O’s next playoff appearance. Don’t really get why he’s in the deal, but I suppose the O’s don’t want to completely give away this season (or the M’s wouldn’t give up another prospect instead). Making him the closer and letting him amass 15-20 Saves by the trade deadline could net an extra couple of prospects from a contending team in need of bullpen help. At best he becomes a poor man’s BJ Ryan.
Tony Butler; 6’7 20 yr old LHP, Rated as Seattles #8 Prospect
Year In Review: Coming off a stunning pro debut, Butler took a long time to get going, as bad weather limited him to just 14 innings in the season's first month and he followed that by missing six weeks with a tired arm. He finished the year with five consecutive quality starts, including a nine-inning four-hitter on August 26.
The Good: Despite his struggles, Butler's combination of size, velocity, and left-handedness is a rare thing. He was consistently reaching 93-94 mph by the end of the year, and his curve seems to fall out of the sky due to his height and its hard break. He's a good athlete for his size, and fields his position well.
The Bad: Some felt that having Butler pitch in his home state of Wisconsin turned out being more of a distraction that a comfort. His herky-jerky mechanics give scouts pause, with some wondering if his tired-arm period was just a sign of things to come. Like many young, tall pitchers, he needs to find a more consistent release point, as he has a lot of trouble throwing his curveball for strikes.
Fun Fact: Butler ended his prep career as Oak Creek High's all-time leading scorer in basketball, playing at the varsity level in all four years.
Perfect World Projection: Butler's ceiling is as an above-average, star-level rotation stalwart.
Timetable: Things won't get any easier for Butler as he moves to the California League for 2008. Consistency and health will be as important as his numbers.
Reasonable Ceiling: Doug Davis/Chris Capuano
He reminds me a bit of Adam Loewen. If either guy can maintain their mechanics and improve their control, they should be really good. Loewen has a bit higher ceiling, but having Butler as a #3 behind Loewen and Tillman would be more than acceptable.
Kameron Mickolio; 6’9 23 yr old RHP (relief), mid 90s sinking fastball, strikes people out and is improving control. There are going to be a lot of options from which to construct a bullpen in ’08.
(Veranda fonted scouting reports from Kevin Goldstein)
[The YearInReview, Good, Bad, etc. parts]
Per John Sickels; Adam Jones B+ (“Mike Cameron without the walks. Still young enough to get better than that.”) Should probably be an A-, Chris Tillman B+, Tony Butler B-, Kam "The Almighty" Mickolio C.
For comparison, Matt Weiters A-, Troy Patton B+, Garrett Olson B-, Brandon Erbe C+.
Not a bad haul. I would have preferred trading him to the Reds, to avoid having him in the same league, but since they wouldn’t include Jay Bruce (rightly so – 20 yo CF, #1 Prospect in baseball, great hitter, tons of power, (think Larry Walker with a few more strike-outs)), that wasn’t going to happen. The Reds still could have come up with a better package, but this is certainly nothing to sneeze at, and is good quality for a guy whose value may never be higher and who doesn’t want to stick around anyway. He’s one of the best pitchers in baseball, but his most similar pitchers through age 28 include Donovan Osborne, Bud Black, Cal Eldred, and Justin Thompson, so future dominance isn’t necessarily a given. I’m going to miss watching Bedard pitch (the game vs. Texas was the best pitching I’ve ever seen), but it was a deal that had to be made.
This is still about as good a group of players/prospects a team has acquired for a star player this winter. It’s way better than what the Twins got for Johan Santana, and a bit better than what the A’s got for Dan Haren because Tillman is the best pitcher in either group, and Adam Jones is the best position player in either group. It’s also comparable to what the Marlins got for Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis, and might even end up better if the two biggest prospects the Marlins’ got don’t both become stars, as the other 4 were mostly filler.
Now to get something decent for Brian Roberts… Read more ...
So Erik Bedard has (finally, officially) been traded to the Seattle Mariners for Adam Jones, Chris Tillman, George Sherrill, Tony Butler, and Kameron Mickolio. To give everyone some info. about the new O’s.
Adam Jones; 22 yr old CF, may eventually hit .300 with 30 HR 20 SB, great athlete, very good defense/arm
Had 1.002 On-base Plus Slugging (OPS) at AAA last year (in a pitchers’ park). Plate discipline isn’t there yet so he may struggle at first, but should be a league-average CF at minimum with a multiple time All-Star ceiling. Think Torii Hunter or even Vernon Wells. There might be more power though, as I’ve heard 40 HR as a projection. If he was eligible, he would be a top 10 Prospect overall, maybe as high as #6.
Along with Nolan Reimold in LF (soon) and Nick Markakis in RF, he will be part of a good/very good offensive and great defensive outfield (all 3 guys have the range for CF and the arms for RF). Jones for Bedard, straight-up, would have been defensible. Taking salaries into account, Jones will easily provide more to the O’s over the 6 years they have him under control than Bedard would for the next two.
Chris Tillman; 6’5 19 yr old RHP, Rated as Seattles #2 Prospect, #44 overall
Year In Review: Ignore the numbers--scouts walked away highly impressed with Tillman in his full-season debut.
The Good: Tillman is a highly projectable power pitcher. He has a loose, long frame and good mechanics, with a fastball that sits at 92-94 mph and touches 96, which should become a more regular occurrence as his body fills out. His overhand curveball is a true plus offering that he breaks hard through the zone. Scouts love his aggressiveness, and team officials praised his ability to survive as a teenager in one of the worst pitching environments around.
The Bad: Tillman simply needs a little polish. While he’s hardly wild, he needs to improve his command and control. Like many young pitchers, his changeup needs some improvement, but he does show some feel for the pitch, and it’s already gotten far better since he was drafted.
Fun Fact: In his last seven starts, Tillman had a 2.50 ERA and 47 strikeouts in 39 2/3 innings.
Perfect World Projection: Tillman’s ceiling is considerably high; if everything works out, he’s a number two starter.
Timetable: The Mariners are well known for pushing their prospects quickly, and Tillman will likely hit Double-A at some point in 2008.
Reasonable Ceiling: Chris Carpenter/John Lackey
“There Is No Such Thing As a Pitching Prospect”, but Tillman looks like a guy who could really take a step up in peoples’ eyes next year as his stats come around to meet his abilities.
George Sherrill; 30 yr old LHP (relief), low 90s, quality slider, 2.36 ERA, 11.2 K/9, 3.4 BB/9, 0.4 HR / 9 last year but only 45 IP in 73 games. Quality left-handed bullpen arm, though probably not going to be around for the O’s next playoff appearance. Don’t really get why he’s in the deal, but I suppose the O’s don’t want to completely give away this season (or the M’s wouldn’t give up another prospect instead). Making him the closer and letting him amass 15-20 Saves by the trade deadline could net an extra couple of prospects from a contending team in need of bullpen help. At best he becomes a poor man’s BJ Ryan.
Tony Butler; 6’7 20 yr old LHP, Rated as Seattles #8 Prospect
Year In Review: Coming off a stunning pro debut, Butler took a long time to get going, as bad weather limited him to just 14 innings in the season's first month and he followed that by missing six weeks with a tired arm. He finished the year with five consecutive quality starts, including a nine-inning four-hitter on August 26.
The Good: Despite his struggles, Butler's combination of size, velocity, and left-handedness is a rare thing. He was consistently reaching 93-94 mph by the end of the year, and his curve seems to fall out of the sky due to his height and its hard break. He's a good athlete for his size, and fields his position well.
The Bad: Some felt that having Butler pitch in his home state of Wisconsin turned out being more of a distraction that a comfort. His herky-jerky mechanics give scouts pause, with some wondering if his tired-arm period was just a sign of things to come. Like many young, tall pitchers, he needs to find a more consistent release point, as he has a lot of trouble throwing his curveball for strikes.
Fun Fact: Butler ended his prep career as Oak Creek High's all-time leading scorer in basketball, playing at the varsity level in all four years.
Perfect World Projection: Butler's ceiling is as an above-average, star-level rotation stalwart.
Timetable: Things won't get any easier for Butler as he moves to the California League for 2008. Consistency and health will be as important as his numbers.
Reasonable Ceiling: Doug Davis/Chris Capuano
He reminds me a bit of Adam Loewen. If either guy can maintain their mechanics and improve their control, they should be really good. Loewen has a bit higher ceiling, but having Butler as a #3 behind Loewen and Tillman would be more than acceptable.
Kameron Mickolio; 6’9 23 yr old RHP (relief), mid 90s sinking fastball, strikes people out and is improving control. There are going to be a lot of options from which to construct a bullpen in ’08.
(Veranda fonted scouting reports from Kevin Goldstein)
[The YearInReview, Good, Bad, etc. parts]
Per John Sickels; Adam Jones B+ (“Mike Cameron without the walks. Still young enough to get better than that.”) Should probably be an A-, Chris Tillman B+, Tony Butler B-, Kam "The Almighty" Mickolio C.
For comparison, Matt Weiters A-, Troy Patton B+, Garrett Olson B-, Brandon Erbe C+.
Not a bad haul. I would have preferred trading him to the Reds, to avoid having him in the same league, but since they wouldn’t include Jay Bruce (rightly so – 20 yo CF, #1 Prospect in baseball, great hitter, tons of power, (think Larry Walker with a few more strike-outs)), that wasn’t going to happen. The Reds still could have come up with a better package, but this is certainly nothing to sneeze at, and is good quality for a guy whose value may never be higher and who doesn’t want to stick around anyway. He’s one of the best pitchers in baseball, but his most similar pitchers through age 28 include Donovan Osborne, Bud Black, Cal Eldred, and Justin Thompson, so future dominance isn’t necessarily a given. I’m going to miss watching Bedard pitch (the game vs. Texas was the best pitching I’ve ever seen), but it was a deal that had to be made.
This is still about as good a group of players/prospects a team has acquired for a star player this winter. It’s way better than what the Twins got for Johan Santana, and a bit better than what the A’s got for Dan Haren because Tillman is the best pitcher in either group, and Adam Jones is the best position player in either group. It’s also comparable to what the Marlins got for Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis, and might even end up better if the two biggest prospects the Marlins’ got don’t both become stars, as the other 4 were mostly filler.
Now to get something decent for Brian Roberts… Read more ...
Monday, March 3, 2008
Fantasy Baseball Draft 2
I'm going to be writing about this draft as I go, with some analysis at the end.
Pre-draft: I have the 9th overall pick. I'm looking at Jimmy Rollins in this spot. I don't think he'll hit as well as he did last year, but those numbers from SS are pretty valuable and he'll score a ton of runs at the top of a potent Philly offense. I'd be OK taking Prince Fielder also.
Round 1: And Jimmy Rollins it was. First round went about as expected, except Chase Utley got taken before David Wright.
Round 2: Grady Sizemore, as I had expected. That's a ton of runs for my team and a solid HR and SB base from which to work. A big time RBI 1B will be good.
Round 3: RBI 1B? Justin Morneau. Hopefully an improved Twins offense gets him some good numbers and the batting average comes back up to MVP levels
Round 4: Brandon Webb gives me my #1 starter. I'm not going to get to pick again for a while and will likely miss out on Nick Markakis now. Targeting Rickie Weeks at 2B, Ryan Zimmerman at 3B, Geovany Soto at C, Corey Hart at OF.
Round 5: Markakis is gone 5 picks before me. Garrett Atkins at 3B was available and the boost to batting average was a need. There wasn't another value pick here.
Round 6: Damn, Hart is taken before his ranking. Looks like I won't need Weeks as I picked Ian Kinsler for 2B. I didn't want him quite this early, but there wasn't a much better choice (Dan Haren maybe?). It's so much better building steals up from multiple sources as opposed to getting a guy like Juan Pierre who only adds in one or two categories.
Round 7: Batting average definitely needs some work. Tim Lincecum should be in the bag in round 8. For now it looks like I have my choice of #2 starters. I do like to have that strong pitching staff. And my #2 starter is... John Smoltz. I don't usually pick older pitchers like Smoltzy, but I think he was good value at this position. He'll break down eventually - hopefully not in 2008.
Round 8: I folded under pressure. Chris Young (SDP SP) was still available and I couldn't take Lincecum over him, but I couldn't take Young over an outfielder so I took Brad Hawpe. Hawpe helped me out last year and so I took another flier on him. Taking a 1B who hits better than Hawpe was another choice, but I didn't want to risk getting left with a bad OF. Two Rockies in the starting line-up so far.
Round 9: Wow, if things go right in the next 5 picks, Lincecum will still be left. Otherwise Nick Swisher's a possibility. Tim Lincecum - 9th round selection. If he gets 180 innings he may K 200. Might only win 10 games, though.
Round 10: No saves yet, and I still need some BA. Come on Jeff Francoeur, let's hit .300 this year! At least the man understands that plate discipline is important.
Round 11: Either Rich Hill or Yovanni Gallardo look like they'll be left for me here.
After that I'll look for some saves (Matt Capps?), followed by maybe another starter (Ian Snell?). I feel like I'm getting too much pitching at the expense of offense, but that may not be the case. On the other hand, if he's there I think I need to take Matt Kemp. Which apparently happened as my computer froze. Thankfully I had clicked on him last.
Round 12: I should have taken Capps here - I still have no saves - but Gallardo couldn't be passed up.
Round 13: Damn, Soto was taken. I now have no catcher. Dustin McGowan was picked to round out a sick starting staff. They're young (minus Smoltz) but boy can they bring it.
Round 14: OK - saves and catcher, here we go. Joakim Soria - #1 Closer. Great Rule 5 pick by the Royals last year.
Round 15: All I need is a catcher that can hit .300 20 HR 15 SB. Yeah, right. I don't have any hitters who do well at any one thing. Morneau should lead the team in HR with 31 (projected). If Rollins could hit 30 again I would be happy. Cracked under the pressure and picked JR Towles before I had to. Still, double-digit steals from catcher is rare.
Round 16: Jim Thome fell so far that I can't not pick him. That kind of power is not freely available, even if it's just from the Util. spot. And after my pick comes a run on the back-end closers. Hopefully CJ Wilson lasts till me in 17.
Round 17: And he does. One more closer to go, and then some bench spots to fill.
Round 18: Ramon Hernandez to provide for some insurance for Towles. Ramon is supposed to be in better shape this year. 20 HR?
Round 19: Asdrubal Cabrera takes what was going to be Yunel Escobar's spot as multi-position back-up. 2B and SS are covered. Now 3rd and another RP (Sherrill?)
Round 20: And here goes Sherrill. I can't believe Rich Harden lasted this long. If he gets hurt they lose nothing. If he doesn't get hurt then they get 8th round production in the 20th. Great pick. Too bad I didn't need any more starters.
Round 21: Back-up 3B? OF? 1B? We'll see who the best player left is. I don't need another outfielder. I should have picked Aubrey Huff and his 1B / 3B eligibility, but Jay Bruce may be awesome. If he plays all year he might hit .275 25 75 80 10, which is great value at this point. Nobody will pick Huff up, so he'll always be out there.
Main Offense Totals: 0.286, 786 R, 201 HR, 762 RBI, 115 SB
The offense actually projects to be worse than the first drafts'. It's the lack of a big bopper (Braun) and a hole at catcher (there was really no way to tell when Soto was going to be taken - I just guessed wrong). Hopefully some of the guys have good years. Thome should make up for the lack of power but finding some batting average will be tougher. It's all about luck at that point.
Main Pitching Totals: 3.55 ERA, 74 W, 48 SV, 1022 K, 1.24 WHIP
Now this is a pitching staff. Saves will be there (3 x 30 = 90) and the Ks and rates are very good.
It seems I was right - I did pick pitching at the expense of offense. I couldn't resist passing up a Gallardo or a McGowan in favor of a bat that was ranked much lower overall. There were plenty of quality arms left later (Snell, Blanton, Greinke) and next time I'll be more flexible with the market as opposed to picking the guys that I like the best. There is some definite upside on offense though. In my opinion, everyone except Kemp could beat their projections pretty easily. An extra couple HR from each guy jumps the total to 219. If Thome has another big year then the RBI will be there. It's about how my teams generally look - young, with top shelf pitching and some low budget closer, and an offense with a hole or two but several multi-category contributors. Maybe a trade of an outfielder (like Bruce it he gets off to a hot start) can net me an upgrade at catcher or ?. I hope Kemp gets to play every day. Man, what a pitching staff. There are four guys who could have years as good as my #1 in the other draft. Read more ...
Pre-draft: I have the 9th overall pick. I'm looking at Jimmy Rollins in this spot. I don't think he'll hit as well as he did last year, but those numbers from SS are pretty valuable and he'll score a ton of runs at the top of a potent Philly offense. I'd be OK taking Prince Fielder also.
Round 1: And Jimmy Rollins it was. First round went about as expected, except Chase Utley got taken before David Wright.
Round 2: Grady Sizemore, as I had expected. That's a ton of runs for my team and a solid HR and SB base from which to work. A big time RBI 1B will be good.
Round 3: RBI 1B? Justin Morneau. Hopefully an improved Twins offense gets him some good numbers and the batting average comes back up to MVP levels
Round 4: Brandon Webb gives me my #1 starter. I'm not going to get to pick again for a while and will likely miss out on Nick Markakis now. Targeting Rickie Weeks at 2B, Ryan Zimmerman at 3B, Geovany Soto at C, Corey Hart at OF.
Round 5: Markakis is gone 5 picks before me. Garrett Atkins at 3B was available and the boost to batting average was a need. There wasn't another value pick here.
Round 6: Damn, Hart is taken before his ranking. Looks like I won't need Weeks as I picked Ian Kinsler for 2B. I didn't want him quite this early, but there wasn't a much better choice (Dan Haren maybe?). It's so much better building steals up from multiple sources as opposed to getting a guy like Juan Pierre who only adds in one or two categories.
Round 7: Batting average definitely needs some work. Tim Lincecum should be in the bag in round 8. For now it looks like I have my choice of #2 starters. I do like to have that strong pitching staff. And my #2 starter is... John Smoltz. I don't usually pick older pitchers like Smoltzy, but I think he was good value at this position. He'll break down eventually - hopefully not in 2008.
Round 8: I folded under pressure. Chris Young (SDP SP) was still available and I couldn't take Lincecum over him, but I couldn't take Young over an outfielder so I took Brad Hawpe. Hawpe helped me out last year and so I took another flier on him. Taking a 1B who hits better than Hawpe was another choice, but I didn't want to risk getting left with a bad OF. Two Rockies in the starting line-up so far.
Round 9: Wow, if things go right in the next 5 picks, Lincecum will still be left. Otherwise Nick Swisher's a possibility. Tim Lincecum - 9th round selection. If he gets 180 innings he may K 200. Might only win 10 games, though.
Round 10: No saves yet, and I still need some BA. Come on Jeff Francoeur, let's hit .300 this year! At least the man understands that plate discipline is important.
Round 11: Either Rich Hill or Yovanni Gallardo look like they'll be left for me here.
After that I'll look for some saves (Matt Capps?), followed by maybe another starter (Ian Snell?). I feel like I'm getting too much pitching at the expense of offense, but that may not be the case. On the other hand, if he's there I think I need to take Matt Kemp. Which apparently happened as my computer froze. Thankfully I had clicked on him last.
Round 12: I should have taken Capps here - I still have no saves - but Gallardo couldn't be passed up.
Round 13: Damn, Soto was taken. I now have no catcher. Dustin McGowan was picked to round out a sick starting staff. They're young (minus Smoltz) but boy can they bring it.
Round 14: OK - saves and catcher, here we go. Joakim Soria - #1 Closer. Great Rule 5 pick by the Royals last year.
Round 15: All I need is a catcher that can hit .300 20 HR 15 SB. Yeah, right. I don't have any hitters who do well at any one thing. Morneau should lead the team in HR with 31 (projected). If Rollins could hit 30 again I would be happy. Cracked under the pressure and picked JR Towles before I had to. Still, double-digit steals from catcher is rare.
Round 16: Jim Thome fell so far that I can't not pick him. That kind of power is not freely available, even if it's just from the Util. spot. And after my pick comes a run on the back-end closers. Hopefully CJ Wilson lasts till me in 17.
Round 17: And he does. One more closer to go, and then some bench spots to fill.
Round 18: Ramon Hernandez to provide for some insurance for Towles. Ramon is supposed to be in better shape this year. 20 HR?
Round 19: Asdrubal Cabrera takes what was going to be Yunel Escobar's spot as multi-position back-up. 2B and SS are covered. Now 3rd and another RP (Sherrill?)
Round 20: And here goes Sherrill. I can't believe Rich Harden lasted this long. If he gets hurt they lose nothing. If he doesn't get hurt then they get 8th round production in the 20th. Great pick. Too bad I didn't need any more starters.
Round 21: Back-up 3B? OF? 1B? We'll see who the best player left is. I don't need another outfielder. I should have picked Aubrey Huff and his 1B / 3B eligibility, but Jay Bruce may be awesome. If he plays all year he might hit .275 25 75 80 10, which is great value at this point. Nobody will pick Huff up, so he'll always be out there.
Main Offense Totals: 0.286, 786 R, 201 HR, 762 RBI, 115 SB
The offense actually projects to be worse than the first drafts'. It's the lack of a big bopper (Braun) and a hole at catcher (there was really no way to tell when Soto was going to be taken - I just guessed wrong). Hopefully some of the guys have good years. Thome should make up for the lack of power but finding some batting average will be tougher. It's all about luck at that point.
Main Pitching Totals: 3.55 ERA, 74 W, 48 SV, 1022 K, 1.24 WHIP
Now this is a pitching staff. Saves will be there (3 x 30 = 90) and the Ks and rates are very good.
It seems I was right - I did pick pitching at the expense of offense. I couldn't resist passing up a Gallardo or a McGowan in favor of a bat that was ranked much lower overall. There were plenty of quality arms left later (Snell, Blanton, Greinke) and next time I'll be more flexible with the market as opposed to picking the guys that I like the best. There is some definite upside on offense though. In my opinion, everyone except Kemp could beat their projections pretty easily. An extra couple HR from each guy jumps the total to 219. If Thome has another big year then the RBI will be there. It's about how my teams generally look - young, with top shelf pitching and some low budget closer, and an offense with a hole or two but several multi-category contributors. Maybe a trade of an outfielder (like Bruce it he gets off to a hot start) can net me an upgrade at catcher or ?. I hope Kemp gets to play every day. Man, what a pitching staff. There are four guys who could have years as good as my #1 in the other draft. Read more ...
Pre-Arbitration Player Contracts
Prince Fielder and Cole Hamels are the new crop of pre-arbitration players complaining about not getting paid enough. Fielder is set to be given $670,000 for 2008, and Hamels $500,000. These players need to settle down and just play baseball. The contract structure that is established by the Collective Bargaining Agreement allows the players to make a lot of money after their third year. The trade-off for that is that the team gets to control the players' first three years at near minimum prices (which are still very substantial amounts of money).
I like the idea that King Kaufman (of salon.com's Sports Daily) had. If asked about his salary situation a player should say “We’re heading into a recession and people are struggling out there. They don’t need to hear me complaining about my big salary not being big enough. Thanks for asking, but it’s between me, my agent and the club.” That's the attitude I would like to see.
In a couple of years Prince Fielder may be making $25 million annually. There's a good chance that by the end of his long-term deal (whoever he gets it from) he won't be worth the money that he will be getting paid. I bet he won't be talking about how that's unfair (and neither will the people doing the paying, in all likelihood).
I haven't heard anything from Nick Markakis [edit: he did sound disappointed that he could not reach an agreement with the team, but there was no take of "low-ball offers" or "insults" or "lack of respect" - he just said that he'll have to live with what he got] about the Orioles treating him poorly. I'd like to see the team offer a long-term contract in the neighborhood of Curtis Granderson's recent 5-year, $30 million. I would even be in favor of a 6 or 7 year deal, as I think that Markakis will still get better and will play consistently well for a long time. Since Granderson has the higher profile (from his 20-20-20-20 (doubles, triples, homers, steals) season and his playoff appearance) so the O's may be able to get Markakis slightly cheaper. Granderson has WARP1 (Wins Above Replacement Player) scores of 6.3 and 10.4 in his first two complete seasons. I have to think his true talent level is somewhere in between the two, as I don't expect him to have 23 triples every year. The .302 batting average was also pretty high considering his lofty (though improved) strike-out totals and less than great walk-rate. I see him being a .280/.350/.450 type hitter going into the future, combined with outstanding center field defense (~ 8 WARP1 annually). Nick's WARP1 scores have been 5.1 and 6.8 but I think the power is going to go up into the high 20s in HR (maybe even 30) along with the walk-rate as it comes in-line with his good batting eye. The doubles are already there. As he gets more experience playing right (he's only been a full-time outfielder for a couple of years) he should be amongst the best there in baseball (and if the O's actually contend he may end up in the Gold Glove discussion). I'm going to hope for .310/.400/.530 but expect more along the lines of .300/.380/.500 (~ 9 WARP1).
Not even adjusting for salary inflation, I have Nick the Stick easily worth about $20 million a year. Luckily for the O's, a guy who does a lot of things well (hit for average; some power - especially a lot of doubles; play quality, but not exceptionally flashy, defense; run a bit (he could steal 20 a year if he wanted to, with a solid rate - 18 for 24 in '07); even be a solid clubhouse (for all those "chemistry" people)), is generally undervalued compared to a guy who does one or two things extremely well (Ryan Howard - who just received $10 million in his first year of arbitration - has WAPR1 scores of 3.9 (part-time), 8.3 (MVP), and 6.4 the last three years. He hits a lot of home runs and walks. These are very good things (pretty much the best, really) but they are "old-player" skills and do not age well. Plus, the market is currently understanding how valuable they are and the those players are making a lot of money.)
If Markakis would accept it, I would have no problem offering him a ten-year $100 million deal. Considering Juan Pierre got 5-years, $50 - I am fairly confident that Nick is easily twice the player that Juan is.
By the way, Markakis' WARP3 (WARP adjusted all-time) scores are 7.1 and 9.6. It is certainly a long-shot, but if he plays for 12 more years (until he's 35) with a normal aging curve (he has a couple of years at his peak of .320/.410/.540 and then falls back down to the .280/.370/.460 range after that with some .270/.330/.410 at the end) then he should have a JAWS (Jaffe WARP Score - it averages together a player's career WARP3 and his "peak" (7 top years) WARP3 scores) score of around (very roughly) [14 years * 10 WARP3 (last year as about an average year seems reasonable to me as he was only 23) = 140: "peak" score let's say is about 12 + 11.5 + 11.5 + 11 + 11 + 10.5 + 10.5 = 78] 109. This is outstanding, even for a right-fielder - the Hall-of-Fame average at the position is currently about 90. Even projecting out 12 more years like the one he had (does anyone reasonably think that '07 will be an above-average year for Markakis (barring injury)?) he'll have a JAWS score of [140 + 70 = 210] 105. If he is only as good as his first year, but manages to hang on for a while he'd be at [18 * 7 = 126; 7 * 7 = 49; 126 + 49 = 175] 88.
Is it silly to do this sort of thing? Probably. It's more to give you an idea about what kind of talent the team has as opposed to a serious prediction. The only really silly part is projecting how long Markakis will play, but considering his complete game (to go along with his all-around skills he also seems to have the work ethic and psychological fortitude (he struggled a great deal when he came up but still ended up hitting .291 when other young players would have found themselves back in the minor leagues); he's hit a respectable .278/.324/.427 against lefties in his career so that isn't a major concern going forward; he is a bit of a slow starter (.274/.338/.399 pre-all-star break and .318/.377/.541 post) but hopefully that will get better as he learns how to get ready for the season; he also hits well against all of the other AL East teams (BOS: .283/.352/.472; NYY: .319/.391/.504; TBR: .287/.360/.451; TOR: .301/.363/.504 ); and his home-road splits aren't too extreme (home: .314/.367/.512; away: .279/.348/.427).
I'm not the only one drinking the orange kool-aid: http://orioleshangout.com/article.asp?ID=1114. I'd say a 20% is about right. If he stays as a full-time player through his mid/late thirties then I'd say that it will be about a coin-flip whether or not Nick Markakis should get into the Hall-of-Fame. His chances should improve once Jim Rice undeservedly gets in and lowers the bar for entry for outfielders. You know, at this point I've forgotten what I had started writing this post about... oh, right - young players complaining about not making enough money. Come one MacPhail, sign the man! Read more ...
I like the idea that King Kaufman (of salon.com's Sports Daily) had. If asked about his salary situation a player should say “We’re heading into a recession and people are struggling out there. They don’t need to hear me complaining about my big salary not being big enough. Thanks for asking, but it’s between me, my agent and the club.” That's the attitude I would like to see.
In a couple of years Prince Fielder may be making $25 million annually. There's a good chance that by the end of his long-term deal (whoever he gets it from) he won't be worth the money that he will be getting paid. I bet he won't be talking about how that's unfair (and neither will the people doing the paying, in all likelihood).
I haven't heard anything from Nick Markakis [edit: he did sound disappointed that he could not reach an agreement with the team, but there was no take of "low-ball offers" or "insults" or "lack of respect" - he just said that he'll have to live with what he got] about the Orioles treating him poorly. I'd like to see the team offer a long-term contract in the neighborhood of Curtis Granderson's recent 5-year, $30 million. I would even be in favor of a 6 or 7 year deal, as I think that Markakis will still get better and will play consistently well for a long time. Since Granderson has the higher profile (from his 20-20-20-20 (doubles, triples, homers, steals) season and his playoff appearance) so the O's may be able to get Markakis slightly cheaper. Granderson has WARP1 (Wins Above Replacement Player) scores of 6.3 and 10.4 in his first two complete seasons. I have to think his true talent level is somewhere in between the two, as I don't expect him to have 23 triples every year. The .302 batting average was also pretty high considering his lofty (though improved) strike-out totals and less than great walk-rate. I see him being a .280/.350/.450 type hitter going into the future, combined with outstanding center field defense (~ 8 WARP1 annually). Nick's WARP1 scores have been 5.1 and 6.8 but I think the power is going to go up into the high 20s in HR (maybe even 30) along with the walk-rate as it comes in-line with his good batting eye. The doubles are already there. As he gets more experience playing right (he's only been a full-time outfielder for a couple of years) he should be amongst the best there in baseball (and if the O's actually contend he may end up in the Gold Glove discussion). I'm going to hope for .310/.400/.530 but expect more along the lines of .300/.380/.500 (~ 9 WARP1).
Not even adjusting for salary inflation, I have Nick the Stick easily worth about $20 million a year. Luckily for the O's, a guy who does a lot of things well (hit for average; some power - especially a lot of doubles; play quality, but not exceptionally flashy, defense; run a bit (he could steal 20 a year if he wanted to, with a solid rate - 18 for 24 in '07); even be a solid clubhouse (for all those "chemistry" people)), is generally undervalued compared to a guy who does one or two things extremely well (Ryan Howard - who just received $10 million in his first year of arbitration - has WAPR1 scores of 3.9 (part-time), 8.3 (MVP), and 6.4 the last three years. He hits a lot of home runs and walks. These are very good things (pretty much the best, really) but they are "old-player" skills and do not age well. Plus, the market is currently understanding how valuable they are and the those players are making a lot of money.)
If Markakis would accept it, I would have no problem offering him a ten-year $100 million deal. Considering Juan Pierre got 5-years, $50 - I am fairly confident that Nick is easily twice the player that Juan is.
By the way, Markakis' WARP3 (WARP adjusted all-time) scores are 7.1 and 9.6. It is certainly a long-shot, but if he plays for 12 more years (until he's 35) with a normal aging curve (he has a couple of years at his peak of .320/.410/.540 and then falls back down to the .280/.370/.460 range after that with some .270/.330/.410 at the end) then he should have a JAWS (Jaffe WARP Score - it averages together a player's career WARP3 and his "peak" (7 top years) WARP3 scores) score of around (very roughly) [14 years * 10 WARP3 (last year as about an average year seems reasonable to me as he was only 23) = 140: "peak" score let's say is about 12 + 11.5 + 11.5 + 11 + 11 + 10.5 + 10.5 = 78] 109. This is outstanding, even for a right-fielder - the Hall-of-Fame average at the position is currently about 90. Even projecting out 12 more years like the one he had (does anyone reasonably think that '07 will be an above-average year for Markakis (barring injury)?) he'll have a JAWS score of [140 + 70 = 210] 105. If he is only as good as his first year, but manages to hang on for a while he'd be at [18 * 7 = 126; 7 * 7 = 49; 126 + 49 = 175] 88.
Is it silly to do this sort of thing? Probably. It's more to give you an idea about what kind of talent the team has as opposed to a serious prediction. The only really silly part is projecting how long Markakis will play, but considering his complete game (to go along with his all-around skills he also seems to have the work ethic and psychological fortitude (he struggled a great deal when he came up but still ended up hitting .291 when other young players would have found themselves back in the minor leagues); he's hit a respectable .278/.324/.427 against lefties in his career so that isn't a major concern going forward; he is a bit of a slow starter (.274/.338/.399 pre-all-star break and .318/.377/.541 post) but hopefully that will get better as he learns how to get ready for the season; he also hits well against all of the other AL East teams (BOS: .283/.352/.472; NYY: .319/.391/.504; TBR: .287/.360/.451; TOR: .301/.363/.504 ); and his home-road splits aren't too extreme (home: .314/.367/.512; away: .279/.348/.427).
I'm not the only one drinking the orange kool-aid: http://orioleshangout.com/article.asp?ID=1114. I'd say a 20% is about right. If he stays as a full-time player through his mid/late thirties then I'd say that it will be about a coin-flip whether or not Nick Markakis should get into the Hall-of-Fame. His chances should improve once Jim Rice undeservedly gets in and lowers the bar for entry for outfielders. You know, at this point I've forgotten what I had started writing this post about... oh, right - young players complaining about not making enough money. Come one MacPhail, sign the man! Read more ...
Fantasy Baseball Draft 1
I was supposed to have my first fantasy baseball draft of the year on Sunday, but I go distracted watching MacGyver (seriously, that is an amazing show. That stuff probably wouldn't work in real life very often but it was very cool to see and hear explained. I assumed this was true, but no to the extent that it merited mentioning but apparently in some countries, a Swiss Army is sometimes referred to as a "MacGyver knife" and duct-tape as "MacGyver tape") and didn't realize. By the time I remembered (about when Axminster makes his first appearance on-screen. That character was a horrible bad-guy. He looked ridiculous, and didn't seem to be a terribly good assassin.) the draft was over. I was prepared for the worst, but I have to say that I am very pleased with the team that was auto-picked for me. I would have made a few choices differently, especially in the last few rounds, but I think it should be alright. Let's take a look.
C: Victor Martinez (Round 3) - I miss the days when I took V-Mart near the end of the draft. Not a bad pick here either, as I already have some average and speed, so getting the best power hitting C is nice. Maybe extra time at first will allow him to play more games.
Projected: .303, 78 R, 21 HR, 97 RBI, 0 SB
1B: Adrian Gonzalez (Round 9) - It looks like the computer decided it likes Kevin Towers' trade with the Rangers too (what a horrible deal for Texas - they gave up Gonzalez, Young, and Termell Sledge for Adam Eaton, who pitched poorly and got hurt, and Akinori Otsuka, who pitched pretty well and got hurt). He's a first baseman that I was going to keep an eye on anyway, and considering what was left at the position, it's not a bad pick here. If th power does continue to go up then this will be pretty good.
Projected: .282, 88 R, 28 HR, 95 RBI, 1 SB
2B: Chase Utley (Round 1 #8) - I don't love the pick here as second base position scarcity isn't a huge issue for me. Still, getting the consensus #1 guy at a position, let alone a guy who can provide 1B / OF type numbers from 2B, isn't bad. I probably would have taken Jimmy Rollins here, though.
Projected: .304, 109 R, 28 HR, 104 RBI, 11 SB
3B: Ryan Braun (Round 2) - I'm a huge fan of the Hebrew Hammer (though, apparently, he isn't really Jewish). The average is going to go down, but I really need the power, having not gotten a big-time 1B. The eventual OF eligibility is a nice bonus. Nice value, considering he is commonly going in the first round.
Projected: .304, 105 R, 38 HR, 106 RBI, 17 SB
SS: Carlos Guillen (Round 5) - Definitely not what I would have done here. Guillen is the type of player that I would never pick, even though he is underrated in real baseball. He's a bit injury prone, and I don't think the move to 1B is going to do much for his knees. I would have taken a #1 starter here if I hadn't before.
Projected: .300, 84 R, 18 HR, 82 RBI, 11 SB
OF: Nick Markakis (Round 6) - This is what kept me from being too mad I missed the draft. Awesome; just awesome. He was one of the top 40 by the end of last year. I just have no words for how lucky I feel that the computer actually picked him. It's like it knew I was an O's fan.
Projected: .295, 92 R, 23 HR, 97 RBI, 12 SB and I personally think the HR and RBI numbers will be higher.
OF: Shane Victorino (Round 10) - I was hoping that the Flyin' Hawaiian would have a bit of a power spike, but it appears that isn't in the cards. Hopefully the steals will be up again, and the runs should be there.
Projected: .280, 76 R, 11 HR, 51 RBI, 24 SB
OF: Jermaine Dye (Round 11) - I'm not high on the Pale Hose, but I really needed some power and Dye should provide it. If he gets a bit lucky this year (he was unlucky with batting average in '07) then this should be good value. Maybe having some guys with solid OBPs in the line-up will help the RBI numbers even more.
Projected: .272, 79 R, 31 HR, 91 RBI, 4 SB
B: Brian Roberts (Round 4) - This was an awful pick for me, as I already had a 2B. In this spot I would have much rather picked a #1 starter or gotten some more power (Hafner or Dunn). Hopefully I can get value from him in a trade, or I can keep him in my utility spot for some R and SB.
Projected: .285, 96 R, 12 HR, 63 RBI, 37 SB
B: Kevin Youkilis(Round 17) - The Greek God of Walks. He'll probably never live down that nickname. He's another guy who's more valuable in real baseball. I don't really need him for anything, but he provides some roster flexibility with the multiple positions. Who knows, maybe he'll bat 2nd and score 120 runs.
Projected: .279, 87 R, 15 HR, 75 RBI, 4 SB
B: Orlando Hudson (Round 18) - Why? Why another 2B? What could I possibly need him for? I shouldn't even bother trading him, as as soon as I get rid of Roberts no one will need the O-Dog. Lost out on Jeremy Hermida, Justin Upton, Evan Longoria, Gil Meche, and Joey Votto.
Projected: .288, 76 R, 12 HR, 66 RBI, 9 SB
B: Gary Matthews Jr. (Round 19) - Sarge Jr. Never would I ever pick him (because I don't like him, and probably neither do the Angels at $10 million a year), especially with the crowded and dysfunctional OF situation in Anaheim. (Note: That was unintentional. They do still play in Anaheim though.)
Projected: .268, 77 R, 15 HR, 66 RBI, 12 SB
B: Adam LaRoche (Round 20) - Very little in that line-up to work with. Does provide some power off the bench.
Projected: .274, 73 R, 25 HR, 86 RBI, 1 SB
SP: Chris Young (Round 8) - No way do I take Young here. He isn't a #1 and so isn't worthy of this pick. I would have taken another outfielder (Nick Swisher) or Tim Lincecum here. Lincecum probably isn't going to provide much more value than Young, but I like him more (bad reasoning, I know, but still).
Projected: 3.48 ERA, 12 W, 0 SV, 164 K, 1.19 WHIP
SP: Jeff Francis (Round 13) - I wouldn't have picked Francis, as I think his K-rate is going to go down from last year and his hit and walk rates will go up. Ian Snell would have been much preferable.
Projected: 4.32 ERA, 14 W, 0 SV, 145 K, 1.37 WHIP
RP: Fransisco Rodriguez (Round 7) - I never pick K-Rod; the injury risk is just too scary for me. Still, he is one of the top closers in baseball and is pitching for a contract. I tend to go against the usual (advanced) strategies and pick a type-flight closer or two, to go along with the typical scouring for saves on the waiver wire (which is what I (hopefully) did). If he's healthy, he'll rack up some quality numbers.
Projected: 2.65 ERA, 4 W, 42 SV, 93 K, 1.19 WHIP
RP: Jeremy Guthrie (Round 16) - Boo! I am not a believer in Guthrie having another season like he did last year. I'll probably drop him as soon as I find someone else (and it looks like I'm going to need some Ks).
Matt Garza, Josh Hamilton and Pat Burrell would all have been better (along with any number of other players).
Projected: 4.47 ERA, 8 W, 0 SV, 108 K, 1.39 WHIP
P: AJ Burnett (Round 12) - When he's healthy he's so good (especially against the Orioles, it seems) and maybe playing for a contract will help keep him on the field.
Projected: 3.71 ERA, 11 W, 0SV, 163 K, 1.25 WHIP
P: Phil Hughes (Round 14) - I like Hughes, but not this much. The rates will be good, but I don't think he is going to pitch enough innings to be a legit #3 pitcher here. Maybe the Yanks push him to 180 innings or so.
Projected: 4.10 ERA, 10 W, 0 SV, 116 K, 1.31 WHIP
P: Joe Blanton (Round 15) - Blanton, as long as he stays in OAK, should be a good pick this year. The Hardball Times did a thing about quality starts that indicated that Blanton is a break-out candidate in '08.
Projected: 4.07 ERA, 14 W, 0 SV, 123 K, 1.31 WHIP
P: Ubaldo Jimenez (Round 21) - Not bad for a flyer in the last round. I don't think he'll do much for me and is going to get cut as soon as I need someone else. Maybe I can package him with Hudson?
Projected: 4.90 ERA, 9 W, 0 SV, 117 K, 1.52 WHIP
Line-Up Totals: about .292, 807 R, 210 HR, 786 RBI, 117 SB
Need for competitive team: about .295, 820 R, 210 HR, 795 RBI, 120 SB
Wow, that's pretty darn good. I'm surprised by the home run totals - I would have thought that giving the utility spot to Brian Roberts would have hurt me there, but I guess that's what happens when you have power up the middle (C, 2B, SS) and Ryan Braun at third. I think this offense could be very solid, and if I can pick up a player or two from the waiver wire then I'll be set. Batting average is fluky so that could go either way: otherwise, good job on the starting nine computer. The bench will require some work (I'll need a SS and C, and maybe OF).
Main Pitching Totals: about 3.82 ERA, 65 W, 42 SV, 804 K, 1.24 WHIP
Need for competitive team: about 3.70 ERA, 75 W, 110 SV, 1000 K, 1.25 WHIP
I definitely needed some more saves so I waived Sarge Jr. in favor of Texas closer CJ Wilson and Adam LaRoche for the O's predicted stopper, George Sherrill. In retrospect I should have dropped Hudson or Jimenez instead of LaRoche, but it should be fine. The ERA is going to be tight - the lack of a real #1 starter hurts a little here, as well as the Ks - but streaming in a few top relief pitchers should help out. Wins are always a crap-shoot, but it looks to be OK, and the WHIP is pretty good - the pitchers all have pretty good control. If I can find one guy for Ks (Daniel Cabrera?) and then pick up a Greg Maddux type for some wins and WHIP (and maybe a little lucky ERA help) I should be good. It's definitely not like last year (Bedard + Sabathia + Rich Hill + Ben Sheets - I also had Chris Carpenter, who got hurt. That is some sick pitching. Or another team had Bedard + Hill + Peavy + Lincecum. Awesome. Or, less awesome but still really good: Haren + Webb (It's like I saw the trade coming) + Vazquez + Matsuzaka) but I think it'll keep me up there. I like to have a strong pitching staff. Hopefully the second (and third, and fourth) tier guys do well.
I have another one tonight that I'll be there for. A posting about it will be up soon (tomorrow?). Read more ...
C: Victor Martinez (Round 3) - I miss the days when I took V-Mart near the end of the draft. Not a bad pick here either, as I already have some average and speed, so getting the best power hitting C is nice. Maybe extra time at first will allow him to play more games.
Projected: .303, 78 R, 21 HR, 97 RBI, 0 SB
1B: Adrian Gonzalez (Round 9) - It looks like the computer decided it likes Kevin Towers' trade with the Rangers too (what a horrible deal for Texas - they gave up Gonzalez, Young, and Termell Sledge for Adam Eaton, who pitched poorly and got hurt, and Akinori Otsuka, who pitched pretty well and got hurt). He's a first baseman that I was going to keep an eye on anyway, and considering what was left at the position, it's not a bad pick here. If th power does continue to go up then this will be pretty good.
Projected: .282, 88 R, 28 HR, 95 RBI, 1 SB
2B: Chase Utley (Round 1 #8) - I don't love the pick here as second base position scarcity isn't a huge issue for me. Still, getting the consensus #1 guy at a position, let alone a guy who can provide 1B / OF type numbers from 2B, isn't bad. I probably would have taken Jimmy Rollins here, though.
Projected: .304, 109 R, 28 HR, 104 RBI, 11 SB
3B: Ryan Braun (Round 2) - I'm a huge fan of the Hebrew Hammer (though, apparently, he isn't really Jewish). The average is going to go down, but I really need the power, having not gotten a big-time 1B. The eventual OF eligibility is a nice bonus. Nice value, considering he is commonly going in the first round.
Projected: .304, 105 R, 38 HR, 106 RBI, 17 SB
SS: Carlos Guillen (Round 5) - Definitely not what I would have done here. Guillen is the type of player that I would never pick, even though he is underrated in real baseball. He's a bit injury prone, and I don't think the move to 1B is going to do much for his knees. I would have taken a #1 starter here if I hadn't before.
Projected: .300, 84 R, 18 HR, 82 RBI, 11 SB
OF: Nick Markakis (Round 6) - This is what kept me from being too mad I missed the draft. Awesome; just awesome. He was one of the top 40 by the end of last year. I just have no words for how lucky I feel that the computer actually picked him. It's like it knew I was an O's fan.
Projected: .295, 92 R, 23 HR, 97 RBI, 12 SB and I personally think the HR and RBI numbers will be higher.
OF: Shane Victorino (Round 10) - I was hoping that the Flyin' Hawaiian would have a bit of a power spike, but it appears that isn't in the cards. Hopefully the steals will be up again, and the runs should be there.
Projected: .280, 76 R, 11 HR, 51 RBI, 24 SB
OF: Jermaine Dye (Round 11) - I'm not high on the Pale Hose, but I really needed some power and Dye should provide it. If he gets a bit lucky this year (he was unlucky with batting average in '07) then this should be good value. Maybe having some guys with solid OBPs in the line-up will help the RBI numbers even more.
Projected: .272, 79 R, 31 HR, 91 RBI, 4 SB
B: Brian Roberts (Round 4) - This was an awful pick for me, as I already had a 2B. In this spot I would have much rather picked a #1 starter or gotten some more power (Hafner or Dunn). Hopefully I can get value from him in a trade, or I can keep him in my utility spot for some R and SB.
Projected: .285, 96 R, 12 HR, 63 RBI, 37 SB
B: Kevin Youkilis(Round 17) - The Greek God of Walks. He'll probably never live down that nickname. He's another guy who's more valuable in real baseball. I don't really need him for anything, but he provides some roster flexibility with the multiple positions. Who knows, maybe he'll bat 2nd and score 120 runs.
Projected: .279, 87 R, 15 HR, 75 RBI, 4 SB
B: Orlando Hudson (Round 18) - Why? Why another 2B? What could I possibly need him for? I shouldn't even bother trading him, as as soon as I get rid of Roberts no one will need the O-Dog. Lost out on Jeremy Hermida, Justin Upton, Evan Longoria, Gil Meche, and Joey Votto.
Projected: .288, 76 R, 12 HR, 66 RBI, 9 SB
B: Gary Matthews Jr. (Round 19) - Sarge Jr. Never would I ever pick him (because I don't like him, and probably neither do the Angels at $10 million a year), especially with the crowded and dysfunctional OF situation in Anaheim. (Note: That was unintentional. They do still play in Anaheim though.)
Projected: .268, 77 R, 15 HR, 66 RBI, 12 SB
B: Adam LaRoche (Round 20) - Very little in that line-up to work with. Does provide some power off the bench.
Projected: .274, 73 R, 25 HR, 86 RBI, 1 SB
SP: Chris Young (Round 8) - No way do I take Young here. He isn't a #1 and so isn't worthy of this pick. I would have taken another outfielder (Nick Swisher) or Tim Lincecum here. Lincecum probably isn't going to provide much more value than Young, but I like him more (bad reasoning, I know, but still).
Projected: 3.48 ERA, 12 W, 0 SV, 164 K, 1.19 WHIP
SP: Jeff Francis (Round 13) - I wouldn't have picked Francis, as I think his K-rate is going to go down from last year and his hit and walk rates will go up. Ian Snell would have been much preferable.
Projected: 4.32 ERA, 14 W, 0 SV, 145 K, 1.37 WHIP
RP: Fransisco Rodriguez (Round 7) - I never pick K-Rod; the injury risk is just too scary for me. Still, he is one of the top closers in baseball and is pitching for a contract. I tend to go against the usual (advanced) strategies and pick a type-flight closer or two, to go along with the typical scouring for saves on the waiver wire (which is what I (hopefully) did). If he's healthy, he'll rack up some quality numbers.
Projected: 2.65 ERA, 4 W, 42 SV, 93 K, 1.19 WHIP
RP: Jeremy Guthrie (Round 16) - Boo! I am not a believer in Guthrie having another season like he did last year. I'll probably drop him as soon as I find someone else (and it looks like I'm going to need some Ks).
Matt Garza, Josh Hamilton and Pat Burrell would all have been better (along with any number of other players).
Projected: 4.47 ERA, 8 W, 0 SV, 108 K, 1.39 WHIP
P: AJ Burnett (Round 12) - When he's healthy he's so good (especially against the Orioles, it seems) and maybe playing for a contract will help keep him on the field.
Projected: 3.71 ERA, 11 W, 0SV, 163 K, 1.25 WHIP
P: Phil Hughes (Round 14) - I like Hughes, but not this much. The rates will be good, but I don't think he is going to pitch enough innings to be a legit #3 pitcher here. Maybe the Yanks push him to 180 innings or so.
Projected: 4.10 ERA, 10 W, 0 SV, 116 K, 1.31 WHIP
P: Joe Blanton (Round 15) - Blanton, as long as he stays in OAK, should be a good pick this year. The Hardball Times did a thing about quality starts that indicated that Blanton is a break-out candidate in '08.
Projected: 4.07 ERA, 14 W, 0 SV, 123 K, 1.31 WHIP
P: Ubaldo Jimenez (Round 21) - Not bad for a flyer in the last round. I don't think he'll do much for me and is going to get cut as soon as I need someone else. Maybe I can package him with Hudson?
Projected: 4.90 ERA, 9 W, 0 SV, 117 K, 1.52 WHIP
Line-Up Totals: about .292, 807 R, 210 HR, 786 RBI, 117 SB
Need for competitive team: about .295, 820 R, 210 HR, 795 RBI, 120 SB
Wow, that's pretty darn good. I'm surprised by the home run totals - I would have thought that giving the utility spot to Brian Roberts would have hurt me there, but I guess that's what happens when you have power up the middle (C, 2B, SS) and Ryan Braun at third. I think this offense could be very solid, and if I can pick up a player or two from the waiver wire then I'll be set. Batting average is fluky so that could go either way: otherwise, good job on the starting nine computer. The bench will require some work (I'll need a SS and C, and maybe OF).
Main Pitching Totals: about 3.82 ERA, 65 W, 42 SV, 804 K, 1.24 WHIP
Need for competitive team: about 3.70 ERA, 75 W, 110 SV, 1000 K, 1.25 WHIP
I definitely needed some more saves so I waived Sarge Jr. in favor of Texas closer CJ Wilson and Adam LaRoche for the O's predicted stopper, George Sherrill. In retrospect I should have dropped Hudson or Jimenez instead of LaRoche, but it should be fine. The ERA is going to be tight - the lack of a real #1 starter hurts a little here, as well as the Ks - but streaming in a few top relief pitchers should help out. Wins are always a crap-shoot, but it looks to be OK, and the WHIP is pretty good - the pitchers all have pretty good control. If I can find one guy for Ks (Daniel Cabrera?) and then pick up a Greg Maddux type for some wins and WHIP (and maybe a little lucky ERA help) I should be good. It's definitely not like last year (Bedard + Sabathia + Rich Hill + Ben Sheets - I also had Chris Carpenter, who got hurt. That is some sick pitching. Or another team had Bedard + Hill + Peavy + Lincecum. Awesome. Or, less awesome but still really good: Haren + Webb (It's like I saw the trade coming) + Vazquez + Matsuzaka) but I think it'll keep me up there. I like to have a strong pitching staff. Hopefully the second (and third, and fourth) tier guys do well.
I have another one tonight that I'll be there for. A posting about it will be up soon (tomorrow?). Read more ...
Patton's Shoulder
Troy Patton's shoulder is apparently in worse shape than was originally thought - it may require surgery, causing Patton to miss the entire 2008 season. I'm actually for that idea. The O's have more than enough guys to battle for the fifth starter job and I think that it would be better for Patton to get everything squared away and come back strong for next year, as opposed to playing through the pain and possibly picking up some bad habits mechanics-wise which could lead to further arm injuries in the future. He was never the hardest thrower around so there isn't much concern of a drop in velocity due to the shoulder, and I don't change his major league projections much going forward - he's a capable number 4 starter who has a good chance to develop into a # 3, with the ability to have a couple lucky seasons where he puts it all together and pitches like a # 2. MacPhail shouldn't shoulder (no pun intended) any blame for getting a pitcher who get hurt - it was known about at the time and considering the injury rate for pitchers as a group, someone who was known to be healthy at the time might be hurt at this point too anyway.
Read more ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
