----- DETECT-O-VISION Inc.-----

THE NEW HOUSE IS READY!!!!

2005-12-27T13:21:00.000-08:00

check it out at http://detectovision.com

This site will shut down soon. Please make your comments at the new site only. See you there.

2006 Offense: +70 Runs?

2005-12-27T00:25:00.000-08:00

.
Here are the 2006 projections from the Bill James Handbook. Jason Churchill did us a fave and typed them all in for us.

Note that these projections are NOT done by James himself, as is stated in the book, but the projections are fun because they're done by a third party. Nobody is going to accuse these projections as being homer-age. ;-)

As we'll explain in a second, if the 2006 M's were to hit the targets projected by the James Handbook, the club would have a very good offense:

Ichiro Suzuki - .326/.374/.431, 11 HR, 59 RBI, 45 BB, 63 K -- .806 OPS
Jeremy Reed - .294/.363/.412, 5 HR, 50 RBI, 48 BB, 58 K -- .775 OPS
Adrian Beltre - .274/.331/.479, 25 HR, 85 RBI, 41 BB, 90 K -- .810 OPS
Richie Sexson - .260/.357/.521, 37 HR, 112 RBI, 77 BB, 158 K -- .878 OPS
Raul Ibanez - .279/.346/.444, 19 HR, 79 RBI, 55 BB, 90 K -- .789 OPS
Jose Lopez - (337AB) .264/.295/.418, 7 HR, 45 RBI, 12 BB, 44 K -- .714 OPS
Carl Everett - .264/.336/.448, 14 HR, 64 RBI, 28 BB, 67 K -- .785 OPS
Yuniesky Betancourt - (209 AB) .273/.309/.397, 3 HR, 21 RBI, -- .706 OPS
Chris Snelling - (394 AB) .317/.387/.470, 10 HR, 56 RBI, 45 BB, 66 K -- .857
OPS

Not on there, Kenji Johjima or Matt Lawton. Let's plug them in at 770 and 750, respectively ... Lawton's production coming in about 300 AB's against righthanders.

Let's toss out the Snelling projection and let's assume that the bench, aside from Lawton, combines for a 675 OPS.

.

We'll Take It!, Dept.

If accurate, this would leave the 2006 M's at an OPS of around 770, compared to their 2005 OPS of 708, and compared to the 2005 Yankees' OPS of 805 and the 2005 Red Sox' OPS of 811.
Per the OPS rule of thumb in the post below, this means a gain of +70 runs, offensively, over 2005. Since the 770 OPS is already adjusted for Safeco, the Mariners would have one of the AL's best offenses ...

IF what? If their hitters performed approximately as they do in the projections above, the Mariners will have a very good offense.

It gives a good idea of what the target performances are. Is that realistic? ...you're asking Adrian Beltre to bounce halfway back, and for one of the young talents (JLo, JuBet, Reed) to have a nice year.

Which, as we all know, is in fact what the M's need in order to score 770 runs in Safeco. A rebound by Beltre, and a good year by any one of the kids, and the offense will be effective.

Cheers,
Dr D

OPS

2005-12-27T00:05:00.000-08:00

Team OPS = Season Runs Scored?

Cameron noticed an interesting pattern that if a team's OPS is 750, that it will score about 750 runs in 162 games. If true, and it is probably loosely true, it makes teamwide analysis very simple.

Simplifying numbers is the concept behind Win Shares, for example -- it allows you to look at more macro issues.

Dr. D has used OPS+ constantly when scanning year-to-year team changes for macro patterns. I'll be interested in seeing how well this little device works out, when reviewing historical teams. Good stuff.

And good read at ussmariner.com.

=================================

Why does it work?...

... people ask? Is it magic?

Because OBP and SLG are the two halves of run-scoring. You're going to be able to move these two numbers around to create lots of RS stuff. If you have OBP and SLG, you've mostly got runs scored, because you're getting on base and then you're batting them around the bases.

Mat Olkin, 10 years ago, realized that OBPxSLGx31 is a great way to estimate ERA. ...the number 31 just happens to be the constant that converts OBP and SLG to the ERA scale -- like converting Fahrenheit to Celsius.

As it happens, OPS + SLG (x 100) estimates runs x 162 ... when you use the constant 162, which is the number of games in a year.

It so happens that when you add OBP and SLG, and multiply by 100, then 162 is the constant you divide by, to get probable runs in nine innings. It is a mathematical coincidence that "about 160" is the constant that converts one metric (OPS) into the scale of the other metric (RS), as well as being the constant that MLB owners picked as the games in a season.

That OBP and SLG generate runs is no coincidence; it's the nature of moving runners around. OPS *must* be closely related to runs scored.

The fact that ~160 is the right constant here, for converting OPS to the team-season-runs scale, that's a nice coincidence. The roundness of this constant is what USSM indirectly noticed. Good catch.

Cheers,
Dr D

POTD: Scott Boras

2005-12-26T15:14:00.000-08:00

So Boras pegs Millwood's value at 5/$60m ... and now it begins to look like Millwood might not even get the 4/$44m that the Seattle Mariners did in fact offer him.

Much hooting and hollering by us M's fans at Boras' miscalculation, but Mariners Wheelhouse counters strongly with this fine analysis at SportSpot:

I'm just not as anti-Boras as most folks here are.Boras' job is to represent his clients' interests, and he does that very well. No GMs are being forced against their will to sign contracts with Boras players - every deal Boras negotiates is a deal willingly entered into by the team. No player is forced take on Boras as his agent against his own will.

From reports that I have seen, when Boras conducts contract negotiations, he is usually better prepared than the team he is negotiating with. His staff has completed an analysis of the team's financial position and available revenues, what the team's needs are, the team's available options to fill those needs, and the probable impacts of those options on the team's performance and profitability. Of course the team has done that also, but Boras' analysis is usually more detailed and more complete than are most team's analyses.

Then he uses his salesmanship to spin the data in his clients' favor.Boras' organization also continually monitors his players while they are under contract, working with team staffs on conditioning programs, providing support services such as counseling, reviewing video and analyzing performance, and other matters to maintain and enhance his players' performance and value.

Boras doesn't generate his edge because he is nefarious and evil. ...Boras is successful because he is better prepared, more organized, and harder working than amost every other agent and team. If you combine talent and brains with hard work, discipline, preparation, focus, and organization, you're going to be successful at what you do.

It's really not Boras' fault if he is better at what he does than the guys with whom he is negotiating are at their jobs. Let's say that he does end up overshooting on Millwood this season; we chalk that up as a miscalculation by him. Even so, his overall record of successes and failures would far outstrip every other GM in baseball and every other player agent around.

A lot of times we get angry with Boras simply for the fact that he is a very aggressive negotiator.

On Millwood in particular, Boras' position had a lot of merit, that he might be worth more than Burnett. Peronsally don't blame him at all for pegging Millwood's eventual value at 5/$60m.

Lost Words Dept.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Wheels agreed with me that ... 'aggressive negotiators' can sometimes cross the line into the territory of greed.

Greed is a word that has been made obsolete in America, at least as it applies to the underdog.

Many sports commentators, including almost all of them at BP, apply "greed" to owners but never apply the word "greed" to a player or agent. To BP, a ballplayer cannot be too greedy. We recall one memorable diatribe in Alex Rodriguez' favor, "proving" that the margin between $210,000,000 and $252,000,000 might make a huge difference in his life. :-) "Who are we to tell him he can't have the extra $40m if he has plans for it?"

This is a reflection of BP's liberal orientation towards always justifying the side in a dispute that has the least money. The liberal analysis is simple: It identifies the side that is less rich, less male, and less white, and notches every debate-point up in the favor of the "little guy's" side, in this case that being Kevin Millwood's side. It defends the poor, the female, and the minority position, regardless of ideology.

The conservative mindset, by contrast, is not tethered to the side that is more white, or more male, or richer. A conservative is free to take the side of the player or the owner, the Japanese ballplayer or the American, the side of Condolezza Rice or of Alan Keyes, the side of Iraq or the USA or Afghanistan, depending on which side it thinks is in the right in that particular case.

Read BP a while, and count the number of times they side with a player/agent, as opposed to siding with Bud Selig & Co. :-)

Greed is a word that has been made obsolete in America, but it is still in the dictionary. It means "An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves." Greed can take the form of demanding $60m, rather than $50m, if you are being offered the $50m by the people who have been your home (not so in Millwood's case).

Ken Griffey Jr. was an example of a player who did not focus, unsmilingly, on the last dollar in his contract. He factored people into the equation when he signed his contract with the Reds.

Who's Serving Who?, Dept.
There are times when Boras seems to hardball negotiations for the purpose of making a point that benefits his own organization ...

1) He wants a 5/$60m trophy contract for the purpose of recruiting clients next year ...

2) Or he demands that extra 10% of 'ridiculous' money despite a people situation that should be taken into account (such as Boras' friendship with Bavasi) ...

3) Or he holds out a high school player for a year, so that the next time around, teams will blink first in a holdout situation with him.

I get the feeling that Boras sometimes smooth-talks a Jared Weaver or Luke Hochevar type into sitting out a year, in part to secure his own credibility at the bargaining table.

=============================
Of course the players who hire Boras are well aware of what they're getting. The ultimate responsibility lies with the player ... but that doesn't change the fact that sometimes Boras steps over the line into sheer unvarnished greed.

==============================
All that said, Boras is there to maximize his client's money, and he's good at it, and that in itself is nothing to hate him for.

.

So Were The M's Still In It For Millwood?
Late news: the Rangers signed Millwood for precisely the same terms offered by the M's a month ago: 4 years, 5th year option/vested.

As bedirthanaverage has pointed out, the Mariners could still have cleared $10m in 2006 salary if they wanted to, if they had "the right player." Bavasi's statements that the M's are "about done" reflects his disgust with the way that Boras has handled negotiations.

If Scott Boras had come back to the M's humbled, setting up a contract for, say, $8m/$12m/$10m/$10m, the Mariners would not be averse to juggling numbers and locking Millwood in.

But Scott Boras is not known for humility. :-) The Mariners could, and would, have still signed Kevin Millwood if Scott Boras were the one to pick up the phone and re-ignite Mariner discussions from a new baseline.

We set the odds against Boras doing that at10:1, because he is proud and greedy. But he could if he wanted. That's what I was listening for: a softer overture from Boras. But was not holding my breath.

As it turned out, Boras took the M's offer ... from Texas.

My $0.02,
Dr D

Winter Scoreboard: +120 runs so far !?!

2005-12-24T01:16:00.000-08:00

.
The rule among journalists (don't say sportswriters) and baseball scouts (don't say bird dogs) is, that the most pessimistic assessment implies the most level head, the most objectivity, and the most accurate analysis. :-) No cheering in the press box, babe.

So it falls to D-O-V to point out, much to its humiliation :-), that the 2006 Mariners have -- on paper -- already turned themselves into a 90-win team.

No joke. Right now, they start the season today Seymour? ... on paper the M's are miles better than in 2005, and on paper are in fact one of the best teams in the AL.

Remember, in 2005 they were -52 below .500, and here are +120 runs hard on the barrelhead.
.

YAHTZEE, Dept.
RF - 0
LF - 0
CF - 0 (?)
1B - 0
2B - 0 (?)
SS - 0 (?)
3B - 0 (?)
C - +30
DH - 0
#10 - +20

SP1 - +40
SP2 - +30
SP3 - 0
SP4 - 0
SP5 - 0

=====================

SP1 is Felix for another 2/3 of a year, over Aaron Sele at 0 VORP.

SP2 is Jarrod Washburn at a 4.25 Safeco ERA, over Gil Meche at a 5.09 Safeco ERA (plus Joel Pineiro cutting his ERA from 5.62 to 5.09).

C is Johjima at .265/.330/.425 over last year's black hole.

#10 is 350 PA's of Lawton over 2005 bench AB's like 1B-Bloomquist's (.249/.289/.333).

Drive Home Safely, Everybody, Dept.
And you have to be pretty stingy not to pencil improvements at SS, 2B, 3B, and/or CF.

Figure those position for even 30 runs total between all four positions, and you have your theoretical +150 runs (and your +100 runs differential).

No, that doesn't sound right to me, either. But there's the math, for your holiday reading info-tainment. :-)

========================

Crafty Lefthander Dept.
Like Jamie Moyer handing out comfortable 0-for-4's, the Mariners' offseason has quietly been making progress without anybody figuring out what is going on. The M's have been wrapping nonstop quality MLB tourniquets where last year there were gaping wounds.

It hasn't been exciting -- until you add up the cumulative effect. Like in a Moyer start, the other guys think they're having a good night, and they look up in the 7th and wonder what's going on...
.

The Good, The Bad & The Ugly Dept.

Zippity-do-dah, zippity-ay ... Lawton IS here as a 4th OF!? ... and that, gentlemen, makes Matt Lawton a major contributor to a potential pennant run.

And the +20 runs hard on the barrelhead. Ka-ching!

===================

The bad: Mike Morse sunk without a bubble...

===================

But as to the ugly, riddle me this. You made $7,500,000 last year. You were an All-Star just the year before, 2004. Why in the world would you sign so quickly in the offseason, for so little, to play on the bench?!

Lawton is a good solid .370-OBP platoon hitter. On Oct. 2, would you have thought such a screamin' deal possible? Did anybody here suggest a $400,000, .370-OBP platoon hitter for the bench?!

Be Afraid,
Dr D

POTD: Matt Clement

2005-12-24T00:15:00.000-08:00

.
Q: Would the Sox really deal him?

A: Word is that the Red Sox have offered Matt Clement plus a valuable prospect for Jeremy Reed and a nominal prospect. The Red Sox are pushing on Clement-for-Reed, but the M's aren't too interested.

With Papelbon and Lester ready, as well as Wade Miller and the usual suspects like Schilling, Arroyo, and Wakefield .... the Sox would like to clear $9m and get the kids in there.
.

Q: Is Clement the TOR starter the M's need?

A: Are the Seattle Seahawks a Super Bowl contender?

All the pieces have been in place for Clement, but he has not delivered the results of a TOR starter. He's got the tools, he has the results in the micro sense (K, BB, HR), he has the experience, he's got the body and the arm, hey, he's got the goatee. But he has not been a TOR starter, yet.
.

Q: What's the holdup here?

A: To put it short and sweet, in Lou-speak: Clement keeps "spitting the bit."

In 2004, for example, Clement threw great in the first half -- but then tanked so badly under pennant pressure that the Cubs yanked him from the rotation.

In 2005, Clement again was brilliant in the first half (10-2 or something; All-Star selection) and then threw nervously down the stretch and was pounded. Including an embarrassing playoff loss against the White Sox, IIRC, in which he HIT the leadoff hitter and spun out of control from there.

Is it that Clement is just wearing down in the second half? Or is he just not comfortable under pressure? D-O-V says it's both, but mostly that he is not comfortable under the pressure. Clement is fussy and fidgety during "game" rallies, seems uncertain and unsure of himself when the game is on the line, etc.

Clement has a high "meltdown index" as Bill James would put it ... marginal BB rates, high HBP rates, high WP rates, etc.

The diagnosis is simple. Clement is a very talented pitcher who does not like pressure. And that's coming from a Doc who is very, very slow to diagnose "makeup problems".
.

Q: Can he learn to pitch under pressure?

A: I think most pitchers like Clement -- talented ones, that is -- DO learn to pitch under pressure, given time.

Randy Johnson and Roger Clemens are notable examples of pitching stars who long held reputations for losing in the playoffs. The Big Unit was like 0-7 in the playoffs for awhile, IIRC; Clemens had similar travails, including a humiliating meltdown and ump-ejection against Dave Stewart early in his postseason career.

But both backed the truck up, and revved the trailer at the ramp again, and conquered their gremlins, and even became great postseason pitchers.

To win in the playoffs, most athletes need to have been there before. I expect Clement to pitch with poise in his very next attempt at it.
.

Q: What does he throw?

A: Strikeout slider, plus fastball, plus-plus sinker. He's a legit 7k a game guy.

Unfortunately has not found the touch on his command at 31; his BB's are a little too high and at times his control totally frazzes out. In the 2nd half of 2004, for example, he walked 4.9 men per 9 innings.
.

Q: Does he have a breakout, Cy Young season in him?

A: The Boston Red Sox gave Clement a big contract assuming that he was going to break out in 2005. Which he did, in the first half...

Clement's walk rate -- 3.5 to 4.0, with periods of 5.0+ -- is way too high for a pitcher who has gotten past 30. ...at any time, you would expect Clement to iron out the last wrinkles in his game, push the BB's under 3, and simply "break out."

Except for the makeup, Matt Clement is the ideal Roto candidate for a bustout, 21-6, 3.25 season. That's not to say he will -- only that he has all the criteria you'd want for a breakout candidate.
.

Q: Most-comparable pitcher?

A: Freddy Garcia is comparable in a lot of ways.

Clement's stuff has a bit more bite than Freddy's does nowadays, but they are big righties, enigmas with power stuff, untapped potential, and a seeming lack of focus. They occupy about the same place in the AL's pitching echelon.

Freddy the last few years has found his level, become more predictable, whereas Clement is still as volatile as a penny stock. You could think of Clement as Freddy, but more so. :-).
.

Q: Projection for 2006?

A: 7.0k, 3.5bb, 0.8hr, 3.75 xERA in a neutral park -- about the #15 starter in the league. But with some downside, and an intriguing Cy Young upside.
.

Q: How about the contract?

A: $9m is in no way an overpay for a talented, 7-strikeout #2-3 starter in the year 2006 ... and Clement will "accept" a 2-year deal if you take him right now. His contract is a plus.
.

Q: Would you trade Reed-and-Bohn for Clement-and-Grade-B prospect?

A: Yes.

I personally think that athletes such as Clement tend to conquer their stage-fright gremlins after a couple of tries at it ... and that Seattle/Safeco are very nurturing environments for that. I'm more than willing to bet that Clement would finally jell at Safeco.

I have a lot of faith in the toughness of a man who took a line drive off his ear and missed only one start.

Matt Clement would give the Mariners a near-Millwood #2 starter.... and on a 2-year contract.

Who would you rather have: Millwood at 4-5 years, or Matt Clement at 2 years?

That said, the Mariners think they can do better. :-) I'm willing for them to do so.

Cheers,
Dr D

#10 Hitters

2005-12-23T12:33:00.000-08:00

.
Overrated vs Underrated Dept.

Coke - is overrated
Ice Water - is underrated

SUVs - are overrated (just rented one)
Ford sedans - are underrated (just bought one - 202,000 miles ago)

Entertainment - is overrated (watching something, expensively)
Recreation - is underrated (doing something, cheaply)

BP - is overrated
Sportspot, Churchill, Bedir - are underrated

Commuting - is overrated
The Bus - is underrated

$50 seats - are overrated
The 3rd Deck - is underrated

Bill Bavasi's saber-orientation - was overrated (by Dr. D)
Bill Bavasi's ability to calculate a chess variation six moves deep - is being underrated (by everybody)

LAST Year's VORP - is overrated (and VORP is always last year's)
Clubhouse chemistry - is underrated (just ask Pythag and the M's)

95 mph fastballs - are overrated
2.0 walk rates - are underrated

The M's roster today - is overrated (in its relevance)
The M's remaining offseason ammo - is underrated

Closers - are WAY overrated (free Eddie!)
#10 hitters - are WAY underrated

Said All That To Say This

Can anybody tell us, in one-syllable words so we can understand it ...

... why teams spend $10,000,000 per season for "closers" who improve their team by, oh, 20-30 runs .... whereas they can spend $400,000 for a legit #10 bat who improves their team by, oh, 20-30 runs?

Matt Lawton, if used as a #10 hitter as D-O-V says that he will be, improves the 2005 Mariners by +30 runs. Lawton in 300-400 AB's as a lefty will produce about +20 runs over a AAA player; the M's bench hitters in 2005 would clip the team for at least -10 runs over the same timeframe.

That's about as much as Kenji Johjima improves them, about as much as B.J. Ryan would, about as much as Esteban Loaiza will improve the A's.

And Lawton cost less than the bamboo "flute" that a Jamaican just sold my teenager when I wasn't looking.

#10 hitters are underrated. And if Lawton is the #10 bat for 2006, he is precisely the #10 hitter that Dr. D has been clamoring for, since Mark McLemore. As the #10, he would be a huge piece of a championship puzzle.

C'est la vie,
Dr D

POTD: Matt Lawton

2005-12-23T09:12:00.000-08:00

.
By The Numbers, Dept.

.280/.380/.400/.780 - Mark McLemore's AVG/OBP/SLG/OPS in his glory 2001-2002 years in Seattle

.273/.377/.428/.805 - Matt Lawton vs RHP, 2005
.277/.372/.436/.808 - Lawton vs RHP, 2003-2005

.268/.348/.466/.814 - Jacque Jones vs RHP, 2005
.280/.333/.474/.807 - Jones vs RHP, 2003-2005

801 - Career OPS, Raul Ibanez
791 - OPS, Raul Ibanez, 2005

Lawton - Who has had a higher OPS vs RHP, 2003-2005, Lawton or Jacque Jones ;-)

$16m - Jones' contract
$400k - Lawton's contract

Yes - Is Jones better with the glove than Lawton
No - Is corner OF defense worth $16 million
No - Would Ozzie Smith's defense be worth $16 million

145 - strikeouts, Lawton, vs RHP, last 3 years
140 - walks, Lawton, vs RHP, last 3 years
OBP - What is Matt Lawton's specialty
OBP - What do the Seattle Mariners need
97 - runs per 650 plate appearances, Lawton, 2003-2005 (vs RHP)

23.2 - VORP, Lawton, Pittsburgh (445 PA's)
-10 - approximate VORP from #10 slot, M's, 2005

Yes - Is it typical for a 34-year-old lefty to have trouble getting around on LHP's
No - Does Matt Lawton project to have trouble with RHP's in 2006

1.6 - Lawton's groundball ratio (1.1 average)
15-20 - Lawton's HR range in fulltime play
16-20 - Raul Ibanez' HR totals, last 3 years
Yes - Is "topspin" hitting valuable in Safeco

$400,000 - What is Lawton guaranteed for 2006
Bench - Does $400k suggest that Lawton is scheduled to start
.

Now That's What I'm TALKIN' About, Dept.
If platooned as a lefthanded hitter, Matt Lawton is comparable in value to Raul Ibanez. Lawton has less power (RBI), but more speed/OBP (R). Overall it's a wash.

Again, if used as a 300-400 AB hitter in the 10 slot, Matt Lawton figures to add the Mark McLemore dimension to the 2006 Mariners -- a three-four-days-a-week sub who, instead of giving you an automatic out, gives you a plus hitter.

Most managers like to use their bench to reinforce their leadership. If you have a Willie Bloomquist and a Greg Dobbs sitting next to you, your position as "Skip" is a little more secure.

But for managers who are willing to reinforce their own leadership, the Earl Weaver / Lou Piniella type of manager -- if a ballclub is willing to put a legit bat in the 10 slot, it can smack down an extra 30 runs. Easy as pie.

D-O-V has wanted a #10 bat since 2002. If Matt Lawton is it, he is as important an addition as would be a #3 starting pitcher.

BABVA,
Dr D

D-O-V Mailbag: Corey Patterson

2005-12-23T02:50:00.000-08:00

You can toss letters, postcards, or ticking packages into the Mailbag via the Pos-I-Tronic Net (blue circle), if y'have y'r own question...

Hey Doc,
How ya been doin'? I havn't seen ya around the boards for a little while, so I figured you were probably getting ready for the holidays since it's just a few days away. (Traveling the last two weeks - Dr D)

Anyways, I always hate to bother you about questions with the M's, lol, but you're always [cool about it]... so maybe you could help me out. (No bother, true dat, and prob'ly not ... heh!)

And NO it's NOT about Griffey for ONCE, lol. Anyways, it's about Corey Patterson... there's been talks about Meche going to the Cubs for Corey Patterson... that is, of course if Jeremy Reed gets traded to the BoSox for either Aaroyo, or Clement.

But the M's just signed Matt Lawton, who is hopefully going to be a bench player. So you've got Lawton, Everett, and Ibanez who can all play LF, or RF. Yet you could either stick with Reed or get Patterson who both play tremendous CF. So have you heard any truth to this rumor? and do you think by opening day we can see Mr.Patterson wearing a Mariners uniform?

Thanks Doc,Have a great Christmas!
- Bobby -
.

Take No Thought For The Morrow Dept.
The M's idea is to shove the chips into the pot to improve the 2006 team, and to do that, the M's will consider moving their young blue-chippers (for whom they would prefer not to wait).

M's indeed are looking at a variety of RLP center fielders, so as to free up Jeremy Reed who is, in fact, in high demand.... not at all unlikely that Patterson could wind up here; he's no worse than some of the names the M's have looked at, such as Brady Clark.

...At 25, it's wayyyyy too early to write off Corey Patterson with the stick, especially given his travails with the strike zone ...

He is definitely not my first choice for center, but if Reed goes out in return for a true marquee player, remember that Patterson could be a wash for Reed offensively in the short term, and it's Adam Jones anyway in the long term...

Look amigos. In 2001, the M's tried to control 2004, and they found out to their great sorrow that "sufficient unto the day was the evil thereof." There has been entirely too much Mariner hand-wringing about five years down the line. You cannot control five years from now; you can't even control today.

Give it everything you got, now, right this minute. If the Mariners have suddenly gotten hip to the Billy Beane idea that you can only win NOW, I'm there, babe.

Same applies to Jose Lopez. If you could (say) deal Lopez for Barry Zito ... well, Lopez' bright future, that's a shame, but the fact is, the 2006 ballclub just got a lot better. Prospects might or might not become 60-homer men, kiddies.

Reed-for-ace, Patterson to fill CF, then Adam Jones? I do it in a heartbeat. Hang the 2009 season in which Reed gets eight votes for the All-Star team.

Cheers,
Dr D

Quick view from a 'net cafe :-)

2005-12-21T21:44:00.000-08:00

Carl "Blackheart" Everett

I guess what a lot of us are saying is why on earth would we pro-rate his stats upward (for more games played) in his age 35-36 seasons?

1) 'cuz if he knocks in 23 and 87 in 135 games, you also add the production from whichever player takes the other 27 games.

23 HR and 87 RBI in 135 games is better than 23 HR and 87 RBI in 155 games. ;-)

I'm not saying he'll get better: I'm saying, notice that 23/87 in 135 is nothing to sneeze at. And he goes to a park that favors him.

===========

2) I don't look for Everett to collapse at his age because when in doubt, I like the extra-talented players. It would be *overachievers,* such as Raul Ibanez, that I would worry about age-declines the most with.

Again, I'm not saying Everett was my choice. I'm just saying you are talking about Carl bloomin' Everett, here. C'mon. Let's not make him out to be Willie Bloomquist.

To me, Everett actually underperformed his career-arc in 2005. For a guy who slugged nearly .600 at his peak, to be down to .435 in his early '30's, that suggests a "soft" level of performance, with upside.

If we weren't so emotional about Everett, we wouldn't be projecting his performance so harshly.

==========

3) Your question (above) does change tack, at least... you're going from "he's useless" to "he will get worse and then be useless." :-)

That's progress :-)

Jarrod "Worst SP In The League" Washburn
Question came up about Washburn finishing in the bottom five among qualifying SP's in fielding-independent ERA?

A1) As a minor opening quibble, note that this makes him 40th, or something -- or a #3-4 SP if you divide by 14 teams. Any stat by which only 45 AL starters qualify, automatically amputates the worst 30% of the pitchers in the league off the bottom of the list. So don't make too much about "bottom five."

=====================

A2) Washburn's xERA, and translated ERA, and actual ERA, were all excellent.

What a poor "fielding-independent ERA" is emphasizing, is simply that Washburn puts the ball in play a lot.

The sabermetrician leaps from this fact -- that Washburn keeps the ball in play -- to a false conclusion -- that the Seattle Mariners should have obtained a theoretically excellent pitcher.

There is a difference between seeking a pitcher who is, theoretically, the best pitcher in a neutral context -- and a pitcher who is, on the green grass of the Big A or Safeco, a 3.75 pitcher.

Sabermetricians swing the pendulum a little too far here, and deny pitchers "credit" for exploiting their contexts. To sabermetricians, if a pitcher matches up with his conditions and wins a bunch of games, it doesn't count.

Consider Bill James' quote on it: "In adjusting for park contexts, we must be careful not to edit wins and losses out of existence. If Wade Boggs has an actual ability to dump doubles off the Green Monster, then actual wins and losses will result from that ability."

Jarrod Washburn doesn't walk anybody, and doesn't give up many HR's, and in a good park with a good defense he will be an above-average starter, period. The sabermetrician wishes to deny Washburn "credit" for what his defense does, but the real GM is one step ahead of him. The GM skips forward past the theoretical and asks, "how will THIS pitcher do in THESE conditions?"

=====================

3. The difference between Washburn and Moyer and Franklin is that Moyer's and Franklin's low K rates lead to precarious HR rates.

Washburn, unusually, has proven beyond any doubt that he can maintain low HR rates despite low K rates -- so for him, the low K rates become much less meaningful.

Safeco will only reinforce Washburn's HR-prevention ability.

======================

4. The REASON that Washburn can allow tons of contact, without tons of HR's?

Who knows. We have heard only one expert theory on it, that being Inside Pitch's. "Washburn has a weird little hitch in his fastball" that leads to "ten straight foul balls without any good contact."

That's what I'm going with for now.

======================

5. There is such a thing as a Tommy John pitcher -- a guy who gives up tons of hits, but nothing else.

Show me a pitcher with low BB's and low HR's, such as Kevin Brown, and I'll show you a pitcher with a better-than-average ERA.

Logically, Washburn should give up HR's. In reality, he has never given up HR's. So, fine.

=======================

Washburn is way overpaid and he is nowhere near being a Kevin Millwood or A.J. Burnett.

But over the last 7 years, he has been an above-average starting pitcher. In Safeco, he projects to have a better year than do Esteban Loaiza or Paul Byrd.

Cheers,
Dr D

This 'N That

2005-12-19T18:07:00.000-08:00

Context.

Matters.

Always has.

Always will.

Most 'net folks who read anything I write (thanks to both of you by the way), know that context is like a sermon on Easter for me. You almost always know what you're going to hear. At least you know there is going to be some sort of reference to the word.

So What's Your Point Padna? I Ain't Got The Time To Read Your Snippets AND Doc's Novels Too!

What does "Crazy" "Jurassic" "Intolerant" "Child Abusing" Carl Everett bring to the Mariners? Without agreeing with any of those labels, Padna's position is that Everett will bring both pizazz and punch. What I will not do is the number crunching that has been going on ad nauseum trying to illustrate that "Randy Winn gave you x VORP per $ while Everett gives you x minus some fraction VORP per $, so why are the M's doing this?" This is not an Everett versus Winn comp in the first place, since Winn has already been translated into Foppert, Carvajal, and Gonzales. Are the M's in a better position now having translated Winn and signed Everett. I think the answer is obvious. While it's possible that none of the arms will pan out (that's always possible as we've found out), I'd much rather be in the position now of having the guys they have than how it looked even six months ago. Clubhouse fire and more long balls address two of the M's primary needs.

So Why Washburn and Not Millwood?

Instead of answering myself that question, it's important to note two things:

The first, of course, is that we don't even know whether the premise of the question is even valid. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that the M's could not sign Millwood if they wanted him, provided he was okay with coming here. But I'm not going to rehash the budget issues now. We can do that in July when we need three months of future FA.

"Either your signature or your brains will be on that contract tomorrow. The choice is yours."

The second is that last I heard, extortion was still illegal. There's no guarantee that Millwood even wants to come here. It sure has been curiously quiet......

Context.....uh....Dep't

What happens if the top targets do not want to come here? What does the org do? You've just had two seasons bad enough to have your fanbase erode to the point of threatening all that you've built. You cannot simply say, get younger and develop your kids in the business environment that exists now. Granted, the M's put themselves in the position they're in. But they do not have the luxury of not including a plan to make immediate improvements. If that means paying the going market rate for Civic instead of star, then so be it.

The whole point of stars and scrubs is that you don't buy the Civic because you're averse to the Lexus. You buy a Civic when the Lexus is not available and you have a business reason to do so. This is a perfectly good time to invest in that Civic. It's not like you've got a Roy Oswalt who wants to come here and you're chiseling him. You can't wait on Boras and get left without a chair when the music stops.

Signing Washburn now does two things.

1. It puts a strong lefty starter at Safeco, which we all know is a pretty good thing.
2. It maintains a decisive tone with an agent like Boras that "if you want the best deal, take my deal now or we need to move to our next plan." That kind of tone will bode well for future negotiations. Which, of course, there will be. BB always needs to keep that in mind.

Johjima's 1.5MB Stream (Tape of his swing etc.)

2005-12-19T07:35:00.000-08:00

Background: IT company SoftBank and Yahoo Japan just announced a new company called TV-Bank. TV-Bank is a company now in beta stage to transfer TV and movie contents over internet.
------------------
And as I searched at TV-Bank they had a tape about Johjima!!!
(Johjima played for SoftBank Hawks)
Go to the title link.
There are 3 yellow squares with Japanese kanji to click. Click the bottom left one. You will get a 1.5MB stream of Johjima.
(Some seconds of commercials first)
Perhaps this service is only available to Japanese residents.
If so you must go with a Japanese proxy.
I don't know about Japanese proxies.
Anyway try.
Hope this information was worth a blog.
----------------
Inka-Wolfy reports that this site is only accept Japanese IPs.
So a proxy is a must.

D-O-V's Pitcher Evaluation Algorithm

2005-12-18T01:16:00.000-08:00

But Mom Always Made A Great Ham, Dept.
Story goes about the bride who prepared a nice dinner for her new husband. She set down the ham and scalloped potatoes, and laid aside a bowl of minced ham for the morning's omelettes.

"Looks great, poofster," says the groom. "But why did you cut the ends off the ham?"

"That's the way you cook a ham, pouska," says she.

"Why's that?," says he.

"Don't ask questions about things you don't understand, pouska," replies she, sweetly but with a certain sandpapery tone.

Next morning, Mr. goes off to work, and honeybunny races to the phone. "Mom! Why did you always cut the ends off the ham when you cooked it?"

Mom stops, and doesn't really know why ... "You know, your Grandma taught me that," says Muds, "but I never really asked why."

So Mudsy hangs up, and calls Gramma. "Mom, why did you always cut the ends off the ham?"

Grams laughs. "I used to, sweetheart," says she. "But now they are making the pans larger."

In The Land Of Blog Dept.
... we use a lot of fancy formulas to evaluate pitching: xERA, DIPS, FIP, xFIP, PERA, BPV, STP, CIA ... the fancier they get the more we like them.

Have you ever actually looked up the formulas behind those acronyms though? They all do the same thing: they take a pitcher's K's, BB's, and HR's ... and then they start threshing them like wheat in a combine tractor.

One guy wants to normalize the HR's by flyball rate. Another guy wants to normalize for defense. Some other guy wants to give bonus points for Sunday-only starting. You can get any kind of light or dark bread you care to order.

But they all start with the same rice, corn and wheat: they all start by assuming K, BB, and HR define a pitcher's skill.

And in doing so, they make too much stew out of one oyster.

PERA and FIP create impressively precise ERA's. But have you ever noticed this? ...

Lotta NOISE In Those HR Rates, Dept.

Consider that Carl Pavano's (translated) HR rate was 1.4 last season, and 0.6 the year before. Do you know of any pitchers who struck out 7.0 batters per game in 2005, but only 3.0 the year before? No, because strikeout rate and walk rates persist well, but HR rates generally don't!

Jamie Moyer's HR rates the last four years: 1.0, 1.5, 0.7, 1.0. Do you know of any pitchers whose K rates the last four years were 5.0, 7.3, 3.5, and 5.0?

Derek Lowe's HR rates last year: 1.1. The year before: half that, 0.6. Know any pitchers who stayed healthy, but whose K rates doubled, or were cut by 50%, last year?

Qwibbles & Bits, Dept.
Now, for some guys, HR rate is more consistent than that. But the fact remains! HR rate swings by 25% either way, based merely on a few balls blown foul or not.

And then we take the luck-based HR rate, and try to build a PERA formula that shows great precision.

Yes, we know some formulas try to extrapolate HR rate from simple flyball rate. That's assuming too much also.

If you use a duller meat cleaver, yes there ARE four kinds of pitchers, in terms of mistake avoidance:

1) Low-HR pitchers (AJ Burnett)
2) Normal-HR pitchers (most of them, such as Jarrod Washburn)
3) Gopheritis guys (Ryan Franklin)
4) Guys who are very erratic (Jamie Moyer fighting age; unhealthy pitchers)

Cut Out The Middleman Dept.
So if xERA is a filet knife that is based on such sloppy, tinfoil material (HR rate), why not just cut out the middleman?

What if you used K/BB ratio directly, and skipped all the xERA formulas? How well would that work?

Bill James "The Heart Of Baseball Is The Strike Zone" Dept.
Here are the top AL starters, 60 or more IP, with a 2.5 or better control ratio, except for HOF'ers Schilling and Kevin Brown.

ERA is in the left column, for your viewing pleasure:

ERA CTL SP
3.44 7.89 C. Silva (Min - SP)
2.41 5.40 R. Halladay (Tor - SP)
2.87 5.29 Jo. Santana (Min - SP)
4.45 5.10 D. Wells (Bos - SP)
4.04 5.09 B. Radke (Min - SP)
3.79 4.49 R. Johnson (NYY)
3.71 3.86 J. Towers (Tor)
3.12 3.73 M. Buehrle (CWS)
3.48 3.65 B. Colón (LAA)
3.74 3.64 P. Byrd (LAA - SP)
2.67 3.35 F. Hernández (Sea - SP)
4.77 3.11 C. Pavano (NYY - SP)
3.73 3.08 D. Haren (Oak - SP,RP)
4.26 3.04 C. Young (Tex - SP)
4.41 3.02 M. Mussina (NYY - SP)
3.02 3.00 K. Escobar (LAA - SP,RP)
4.03 2.82 B. McCarthy (CWS - SP)
2.86 2.81 K. Millwood (Cle - SP)
2.53 2.81 R. Harden (Oak - SP)
3.44 2.80 J. Lackey (LAA - SP)
3.79 2.75 C. Lee (Cle - SP)
4.03 2.60 C. Sabathia (Cle - SP)
4.49 2.59 D. Bush (Tor - SP)
4.57 2.54 J. Bonderman (Det - SP)

The average ERA is 3.65 for these 23 pitchers, who were sorted by nothing other than simple K/BB ratio. This 3.65 would make you the #12 pitcher in the league, 12 points out of the top 10.

Practically everybody in the top 23 is under 3.99 on the ERA. The fliers are three excellent pitchers who were in bad circumstances: the two Yankee pitchers, the lefty in Fenway. Plus there was a young pitcher in Texas' Ballpark who bears close watching. The other 19 guys *all* have outstanding ERA's. (We left off Brown and Schilling, but it is worth noting that Mussina, Brown, Randy Johnson and Carl Pavano ALL had inflated ERA's.)

(David Bush had gopheritis -- 20HR in 130IP -- which negates good CMD: the next two guys on the list would have been Jon Garland and Freddy Garcia.)

As you can clearly see, this is a list of terrific pitchers. ...The SIMPLEST way to quickly sort for excellent pitchers, is to sort by K:BB ratio.

BaseballHQ Chimes In
Ron Shandler opens BASEBALL FORECASTER with a discussion of K:BB and points out the following MLB-wide correlation:

CMD ... ERA
0.0 - 1.0 ... 6.24
1.0 - 1.5 ... 5.16
1.6 - 2.0 ... 4.63
2.0 - 2.5 ... 4.30
2.6 - 3.0 ... 3.80
3.0 - 9.9 ... 3.30

K:BB is really just xERA (and DERA, and FIP, etc.) simplified. It works as well or better, provided only that you fish out pitchers with gopheritis first.

On The Field, Dept.
Why does K:BB work so well?

Never mind why. The fact is that it just does. If we didn't have an answer to "why," pitchers with 3:1 control ratios would still lead the league in ERA.

But consider that a pitcher with low BB's is constantly attacking the strike zone, constantly pitching ahead in the count ... and yet getting the ball by hitters.

Ryan Franklin has low BB's, but can't get the ball past anybody (2.9 K's). ANY pitcher with low walks and high K's is pounding the strike zone -- and making hitters miss.

That's good. Get pitchers who attack the strike zone and make hitters miss. You automatically get that with K:BB pitchers.

And Take the DL With You, Dept.
Billy Beane gets low minor-league injuries.

Guess why? His high-KBB pitchers know how to pitch. Their ratios automatically filter them for good pitching mechanics (correlated with consistent control).

I'll bet you a dollar that any decent study would show MUCH higher injury rates with wild pitchers, than with pitchers who have great command.

Gopheritis? All Bets Are Off Dept.
(Bad) Corollary 1: If a John Burkett type has a sky-high HR rate, that negates a good K/BB ratio. He's just laying it in there on 3-1. Anybody can avoid walks by teeing it up for tape-measure shots.

David Bush and Brad Radke were guilty of this in 2005.

You can go by K/BB ratio IF AND ONLY IF you weed out "gopheritis" pitchers at the beginning.
.
.

Hot Stuff Too? Then Biggie-Size My Order, Dept.
(Good) Corollary 2: If a pitcher with great command ALSO has a strikeout rate approaching 6, he is almost certainly an excellent pitcher.

Ron Shandler states it this way: "soft-tossers (with good CMD) can take huge leaps in their game by getting their DOM over 5.6."

So, three sets of pitchers who have nice K/BB's:

1) AVERAGE-SOLID pitchers: high K:BB, but high HR
2) GOOD pitchers: high K:BB, but low K
3) OUTSTANDING pitchers: high K:BB, but high K

The D-O-V Way, Dept.
Ol' Dr. D likes all the xERA stuff ... but you know what? Many times it is actually more coherent -- you get less wrapped around the axle -- just looking at good old K:BB.

Dr. D, and Bill James by the way, use mostly the following process when evaluating pitchers:

1) K:BB
2) Look for something *out of alignment* in the stats, something weird and defining for him
3) Gather all factors and use previous baselines, templates, "families" of pitchers to UNDERSTAND the pitcher

You knew all that? Why don't you use it, then? :-) Why do you think that Carl Pavano and Matt Morris and Paul Byrd are far overrated, and that Jarrod Washburn and Kenny Rogers might be good pitchers?

The DRAFT BOARD
Now that we have explained why K:BB is so simplifying and cleansing, leaving you with peaches-and-cream staff complexions, here is the current crop. They're listed in the order they appear on Dr. D's draft board.

The CMD ratios are almost all good -- which is why they are the acceptable targets of the offseason.

Control ratio is first -- and if the HR rate is low or high, we give that. Remember, high HR negates good command ratio.

If the K is below 5.6, we give that (that tells you that the pitcher in question will be only "solid," not excellent).

2.5* - AJ Burnett - (low HR ... 2.9 control in 2004 ... very high K)
4.5* - Matsuzaka - (super low HR)
2.8 - Millwood
4.0* - Nishiguchi - (low HR)

3.2 - Morris - (low K)
3.6 - Byrd - (low K)
1.6 - Kim - (used to be 3.0+)
2.6 - Kevin Brown - (gopheritis in 2005, though not usually)

3.6 - Weaver - (but horrific gopheritis in 2005 and in NY)
2.6 - Helling - (and high K's, and super low HR's in 2005)
1.9 - Moyer - (low K's and onsetting gopheritis)
1.8 - Washburn - (low K's and bad gopheritis)
1.6 - Rogers - (with very low K's)

Pitchers who missed Dr. D's draft board tend to look like this:

1.3 - B. Anderson (with super low K's and horrible gopheritis)
2.1 - Elarton (with mediocre K's and tragic gopheritis)
1.1 - Armas (gopheritis, low K's)
1.9 - R. Ortiz (with tragic 1.8 gopheritis)
1.9 - J. Johnson (with teeny tiny K rates)

POTD Prereq 101, Dept.
And since this post is Prereq Math 158 to the Carl Pavano POTD:

3.1 - Pavano - (with good K's and normal HR's every year but 2005)

Enjoy,
Dr Detecto

Intensity In Ten Cities, Dept.

2005-12-17T20:17:00.000-08:00

One thing that's kind of funny, and kind of nice, is that the blog-o-sphere isn't picking up rocks (behind the one or two ringleaders) to media-lynch Everett as a worthless human being.

But the odd flip side to that coin is that the blog-o-sphere, in general, is worrying that Everett has nothing left in the tank. That part of it is mystifying.

Everett:

1) Was a bona fide MVP-level player at his peak (and being far more gifted than, say, Raul Ibanez, tends to a later decline)

2) Hit 23 HR's last year

3) Hit about 6-8 additional doubles in Chicago that woulda been out of Safeco (=30 HR) and is a dead pull LH hitter

4) Has been playing dinged up

Everett is kind of in the Griffey, Nomar class. Always take the mega-gifted athlete to surprise high, rather than the Ibanez-, Aurilia-style overachievers.

Honestly, whoever Everett was playing for, if they had a friendly RF, I'd figure him for around 25-30 bombs and they will be big ones.

Everett is approximately a lateral move from Randy Winn and Jacque Jones, offensively, though with a louder bat. And no matter what the saberdweebs tell you, Everett will bring a lot more LH presence to the M's lineup than did winn.
.

Chemistry 101
No jokes about Phillips, please... :-)

But note this carefully. Sabermetricians, if they had been around in 1994 like they are now, would have graded Bill Bavasi's 1994-1995 offseason an F. ...and yet the reality was, he had turned a .400 team into a dominating one!

Sabermetricians are absolutely colorblind to factors like those presented by Tony Phillips. And that is why every year, year after year, there are at least three teams that perform 20-30 games differently than expected -- like the 2001 and 2004 Mariners -- and sabermetricians shrug and say, "it's just one of those things." ...what it actually is, is a manifestation of the huge part of baseball that we don't understand.

Though a (roughly) lateral move offensively, there's little doubt that Bill Bavasi does see Carl Everett as the Mariners' version of Tony Phillips.

And I don't know how you disagree with him about that.

Did the 2005 Mariners not need a Tony Phillips? ...and who else would you have gotten to fill the role?

BABVA,
Dr D

POTD: JARROD WASHBURN

2005-12-17T15:44:00.000-08:00

Aloha from Jamaica-mon and G'die from the Louvre. Or something. My wife will let me know where we are when she comes and kicks my 'net-cafe chair over.

Garcon, another doppio. Only got a half hour to see if there are any baseball fans left in Seattle (or who frequent Vission de Detectair) anymore.

Q: Quick, Doc, what's the good news?!

A: ::winning smile:: VERY few people get the disease named after them!

And the therapy qualifies as experimental, so we'll pick up the tab on that too. Everything's coming up gold.
.

Q: If you even try to reverse your field on the WashBURN signing now, we are prepared to pitch-and-flame your castle...

A: ::see smile at top left of homepage:: I'm always open to new experiences, provided they're righteous. An unruly mob can't be any better or worse than Jarrod Washburn for 4/$36m or an hour of Dodgeball with cheaters in 95% humidity.

The fact that the Mariners are willing to give this contract to Jarrod Washburn, and UNwilling to give Kevin Millwood ONE MORE STEENKING YEAR? That, in one move, sums up everything that Silentpadna and I have been crying and moaning about for four bloomin' years.

Washburn-for-4 over Millwood-for-5 absolutely sums up the Mariner business organization, and it sums up the root cause of their wussiness on the field.

Sorry. Can't dance around the question. When the generals have no mojo, the troops won't either.

And as you and I know, bulldogging the calf in a half-hearted way is the very FASTEST way to go to the hospital (or to 96-loss City). The Mariners' very cowardice is precisely what makes their worst nightmares come true.

In this case, that nightmare is the fact that they are one of the worst 5 teams in baseball, and the only one of the bottom 5 that is rich. Lincoln and Armstrong are turning in Tampa Bay results with $90m payrolls. Their refusal to give Kevin Millwood the 5th year is one more swing-and-miss that keeps them there.
.

Q: You still think the Mariners will contend in 06?

A: They could, yes. ... The M's start at -52 runs ....

Felix +40, Johjima +20-40, Everett =, Washburn +30 ... That's about +100 runs. ... then there are the improvements from the young kids, further trades, etc.

On paper, the difference between Washburn and Millwood is probably only about 20 runs or so. It's not the 2006 dealbreaker.
.

Q: Are you trying to say Washburn will be effective in 2006?!

A: Washburn has never been anything but effective.

He'll be very effective again in 2006. He'll probably be in the top 25 in the league in ERA. I'll have him about #20 on my AL SP draft list.

His K's are marginal and he's tricking people, BUT:

1) His BB rates, the last 5 years, have ranged from 2.1 to 2.5.
2) His HR rates, the last 5 years, have ranged from 0.8 to 1.2.
3) His translated ERA's, the last 5 years, have ranged from 3.18 to 4.01.

Here, get a load of Washburn's translated ERA's. They have been, and remain, as good as Kevin Millwood's:

2000 - 3.38
2001 - 3.52
2002 - 3.18
2003 - 3.86
2004 - 4.01
2005 - 3.48
Career - 3.62

And his on-field ERA is 3.93 for his career.
.

Q: On further review, you think Washburn is a good pitcher?

A: He is, yes. Having heard what Inside Pitch has to say on it, and suddenly realizing that Washburn is a card-carrying member of the Tommy John Family of Pitchers, and realizing that his K's have been down since 2003, while he has maintained low HR's and low XERA's ...

Yes, you have to admit that Washburn is a solid #3 starting pitcher, a 15-game winner on a good team.

That's why the M's had to pay $36m -- because other MLB teams saw that also.

Q: Why are his skills so predictable year-to-year?

A: Because he's a gamer, because his fastball moves (as Pitch pointed out), and because he's a graceful lefty with consistent mechanics.

Q: Even though his K's are low?

A: His K's are at the lower boundary of what is acceptable. Some good pitchers, such as Brad Radke, operate in the 5k area.

Look, let's not outsmart ourselves here. Washburn has been doing it his whole life. He has NEVER had a translated K rate over 5.7 and his translated ERA has never been over 4.01.

I originally thought Washburn's K's were declining, but they're not. They're exactly the same the last three years, and not far below his peak.

I looked at Washburn's K rates, comp'ed him to Moyer, and figured he's smoke-and-mirrors. A closer look shows more crunch in the center. My bad. But it happens about 40 times per game to me in a chess tournament: you look once and think you have it nailed, and then you study a while and you see things in the position you didn't, at first glance.

What you see in Washburn, at second glance, is a repeatable Tommy John game: he gives up hits, but walks nobody, and contains the HR's, and he's tough as nails, and he does it every year.
.

Q: What about Safeco?

A: As a solid #3 starter who is lefty, Safeco could easily give Washburn a sparkling record.

Hey, don't gimme any guff about lefties in Safeco, kids. USSM just spent a year oooh'ing and aaah'ing about Jamie Moyer's King Kong act at home.
.

Q: Still doesn't make him a smart sign.

A: Too often we, including me, get too caught up in the question of "who is the most CLEVER signing."

This happens in roto. An owner "realizes" that Jeremy Reed is a sleeper, and .... takes him 3rd round, to make sure everybody knows how smart he is. LOL.

Jarrod Washburn is not a clever signing. But if you forget about how SEXY or TECHNO the signing is, you realize that Jarrod Washburn is going to be a whale of an effective pitcher in Safeco.

.

Q: Final Prognosis?

A: On further review, I'd call Washburn about as effective an SP as Loaiza or Morris or Byrd, and better suited to Safeco.

As a lefty #3SP, he'd have been delightful as the 2nd SP in behind Millwood, at say $5-6m per.

So I, amigos, am going to laugh off the $9m per, and think of Jarrod Washburn as a nice second pitcher in.

If Matt Clement, or similar, comes in as the deuce -- YOU hang yourself. I'm celebrating a weird, but powerful, 2006 rotation. :-)

.

Q: What does Inside Pitch have to say about him?

A: From ITP:

I think Millwood is a bit overrated as well, it's funny because people are expecting him to be better for the very reason they are expecting Wash to implode -- their peripherals. I think most people have covered the numbers and the perception that he's been lucky ...

I actually have a hard time dismissing the numbers but at the same time Wash is one of those guys that makes me wonder about a pitcher actually trying to pitch to contact. The thing about Wash, he throws a weird fastball, it's got a hitch in it, you'll see him throw 10 FB in a row and yet you'll see the batter struggle to make good contact.

The one thing that's been overstated a bit is the condition of his arm... Prior to last year he's never really had any arm problems, he's been on the DL with stuff like strep throat, stomach ailments, and early in his career oblique strains.. He really struggled with those a couple years ago too.

I know you guys are TOed at the money involved, and I wouldn't want to see him making that sort of cake either but, I really do believe it's a case of a team paying the market rate. This has been a bad year for baseball's lords of the realm when it comes to fiscal restraint, I guess they will just have to comfort themselves with the loads of money they are making.

Anyway, rather than sticking to one opinion, I think you might enjoy seeing what Angel fans are saying about the guy.mb3.scout.com/fanaheimang...1720.topicThe one thing you will come to love -- he is not afraid of ANY hitter, he will never get rattled, and he is the first guy to laugh at himself after he does something you just want to cringe at.

=============

Well, you'll find you got a pitcher who's indicators are all predicting inpending doom and yet, when he pitches you will see a guy who is about as fearless a competitor (never seen him get rattled - ever), as you can find and a guy who takes his failures pretty well, some would say too well -- Im refering to Washburn's infamous smirk... The guy will give up a 700 foot HR and then turn around and give a silly grin.

No clue what his future will hold for him, I'm sure the Ms board has talked up the issues with the indicators *(the falling K rate, the weak k/W rate, ect ect), and those should be genuine concerns but chances are the guy will continue to evolve into more of a finesse lefty.

The consistent 92-93 FB isn't anywhere near as consistent as it used to be (he seems to top out around 90 these days), but he will still challenge hitters and trust his defense. He will still go out there and give a team everything he has for as long as he has it.

Like Trrr said, maybe he will do better now that's he's out of Anaheim. I liked Wash, he was a good soilder for the Angels, he will be overpaid, and that contract is likely too long but, the market is what the market is... He should be okay for the first two years of that deal I would think.For the Angels -- this is yet another reason to talk contract extension with Kelvim Escobar..Best of luck to the bow hunter, except of course when he is facing the Halos.

+150 Runs Scoreboard

2005-12-17T14:59:00.000-08:00

DELTA, Free Agent Dept.
The 2005 Mariners were -52 runs below .500 (699 for, 751 agin'.)

As always, +100 runs above .500 would be plenty to have you in the fight for the World Series. The Yankees were +97 runs, Boston +103, Chicago +97, LA was +115, Oakland +109.

Here y'go, amig-O.

+40 Felix
+30 Washburn (assumes 4.25 ERA)
+30 Johjima (assumes lukewarm year)
+00 Everett (assumes league-average bat)

The M's have added +100 runs so far to their 2005 team. On paper.
.

DELTA, Returning Player Dept.

Check the other possible ways the M's might pick up a run or ten, beyond the Big Five:

+20 Everett if he has a healthy, up, park-aided year

+10 Adrian Beltre if he returns to a +26 VORP player (was +16 in 2005; was+70 in 2004)
+10 Adrian Beltre if he returns to a +36 VORP player
+10 Adrian Beltre if he returns to a +46 VORP player

+10 Jose Lopez if he is a mediocre +15 VORP player like the '05 Beltre (Boone +5 VORP this year)
+10 Jose Lopez if he is a +25 VORP player (Robinson Cano +28 at .296/.316/.457)

+10 Yuniesky Betancourt if he hits for +10 VORP ... vs the 0.0 VORP of Valdez-Bloomquist-Betancourt
+10 Yuniesky Betancourt if he hits for +20 VORP

+10 Jeremy Reed if he posts a measly +15.7 VORP
+10 Jeremy Reed if he has a Randy Winn year +25 VORP

+20 Jo-El Pineiro if he has as good a year as Jamie Moyer 2005 (vs. the 13 VORP assumed above)

+10-30 Marcos Carvajal /Clint Nageotte/Jesse Foppert if the M's get a pitching surprise

+10 George Sherrill over, say, Matt Thornton

+10 Mike Morse and the rest of the bench, compared to 2004's bench

If the Mariners did ALL of the above, they would gain +270 runs and win about 110 games. The above are possibilities for improvement. The M's need 1/3 or 1/2 of them to happen -- net -- in order to be one of the best teams in the league.
.

2005 RUNS OVER AAA LEVEL

+45 Ichiro
+ 5 Reed
+40 Ibanez
+56 Sexson
+15 Beltre
+15 Winn (later -1 Dobbs and +12 Morse)
+ 4 Boone (later +1 Lopez; negative first trip, positive second trip)
-13 Olivo (later -7 Borders and +0 Torrealba)
-08 Valdez (later +3 Betancourt)

+30 Moyer
+13 Franklin
+ 4 Jo-El
+ 0 Meche
- 1 Sele (2/3 season), later +29 Felix (1/3 season)

Tony Phillips 1995

2005-12-17T14:19:00.000-08:00

In 1994, Bill Bavasi's Anaheim Angels were -21 below .500 ... in a strike-shortened season.

For 1995, he brought in the scary-tempered, controversial Tony Phillips -- and the Angels ran away with the division (until the M's miracle). Mariners Wheelhouse points out the parallel to Carl Everett at the usual hangout (SportSpot): Da Spot

Bavasi comments on Phillips:

Q: So was his intensity somewhat contagious?

He is THE single most influential and best player I’ve been around... What put getting Phillips over the edge for us was Matt Keough who played with him said, “I guarantee he will made Jim Edmonds and J.T. Snow and other guys better players. He will absolutely influence them and drive them hard”. That put it over the edge for me.

There was a time during that year Tony had something like seven cortisone shots in his hamstring just to stay on the field. And he was driving Edmonds…you can look at Edmonds’ career, that was the big jump. J.T. Snow didn’t always over-perform that year but Tony would go into the training room and flush any player out, get them out on the field, and say, "what are you doing in here"…we’re playing today, you are playing. That was the big jump (for the team).
Tony has had his struggles in different parts of his life, but this guy made me think I could be a GM because of the way we played that year. That was our first significant trade…more nerve wracking than a free agent signing. Tony absolutely made that deal work. I’d give a bunch of players for one of those guys.

.
Don' Mess Wif MY Money, Bro', Dept.

The 2004-2005 Sonics improved by 89 games, or something, based on exactly two significant additions:

1) They added a backup point guard.

2) They added a big inner-city guy with a scary temper who didn't like playing with pantywaists.

==========

What Were You THINKING, Bill?, Dept.

Bill told us what he was thinking, but we waved him off, because he didn't tell us what we were thinking.

He told us that Carl Everett would be a credible threat from the left side (which he will), and that he would make the players around him better (which he will).

We have proceeded to analyze eighty-five kinds of statisticial trees, and lost sight of two simple forests:

1) Carl Everett will hit 25+ homers at Safeco, and

2) Carl Everett will restore a Lou Piniella presence to the dugout.

Eight Key Decisions Dept.

Bill James stated that Theo Epstein's year would turn out well based on a critical 8-to-10 decisions each year. This year, for Bavasi, those included:

1. Johjima

2. Easy Eddie

3. The #2 SP

4. The #3 SP

5. The LF

6. WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE WUSSY TEAM PERSONALITY

Amigos asked Dr. D all the time: "If we get Millwood and Burnett, does that make us a 90-win team?"

I said, all the time, "on paper, yes, but with this team you never know. There is a huge, overarching negative: the team plays gutless. It underperforms. It is always -6 under Pythag and that is no accident."

The Mariners could have made EVERY roster move perfectly, and been torpedoed by the overarching negative that they are not in it to win it -- that they play soft.

Bavasi's decision about what to do about the team character, sez Padna and I, matter more than every other offseason decision put together.

Everett Is The Hammer To That Nail

Most saberdweebs believe in leadership like they believe in Santa Claus.

But most saberdweebs watch sports from behind computer monitors and horn-rimmed glasses. (We mean that in a good way). Most saberdweebs have never been in an important sports tournament. Most saberdweebs have never had a very large inner-city brother go haywire and get in their face, on the bench, after they have screwed up. Most saberdweebs are blind to the fact that a Danny Fortson / Carl Everett type can, and does, scare his teammates into having an idea out there.

Bill James said, after 2004, that if it had not been for the Red Sox' team leadership, that there would have been no title run -- that it was absolutely the difference-maker in their coolness and focus under fire.

The 2003-04 Sonics, without Fortson, played as soft as a jelly roll. The 04-05 Sonics, with Fortson, played like lions.

The 2004 and 2005 Mariners played so soft it made you nauseous. The 2006 Mariners will not.

Won't Be the First Time, Dept.

Does Carl Everett's "ability to make his teammates better" show up at all in the win column?

In 1994, the New York Mets won 55 games. In 1995, Carl Everett was traded to the Mets and they won 69 ... an improvement of +14 games.

In 1997, the Houston Astros had won 84 games. In 1998, Carl Everett joined them and they won 102 ... that's +18 games.

In 2000, Everett was traded to Boston... although Everett hit .300/.373/.587 in CF, their rotation went up like a mushroom cloud, and the team lost 9 more games, finishing 2nd again.

...we're not saying that Carl Everett is more important than all the other 24 players, or that he is the only factor in a won-lost record. We're saying that he can help a non-focused team focus. That seemed to be the case in Houston and New York, but in Boston he made no difference despite his MVP season.

In 2002, Everett joined an old Texas team (Pudge, Raffy, Juan Gone) that was bickering about ARod's contract, and made no difference (they won the same number of games).

In 2003, he was traded in July to the White Sox, who were below .500 at the time. They immediately went 17-9 in July and were much better in the 2nd half than in the 1st.

In 2004, he signed with the Expos, who got much worse (for many reasons).

In 2004, the White Sox traded for him again -- very significantly -- and in the big picture, Carl Everett helped them win a World Series the next year.

In Which Category Are The Mariners?, Dept.

Danny Fortson did not turn around every team he ever joined. To exploit Fortson's leadership ability, you need the right match, that being an unfocused team in search of some toughness.

The Pudge-Raffy-JuanGone-ARod Rangers weren't going to respond to ANYbody's leadership. Neither were the castaway-on-a-raft Montreal Expos. But who WOULD be a good match for Carl Everett's leadership?

I dunno. You might start with his Astro teams, or with his White Sox team.

Or if you can see him as a 3-D human being for one second, with both strengths AND weaknesses, it might occur to you that the 2005 Mariners needed PRECISELY the kind of Lou Piniella injection that you can find in Carl Everett.

Hit 'Em Here, Dept.

Everett hit 23 homers last year, and I count 7 more of his Chicago doubles that were out of Safeco. He will hit big homers in Safeco and he will yell at his teammates to get their heads in the cotton-pickin' game.

He does not add runs compared to a Winn or a Jones -- he's a sideways move offensively --

But he adds some Fortson. The runs will have to come from someplace else.

Like, maybe from the other 24 guys when Everett marches up and down the dugout all year. LOL.

Cheers,

Jeff

Second fiddle

2005-12-17T10:05:00.000-08:00

Washburn is one of the oldest guitar makers in America, but the Fender Strat's, Gibson Les Paul 's, and Rickenbacker's are build elsewhere.
Apparently, the M's got tired of playing second fiddle and air guitar in the free agent market and got their own real one, a Washburn model named "Jarrod". The price is steep and they intend to play with it for 4 years. It maybe a solid guitar with a great, soft sound but it surely isn't the Riffmaster we all hoped for. Joe Satriani would have spent the money elsewhere.
I don't know if Washburn owns a Washburn or if he knows how to play at all. He is a good pitcher, with the 4th best ERA in the AL last year. He is very familiar with the AL West and Safeco. But he won more than 11 games only once in his career which got him a ring. He is not the ace everyone was hoping for. He is not the second part of the 1-2 punch (with Felix) at the top of our rotation.
Steve Kelly from the Times puts him nicely in perspective (title link). I believe it takes more than a Washburn to get back near the top of the Billboard charts, not to mention a number one hit.

back in the doghouse temporarily

2005-12-15T08:09:00.000-08:00

our new home at http://detectovision.com starts off like Tom Hanks' "Money Pit". After the staircase broke down, getting stuck in a hole in the floor and a collapsed scaffolding while covered in white paint, I had to call in the contractors. The good news is it will take up only 48 hours max. to repair.
Until then, we moved back temporarily to our old and cozy little doghouse. Comments are turned on, so fire away.

Edit to add: I forgot to mention the episode with the fountain in the garden....

Inka

Lukewarm Stove

2005-12-13T06:17:00.000-08:00

The winter meetings are over and it seems that most GM's and player agents are using the opportunity to get their Christmas shopping done. The hot stove has cooled down to a modest lukewarm, even the rumor mill is grinding as slow as my grandma's. The good doc picked the right time for his vacation on Richard Branson's private island, leaving us behind with not much to report. Perhaps he will bring us a few leftover boxes of Veuve Clicquot's finest, coinciding with the M's signing of Millwood. One can only hope.

Rumor has it, Jarrod Washburn received a 4/40 offer from the Nats. To put it in one perspective, it would match Pavano's contract numbers from last year who at the time was considered as the third best pitcher on the FA list after Clemens and Pedro. A list in 2004 that included Matt Clement, Odalis Perez, Jaret Wright, Brad Radke, Russ Ortiz, Matt Morris, Eric Milton, Jon Lieber, David Wells, Derek Lowe, Kevin Millwood, Esteban Loaiza, Orlando Hernandez, Paul Wilson, Paul Byrd and Steve Kline. Many of those pitchers ended up as a complete bust. The guys in italics, who decided to sign one year deals are looking like geniuses today, if you compare it to Pedro's contract, a 4 year/$53 mil deal. What a difference a year makes!

Another rumor says that the Red Sox and Mariners are talking about a deal that would involve Matt Clement and Jeremy Reed, if Damon goes elsewhere. Perhaps Ichiro is headed for centerfield after all 'til Adam Jones is ready?? Who knows....

Oh, what's up?

2005-12-09T23:15:00.000-08:00

I take that last post as an invite to run around naked... so to speak... anyway, here goes.

The WBC Japan Team roster was announced yesterday. If you haven't seen it yet, here it is -- 29 and counting on Hideki Matsui to make it 30. As soon as Hideki meets with whatever astrologist he needs to consult, or whatever....

Pitchers:
Naoyuki Shimizu, CLM
Shunsuke Watanabe, CLM
Hiroyuki Kobayashi, CLM
Tsuyoshi Wada, FSH
Toshiya Sugiuchi, FSH
Daisuke Matsuzaka, SL
Koji Uehara, YG
Hiroki Kuroda, HC
Soichi Fujita, CLM
Yasuhiko Yabuta, CLM
Kyuji Fujikawa, HT
Hirotoshi Ishii, YS
Akinori Otsuka, San Diego Padres

Catchers:
Tomoya Satozaki, CLM
Motonobu Tanishige, CD
Shinnosuke Abe, YG

Infielders:
Tsuyoshi Nishioka, CLM
Toshiaki Imae, CLM
Nobuhiko Matsunaka, FSH
Munenori Kawasaki, FSH
Michihiro Ogasawara, NHF
Akinori Iwamura, YS
Takahiro Arai, HC
Tadahito Iguchi, Chicago White Sox

Outfielders:
Kazuhiro Wada, SL
Tatsuhiko Kinjo, YBS
Hitoshi Tamura, YBS
Norichika Aoki, YS
Ichiro Suzuki, Seattle Mariners

Just one question: What's with the "BayStars dominated outfield"?

Tatsuhiko Kinjo (.324/.361/.439 - 12HR, 87RBI)
Hitoshi Tamura (.304/.369/.578 - 31HR, 79RBI)

Oh-kantoku says:

''The players on this roster were chosen on the basis of their performances this past season,'' Oh said. ''And I also picked players who help us play the Japanese style of baseball -- like (submarine right-hander) Shunsuke Watanabe, whose pitching mechanics are not familiar to our opponents.''

Weren't these guys sitting at the front of the class (based on their performances this past season), waving their hands, shouting "Oh, oh, pick me!"?

Kosuke Fukudome (.328/.430/.590 - 28HR, 102RBI)
Tomoaki Kanemoto (.327/.429/.615 - 40HR, 125RBI)

Maybe they had respectfully declined an invitation. I don't remember hearing about it.

Anyway, I never meant to write a "snubs piece" -- they're cliche... you know, all those "All-Star Snubs" articles that come out after the votes are in.

Chiba Lotte Marines players make up nearly 1/3 of the team (eight of 29, so far), this may be Oh's way of getting rid of the competition in the Pacific League.

Nah, I'm just playing.

Anyway, no Toyoda. No Miura, nor teammate Kadokura, etc, etc....

So, what?

Here's a projected lineup for a game one, say:

1 RF Ichiro (Seattle Mariners)
2 2B Iguchi (Chicago White Sox)
3 DH Matsunaka (Fukuoka Softbank Hawks)
4 CF Matsui (New York Yankees)
5 LF Wada (Seibu Lions)
6 1B Ogasawara (Nippon Ham Fighters)
7 3B Iwamura (Yakult Swallows)
8 C Tanishige (Chunichi Dragons)
9 SS Nishioka (Chiba Lotte Marines)
SP Watanabe (Chiba Lotte Marines)

Should be fun to watch all the same.

Edit to add:

For those interested, please click away:

mb7.scout.com/fbaseballfrm42

Sorted by PA for now. Differences among leagues the major caveat.

K:BB ratios 2005
Player               PA   K:BB
Ichiro Suzuki       739  66:48
Tomoaki Kanemoto    662  86:98
Norichika Aoki      649 113:37
Tatsuhiko Kinjo     642  63:32
Akinori Iwamura     618 146:63
Kosuke Fukudome     612 128:93
Takahiro Arai       587 126:37
Tadahito Iguchi     581 114:47
Michihiro Ogasawara 580 114:61
Nobuhiko Matsunaka  575  85:76
Kazuhiro Wada       542  66:60
Toshiaki Imae       509  62:22
Hitoshi Tamura      499 108:43
Tsuyoshi Nishioka   493  51:31
Munenori Kawasaki   458  52:26

Out To Lunch

2005-12-09T21:56:00.000-08:00

.
Hold The Applause Dept.

.
Dr D and all the mini-Dr D's be gone for a spell ...

Jammin' with the volume up to 11:

Inka-Wolfy on the electric HTML keyboard and the Daily News synthesizer

Dr Naka grindin' lead NPB axe with garstar duelin' along

Silentpadna holdin' down the bottom end on his Ditto-Bass

Mikey Jay blowin' sax on the occasional Aubrey Huff POTD

And the usual gang of suspects ...

If it's too much of a SCUD for SportSpot, I guess you can fire from this Turkish airbase ;-) but Inka-Wolfy will cheerfully nuke anything that displeases him and gets a salary bonus for each comment snuffed ... rumor has it that Inka-Wolfy has an even hotter carburetor in mind for D-O-V.

Keep da faith,
Dr D

mini-POTD: Marcos Carvajal

2005-12-09T17:32:00.000-08:00

.
g-moneyball on Luis Gonzalez
The second player in the Torrealba deal is a 6' lefty reported to have a 90-92 fastball, average slider and change. He made the AA All-Star team in 2005.

Catch g-money at World's Greatest Sports Chat

*can't stop laughing*

Man do we just keep piling on the Rockies.

Luis is another Dodgers boy - much like Carvajal was before last year. Bavasi is stealing every interesting piece he can from his old team because the Dodgers may not know what they have in the system as well as Billy probably does, as he used to oversee their farm system.

Luis is about to turn 23 and just reached the highest level of the minors. In AA last year before the All-Star Break (yes, he made the All-Star Game) he was 6-1 with a 1.91 ERA. He pretty much kept his team's bullpen afloat single-handedly.

He's wild as all get-out and his Ks fluctuate all over the place, but he's got a ton of potential and is one of those guys you call "a gamer." The Dodgers have too much talent on that team to protect everybody, so the Rox drafted this guy for us and then traded him to us.

If he works out, fine, if not we can send him back to the Rockies or Dodgers. The Twins drafted Ryan Rowland-Smith from us in last year's Rule 5 but sent him back in ST when it wasn't working out.

This is us taking an absolute steal from the Rox in Carvajal and then being completely greedy and taking a no-risk flier on a talented but inconsistent minor-leaguer as a 2nd addition.
.

Um, Yeah, We Can See Why You Wanted A Sweetener With This Guy

Carvajal is 6'4", 175, super-slender with a whiplike pitcher's body, is from Felix Hernandez' home country, Venezuela, and in 2005 he became the youngest pitcher ever to appear for the Rockies -- only a year older than Felix at his own debut.

Carvajal pitched very well in the NL at 20, against good solid competition, though few people seem to have found this notable. LOL.

All reports agree that he throws a legit 92-96 with a hard slider and an effective changeup.
.

Baseball Prospectus 2005
Dominated the Sally League with very live stuff at the age of 19. He'll start the year at high-A, but he's got a long way to go, especially as he battles the injury concerns so prevalent with precocious arms (they mean, just generally with young flamethrowers - DrD). He throws hard, which is why the Brewers picked him up in the Rule V Draft, and sold him to the Rockies. So you might well get a chance to see him doing mop-up duties at Coors Field (at 20 - DrD). And with the Rockies, that could be 350 innings of work.

Dr. D on the 2005 Translated Stats
At the age of 20, Carvajal's Rockie performance -- his MAJOR league peripherals -- were, translated:

8.3 k
3.0 bb
1.0 hr

If Carvajal did that for 200 innings as a starter, he would be one of the ten best pitchers in the league, of course. ...He did it for 53 innings in relief, with the Rockies, which is still a closer-worthy season, if you normalize it.

Wow. Twenty years old. Who is this guy?
.

John Erhardt, August 2005
Free pitchers are good. Free pitchers who rank fourth on your team in VORP are even better. Marcos Carvajal came from the Dodgers (via the Brewers) in last winter's Rule V draft (yes, Erhardt put in Rule V inadvertently, so feel free to charge him with "not knowing what he's talking about" - DrD).

Scouting reports weren't terribly optimistic about him, as he'd thrown just 3 innings higher than low-A ball before this season. (Say WHAT?! At 19 he's behind the curve if he isn't in AA?!- Dr D)

He's made the jump nicely:
Stat Total Team Rank
IP 46.3 8th highest
H/9 8.74 5th best
BB/9 3.50 7th lowest
K/9 6.99 8th highest
HR/9 .97 8th lowest
VORP 6.0 4th highest
BABIP .301 6th best

It's also worth noting that he has odd reverse-Coors splits, as his home ERA is 2.86 (28.1 IP), while his road ERA is 7.00 (18 IP). (When you're dealing with such small samples of relief usage, a few extra hits allowed on the road can have giant ramifications, so this isn't as meaningful as we'd like.) (Um, yeah - DrD)

(Erhardt goes on to note that Carvajal faced hitters who were 17 OPS points below average -- that is to say, for all intents and purposes, average NL hitters - Dr D)
.

Rockies Blog
The Barmes blog took it as a matter of course that Carvajal, at 20, was the Rockies' best relief pitcher.

Carvajal began his pro career as a starter, as does nearly every major league pitching prospect, but was moved into the pen by his second full year in the minors. In any case, he pitched well throughout, compiling a career 2.10 ERA and averaging just a tick above a strikeout an inning. The Rockies essentially paid the Brewers to take him in the Rule 5 draft back in December '04 (because Colorado wanted LA's Matt Merricks as well).

Carvajal made his name in the minors predominantly with a high-nineties fastball, but as BA notes he now has a complementary slurve (demonstrated yesterday to great effect against J.D. Drew).

Sickels, a notoriously tough grader, merits him a B-, and says with refinements to his command Marcos "has a good chance to emerge as a dominating power reliever." The Prospectus is less bullish, stating Carvajal has "a long way to go," and projects him for mopup duty in Colorado, obviously not taking into account the quality (or lack thereof) of his mates in the Rockies bullpen.

The obvious caveat to all of the nice things the prospect books say about Marcos Carvajal is the possibility of injury. He is, after all, only twenty, and as much as the temptation may be for Clint Hurdle to use his best bullpen weapon as much as possible, great caution must be taken, especially considering the adjustment to altitude. The Rockies aren't going to have much need for a dominant setup man this year anyway.

In my estimation the best thing to do with Carvajal is pitch him in two- or three-inning stints every few days, regularly as possible, and avoid back-to-back appearances especially at Coors.

The Rockies can't send him down to the SkySox for seasoning (as a Rule 5 pick, Marcos has to stay with the big league club or else be offered back to the Dodgers, who would almost certainly want him), so great care must be taken to avoid those psyche-damaging Coors innings that send the ERA rocketing and the confidence plunging.

Carvajal can do what Dan O'Dowd wants out of his pitchers these days: change speeds.

His fastball pushes 100 and his slurve is nearly 20 MPH slower. If he can keep throwing both pitches for strikes, he'll be a major contributor down the line. Now only if they had two or three more righties and a lefty or two like him.

BP, March 2005
... With only three innings on his resume above Low-A, Carvajal is not a known quantity, but he’s struck out a batter an inning so far in his professional career and is plenty young to have completed a successful first year in full-season ball.

He’s got three viable pitches and his fastball is in the mid-90s; in fact, he’s only in the bullpen because scouts don’t think his frame can handle a starting workload. He also throws ground balls at an above-average rate, making him a possibility when the game calls for a double play. Besides their closer, the Rockies don’t have a right-hander who can induce a ground ball, which is of paramount importance at altitude.

Getting Carvajal essentially for nothing (just the $50,000 drafting price plus the $25,000 they paid to the Brewers, who first picked him) and letting him stay on the roster during a meaningless year is a low-risk, high-upside move.

Something notable about Carvajal: his BABIP (batting average against on balls in play) was a scant .250 last year, so some regression to the mean is to be expected there. PECOTA expects an equivalent ERA just shy of 5.00, which will look lousy in Coors Field, but Carvajal, especially since he will be used in low-pressure situations, could come out of 2005 looking like one of the better pitchers on the staff. (These amigos continue to find it unremarkable that a kid register as a quality MLB pitcher at 20 - DrD)

He walks a few batters, though – 85 in 184 professional innings to date...

Would assume that there's no way the Rockies would cough up this amigo for Yorvit Torrealba. But, hey, maybe they figgered "he was just $75,000 to us." We can dream.

Enjoy,
Dr D

Texas Two-Steps Dept.

2005-12-09T17:11:00.000-08:00

.
Here 'n There

1) It turns out that the take on A.J. Burnett was spot on. Burnett wanted St. Louis badly, but the Cards dug in on the 5th year, and blew the deal. So, Toronto has the "Be Afraid" rotation for October.

It doesn't matter who signs who, whether the Tigers step in front of a Kenny Rogers bus and get pancaked, or who's left to bid. It is 5 years for Millwood for find a different SP, amigos.

Y'understand, Boras takes these trophy contracts back to the next crop of FA's and says, "look, I got Millwood 5 years."
.

2) The Seattle Mariners did call on Barry Zito, but Beane wants an MLB-ready starter (at least Carvajal-level, ahem), a serious bat in Austin Kearns territory, plus a Grade A prospect. Nada.
.

3) The Red Sox would trade Manny Ramirez and they would pick up about $3m of his annual salary if they got back a real nice package right now. But the Red Sox are assuming a sensible deal won't happen, and are trying to mend fences with him. It's all too rich for the Mariners' blood, who haven't been whispered on it, and besides, the M's need a lefty like Carl Everett, right? :-)
.

4) Yes, the Marlins did ask for Reed, Lopez, and a blue-chip arm for Juan Pierre. Most MLB GM's perceive Pierre as a minor star. He is neither the piece of crud that semi-saber 'net rats think he is, nor an All-Star candidate, but he is a useful player. ...Anyway, his perceived value around baseball is well in excess of Jeremy Reed. ...along these lines, DG notes that the M's also asked about Brady Clark to coil the spring on a Reed-eject button.
.

5) Not sure why we didn't pay more attention to Bavasi's wink that he is into a ton of "IF/THEN" scenarios "that could blow a hole in our lineup" and that are bigtime deals. Beltre, Reed, and Lopez are the amigos who could be traded in blockbusters.

Seriously - show a little more faith in Bavasi. :-) He wants impact players worse than you do.

Don't run screaming into the night every time you hear a rumor about a lukewarm player. Billy will git 'r done. You heard it here first. LOL.
.

6) Carl Everett could easily be an IF/THEN -- brought in to free Raul Ibanez up ... Ibanez-for-Kris Benson has been discussed (Dr. D passes). ... we'll just guess, you might try to work a multiplayer around Matt Clement *if* Millwood fell through.

Everett is a league-average hitter, but with that megatalent upside and he is a pull hitter in Safeco. .... If everything broke right he could go .280/.350/.500 with 28 dings and 100 RBI in Safeco, and because he's suited to the park, could (feasibly, now, not probably) be an impact bat. .

7) Milton Bradley is an impact CF if you powerflush Reed. Are you kidding? At 28 he has already slugged .500, twice, and is a plus CF and switch-hitter. Bradley would be a genuinely exciting get.

The M's don't want to, um, play games with Milton Bradley -- but they do want to dance with Carl Everett? The Oakland A's do want Bradley's issues -- they're chasing him right now. How come they can pull off stuff we can't?
.

8) Miguel Tejada is not a serious candidate for Seattle because he likes the East Coast now and because even Bill Bavasi doesn't have the ... um, chutzpah to throw a mistake back in Lincoln's face. But supposedly Florida would deal Miguel Cabrera. Any four guys except Felix, amigos.
.

9) Orlando Hudson is the quintessential Mariner second baseman if Jose Lopez is the key to another deal .... league-average bat, terrific defense. Asdrubal Cabrera would be ripe on the vine, just as Hudson was coming into big paydays.
.

10) Not only the M's, but Mikey Jay and the saber-master Red Sox are hot on Aubrey Huff, who does figure to bounce back. DRays fans can't figure out what the problem was with him. BALCO worries? Nada. Huff is the biggest amigo this side of Dunn and Sexson.

But there is no way in Lou Piniella's wildest dreams that the DRays were ever going to take Meche or Pineiro as the key to such a deal.

On the other hand, if Torrealba for Carvajal, why not Gil Meche for a 3 hitter?

Cheers,
Dr D

mini-POTD: Carl Everett

2005-12-09T13:17:00.000-08:00

.
As a ballplayer, I don't especially want Everett. But that's not to say that he might not help the Mariners. He certainly helped the White Sox in 2005.

1) Carl Everett's scatter chart implies that he could be the best LH home run hitter the Mariners have had in Safeco. There are many, many doubles he hits in other parks that could go out of Safeco.

Seriously -- Everett is very well-suited to the Safeco ballpark. He becomes the first hitter that really attempts to hit left-handed homers there.

2) Everett has been only league-average the last two years, and yes, he could decline, but he also has upside.

He is a mega-talent compared to Raul Ibanez, has more talent in his little finger than the hard-working and admirable Ibanez ever had. The cold, hard fact is, that Everett could draw on that talent to rebound after 30, like Nomar could, and like Griffey just did.

Everett has been injured and he could perform better in 2006 than he did in 2005. If the stars align and the moon is full, Everett could have a 2006 season in which he is a real impact player.

Of course, he could also decline. But then, he's cheap. The risk/reward is good here, amigo.

3) In any case, Everett is likely to have the #2 HR and #2 RBI total for the 2006 Mariners. 27 HR and 90 RBI is not at all unreasonable to hope for -- and in Safeco that's worth 35-100 someplace else.

4) Between Sexson and Beltre, he does in fact give Hargrove what Hargrove wants - a lefty hitter with pop that opposing managers respect.

5) Everett plays the outfield better than given credit for (about average). In 2003, he filled in, in CF, and since then his stats at the corners have been middling.

6) Everett comes very cheap and on a very short contract. If you obsess over risk/reward, you like Carl Everett for 1/$4m better than you like Brian Giles for 3/$36m.

7) Everett frees the Mariners up to trade Raul Ibanez.
.

Again, I don't want Everett. But let's not overlook the things that the Mariners see.

Especially if he is the 2nd bat in, let's say Ibanez traded, a Jenkins type in, and Jenkins-Everett-Johjima the offseason upgrade, then yes, Carl Everett could help the Mariners.

Enjoy,
Jeff

Carl Everett's "Child Abuse" :-P

2005-12-09T12:36:00.000-08:00

.
Procedures and Documentation Dept.
Well, that's progress: http://ussmariner.com/?p=3179

Much better than the last time around, we'll cheerfully concede. We've gone from "unjust" to simply "biased." I'll take it.

The bias does warp DMZ's assessment of Everett, because the obvious point is to reinforce the earlier implications that Everett's issues are absolutely unacceptable -- if not probably into that "sociopath" territory implied last week.

================

(1) As to Carl Everett's "scary temper" -- which is the sum and total of DMZ's "history of incidents," aside from the one "child abuse" case -- I suspect that IS a perfectly fair way to characterize it (as Larry Dierker, not DMZ, did).

I suspect that is also a perfectly fair way to characterize Randy Johnson, and Milton Bradley, and Ted Williams for sure, and Juan Marichal, and Albert Belle, and Rob Dibble, and 20% of the players in the NBA, and 50% of the players in the NFL, and a lot of soccer players, and many of our wives. :-)

Danny Fortson has a scary temper. His team manages that temper -- frequently giving him penalties for incidents -- and trying to nurture him into team play.

I am all for this. I think that in an era when Boeing will pay for your AA counseling to rehab you back into an effective worker, that there is a place for "maintaining" a player like Fortson.

Judging by the cheering that Danny Fortson receives from Sonic fans, Dr. D is hardly alone in his feelings about Fortson types.

================

(2) As to the "child abuse" -- okay, you are a fair man who is about to sit on a jury and listen to the Carl and Linda Everett case.

Here's how much you know: the child care worker found "bruises and welts" on the daughter (the accusers' choice of terms).

Apparently a Mets worker or two agreed that the marks were scary. Individuals who do not believe in spanking, such as many King County schoolteachers, are going to call any mark "scary" and immediately contact CPS upon finding any mark on a child. That is because they are aghast at the concept of spanking itself.

Because you're knowledgeable -- in foster care or whatever -- you understand that a CPS worker (and a judge in New York or King County) might (and often does) refer to spanking itself as "excessive corporal punishment" -- although they must have something such as a mark to say so, because the law expressly permits spanking per se.

Because you have worked with many such counselors, as Dr. D has, you are aware that the Kindergarten Care employee who may be, and usually is, a super-prissy bureaucrat who does not believe in spanking, and/or a 17-year-old with no children of her own.

If the marks on the daughter's face and neck could fairly be categorized as "welts and bruises" -- the court did not establish that -- these could easily result from, for example, grabbing the child by the neck while talking to her (which was the favored "pay attention" device for 1950's and 1960's school principals, for example -- take a child by the trapezius muscle to get them to listen).

I'm not saying that Carl Everett did not abuse his daughter. I'm saying that I have no idea whether he (actually his wife) did, or not. The details reported in this case, including the court's finding, are consistent with non-abusive homes as well as abusive homes.

If you ever paddle your child, leave a mark, and a schoolteacher finds it, you are in for one hellacious nightmare. The bureaucrats in the system, and many times the judges, have no interest in being fair.

Carl Everett's wife, presumably, spanked their daughter with a belt, grabbed the daughter by the neck while lecturing her, and probably slapped their daughter across the face. I don't recommend any of those three things. But neither do I think the child would be happier if her parents suddenly disappeared from the face of the earth.

I received all of those three things, when I was a child. I still would not have wanted a prissy 97-pound bureaucrat showing up at my home, grabbing me by my wrist, pulling me out of the house with a satisfied smirk, and putting me in the back of a car -- turning me into, effectively, an orphan.

My mom loved me, and had a temper, and she'd slap me or take the belt to me, like any farmer would his own kid before we learned that children should never be punished. But we were a close family.

Maybe Linda Everett stepped over the line with the slaps and spanking and maybe she didn't. But I'm not going to imply that Carl Everett is a monster because I found out that his wife slapped and spanked his daughter.
.
==============

(3) Everett is well-liked in clubhouses, not feared and abhorred. In real MLB locker rooms, they understand that the testosterone is high. They don't swoon away and suffer the vapors over a shoving match, like they would at the P-I news building, or in DMZ's world.

Carl Everett does have a hair trigger, like Danny Fortson and Ted Williams and a bunch of other guys. If he's on my team, he gets penalized for "incidents," and if he steps over the line, he's gone. That's all.

Make up your own mind on Everett. But as to the switch from blue-labeling last week, to the fact-based discussion we're having now .... I applaud it.

Dec 06 - FAIR and synonyms:

... free from favoritism, self-interest, or preference in judgment.

Fair is the most general: a fair referee; a fair deal.

Just stresses conformity with what is legally or ethically right or proper: "a just and lasting peace" (Abraham Lincoln).

Equitable implies justice dictated by reason, conscience, and a natural sense of what is fair: an equitable distribution of gifts among the children.

Impartial emphasizes lack of favoritism: "the cold neutrality of an impartial judge" (Edmund Burke).

Unprejudiced means without preconceived opinions or judgments: an unprejudiced evaluation of the proposal.

Unbiased implies absence of a preference or partiality: gave an unbiased account of her family problems.

Objective implies detachment that permits impersonal observation and judgment: an objective jury.

Dispassionate means free from or unaffected by strong emotions: a dispassionate reporter.

Looking For A Few Good Men Dept.
"Fair" implies one simple thing -- that you calmly apply the SAME standards whether you are judging FRIEND or FOE.

Very few people do this. Very few people apply exactly the same standards of judgment to Bill Clinton and to George W. Bush -- we bend the interpretations in favor of people we like, and we warp judgment against people we hate. This is the definition of "unfair," and of "unjust," "biased," "prejudiced," etc.

PC Seattle loathes Carl Everett. ...but let's just pretend for a second that we were going to judge Everett ... well, FAIRLY.

What would we come up with?

Child Abuse? NADA
So what did Carl Everett do to his 6-year-old daughter?

Did he lock her in a closet for a day? Did he make her walk across live wires? Did he pour scalding water on her? (All actual CPS investigations.)

No. His WIFE (LINDA Everett) spanked their daughter with a belt. For that, the government took his children away.

Look, my parents spanked me with a belt, and often, and they did it in love. Yes, sometimes it left a mark for a few days. The true abuse would have been if a CPS worker had grabbed my wrist and pulled me away from the dinner table because the CPS worker didn't believe in spanking.

This is PC Seattle, so most people believe that spanking is wrong (and that horrific little 3-year-old brats are the norm). But leaving that debate aside: let's be clear that spanking with a belt is something that many, many Americans have believed in and still believe in.

If you consider spanking to be child abuse, power to you, but let's be clear that we're not talking about whips and chains here. In fact, we're not even talking about Carl Everett spanking his daughter; we're talking about his wife spanking his daugher -- and Everett losing his kids because of it.

Libel Dept.

It's a word that gets tossed around too much, but in this case it genuinely applies.

You're going to insinuate that CARL Everett did something sinister to his daughter, but you're going to vaguely leave it at that?

So what did he do, take a power drill to her, like Saddam Hussein would? You'll just leave it to our imaginations?

If you are going to insinuate that a man tortured a 6-year-old girl, then it is your responsibility to reasonably document your accusation against the man you just smeared.

What the news reports say, that I have read, is that LINDA Everett was charged with "excessive corporal punishment" (spanking with a belt) and that Carl Everett "failed to stop her." And from what I can tell, Linda Everett was cleared of the charge, albeit with an agreement that she and Carl would attend "counseling".

You have more than that on Carl Everett? What, precisely, has been proven against Carl Everett? Could we be specific here?

Demonstrate that Everett did something horrible to a 6-year-old girl ..., or stop with the vague insinuations that Carl Everett is a monster.

Let's Throw Hands Dept.
Everett has been in his share of flareups on the MLB field and in the locker-rooms.

Hey, when I was 25, I got into scuffles about every 5th time I played basketball. I'm going to turn around and say that Carl Everett is a worthless human being?

Are you fair? Do you apply this same standard to an NFL or NHL player who gets into one shoving match a year?

Everett shouldn't be getting into fights. But me personally, I put Everett's temper into perspective. I had a temper too, on the sports field. It didn't make me a waste of a human being.

My response to Everett's shoving matches is this: If you brawl, you are going to get serious penalties. If you act outside the rules, you are going to receive the same punishment that anybody else would.

Hargrove managed Belle and Manny in Cleveland and you get a fresh start with us. Let's make the most of it.

That is a little different from saying, "Carl Everett is a lunatic." He is not.

On The Field
Everett these days is a league-average hitter, with power and upside, who can help you against RHP.

As a DH? Nada. As a role player, a #10 hitter? He'd probably win the Mariners a division.

Who WON In 2005, Anyway?
Bobby Jenks had been blue-labeled and jeered at as a lost cause. Carl Everett was notorious. A.J. Pierzynski had serious issues. Other White Sox had issues, as well. Did that hurt the White Sox on the field? ... Or did it give them grit?

I like Chuck Knox' remark about Brian Bosworth: he'd seen much, much worse.

And one or two such players are one thing, said Chuck, but whether you need 20 of them is another matter.

Everett has his issues, but I absolutely hate word-lynchings. What do you say we be a little more, well ... fair.

BABVA,
Dr D

Diamond Genius Dept.

2005-12-08T17:40:00.000-08:00

.
Rockies' fans are very pleased with the move. Most of them are achieving terminal velocity off Pike's Peak and getting clean finishes to their Rockie-rooting life cycles. Video in the 2nd half of the post.

.
With a re-direct to Inside the Park (link in title bar), we dig what Jason Churchill has to say on Senor Carvajal:

Followup Moves
What this does is allow the M's to do one of two things much easier than previously.

1) Not only non-tender Meche and Franklin, but not fret one bit if they don't land a back-end starter (we know they still need a TOR) before the season starts. Carvajal can easily slide into the 5th slot behind Felix, Jettvin WeavisWood, Moyer and Pineiro.

2) Putz, Mateo or Soriano can comfortably be traded. Maybe two of them, since Atchison can fill in for Mateo with ease.

Scout's Clipboard
What I have on Carvajal:
92-95 mph fastball, good running action. Touches 96, 97, 98 at times.

Solid command, though it does leave him at times, good feel for pitching.

Can start, despite the lack of a good third offering. Change is a work in progress but scouts like the development of the pitch.

As a reliever he has the potential to close with his slider improving every step of the way. If he sharpens his command with it, it'll be a plus pitch, at worst, by the time mid-season rolls around.

From the M's:
"We think he can do both (start and relieve) but we're not sure yet how we might use him. I think he's definitely a 25-man roster arm, so something is going to have to happen, most likely in the pen."--- M's exec at scouting/player development level

"I think he might turn out to be a lot like Rafael (Soriano). He's very easy with that one (fastball) and our guys had good reports on his slider as an out pitch. From that, I'd like to see him start until he shows he can't. But he can help us right away in the bullpen and that's probably where he'll be this upcoming season."--- M's scout
.

Dr. D Kibitzing Dept.
"Easy 92-95 fastball touching 97-98 with good running action" is indeed how you'd have described Rafael Soriano pre-surgery. It's also consistent with the Rockies blog that had him "pushing 100 with a slurve 15 mph slower."

Super-dee-dooper keen that the M's aren't ruling out Carvajal for the rotation.

And, agreed 100% that the move is a Knight centralization in chess. ...Most amigos had not really taken proper note of Bavasi's quote yesterday that "one trade triggers another triggers another."

That applies most to CF, 3B, and 2B. ...but the M's were also unduly scared of trading Julio Mateo, who seems to have turned into a Willy Wonka Golden Ticket this offseason. :-)
.

Now to the Lemming Action Dept.
Getta load of their reaction to losing Carvajal: Please blow our heads off, somebody

Roxpert: If so, this is just plain stupid. We trade for a younger, better version of Ardoin, and give up one of the best young pitchers we've ever had. Watch Carvajal explode as a pitcher in Safeco, a great pitchers park, within a couple years. Horrible, horrible trade if true.

So we ... give up one of the best kids who has ever pitched for us ... if that's not "outdumbing" yourself, I don't know what is.

Rankal: I wonder if other organizations sit there and laugh at our off-season moves. I mean, we just picked up the catcher off waivers a month ago (Miguel Ojeda I believe) and we released him.

Now we have Torrealba, who is OK at best, and give up a great possible phenom in a pitcher for it. Stupid, stupid, STUPID. The Rockies seriously deserve to lose.

Fuentes40: .... O'Dowd. What could have possibly been going through his head? What was he thinking? Is he insane?I think this has the potential to be one of the worst trades in Rockies history.

GoldGlove1776: This move makes me sick to my stomach. I liked the King deal, but to follow it up with some [slop] like this? O'Dowd and co. are a [...] joke. This team is going nowhere with these complete buffoons at the helm. Unbelievable.

It's getting a li'l heavy for me Padna, but ... LOL.
Dr D

Jason Bourgeois, Rule V Pick

2005-12-08T15:15:00.000-08:00

.
Amusingly, thebaseballcube.com has him playing for three weeks in the PCL at 14 years of age, and then taking four years off (after getting busted for his age, we assume).

...it's fun to visualize a junior high schooler getting on base against fring major leaguers ... hey, Jason put the ball in play in 17-of-23 atbats :-) 086 OPS

The experience scarred him, because he never regained his upper-deck power after the age of 14.

D-O-V is fortunately not familiar with Bourgeois, and looking at his performance record, we can confidently say "see ya next decade."

Run-scorer with zero power and poor eye ratio for a slap hitter (57 k, 31 bb last year was typical). Offensively he would be a run-scorer ... but scored only 33 runs in 119 games last year.

Repeated AA in 2004, and posted a 645 OPS when he did.

I'm sure the M's tools scouts see him as a Wilson Valdez type, which is who you would have to ask (the tools scouts, that is, not Wilson). He definitely ain't a sabermetric pick.

No harm no foul. Orgs sometimes feel they need position thickener, kinda like suet in chili. The org has logistical worries that we fans don't. :-)

Cheers,
Dr D

BobbyDon's Info-Miracle

2005-12-08T13:39:00.000-08:00

While USSM was predicting a Rule 5-eligible, and D-O-V was assuming a Grade C prospect, Bill Bavasi was scoring .... the next best thing to Felix Hernandez?! ... ??? For Yorvit Torrealba?!

I hadda laugh last night, because Bobby Don was being thrashed in the wee hours of the morning for posting something so feebleminded as Carvajal-for-Torrealba...

Without even looking, we can tell ya that the ensuing posts will have been swept up by the midnight censor-brownies for mentioning Valdemort's name :::shudder::: but for those of us who were up, it was quite the kick :-)

.... we can hear it now: "the next best thing to Felix? Really?" ...well, whatever :-) ... go make a list of the 20-year-olds who posted 8.0 k / 3.3 bb / 1.0 hr lines last year, and who have pheenom stuff. Next best thing to Matt Cain, I guess. LOL.

Wednesday 1 am -- Did BobbyDon Score?! The Crowd Is On Its FEEET........

Seattle will receive "a good player" in the Torrealba trade, sez O'Dowd. MLB.com

If Bavasi really does score Carvajal, we owe Bobby 1,000 sPoints and Bavasi a standing O ;-)

Wednesday 3 am -- I'll take a side order of info-tainment, hold the sneer, Dept.

Greetings and salutations, "TypicalIdiotFan" as you style yourself (and who is Dr. D to talk?!) -- re, your USSM post #86 that will shortly be censored --

1) Isn't it a little over-the-top to call Bobby's deduction stupid, and then call everybody's attention to it and ask for help with it? ;-)

2) If you have to put "logic" in quotations -- to show contempt for the "hooey" -- why is it tough to understand Bobby?

Never toss a radish when your opponent is sitting next to the lemon meringue pie :-)

3) In any case, here's the free advice: Don't sneer at the (amigos you perceive as) nerds, just so the Prom King and Prom Queen will smile with you and consider you part of their group. It wasn't cool when we were 13 and it's not cool now.

(And the Prom Kings are about old enough to tell their entourage to grow up....)

4) OK then .... what Bobby noticed, is the timing of the player's name revealed -- that if a player had been a Rule 5 draftee from last year, that he could be traded beginning tomorrow morning (which is when the M's will in fact announce the player). This is the key connection that Bobby caught, along with his understanding of the rule that teams don't have to wait 365 days to trade a Rule 5 player -- they just have to wait until a few hours before the next Rule 5 draft (so they can clear space for the draft itself).

This left two possible Rockies, of which one was eliminated, the other being Carvajal. See the comments for his explanation.

No harm done. TypicalIdiotFan's post will be censored off the blog bright and early. It names He Who Must Not Be Named. ;-) .... 's OK, we'll post it in the comments here :-)

Bobby has an interesting deduction even if he's mistaken. And if he's right, he pulled off an info-miracle. In any case we have an interesting chat about the youngest Rockie.

STANDING! O! BOBBYDON!,
Dr D

Rule V Draft

2005-12-08T00:27:00.000-08:00

Q: Who are the best Rule V players this year?

A: Here is David Regan's top XX, without Regan's comments, since it's a BP insider column (if you have $39, a subscription is well worth it. That's a latte a month vs. several hours of reading a month...) .

I'm not real down with his rankings. By no means. But I'm sure Regan has studied them a lot more than I have.

Anyway, you'll have to settle for D-O-V's quick takes on them. We're hardly as good at, or as interested in, the non-M's minors as a John Sickels types. But just to give ya a scannable couple minutes with yer java :-)

You can baseballcube these amigos.

1 Kevin Howard, 2B, Cincinnati (24, AA) (BA #1)
lefty! MI who hit .400 in the AFL and who plays every position ... very lukewarm record before the AFL.

I wouldn't draft Howard even if I had the first Rule *V* pick, but what do I know...

2 Brandon Sing, 1B, Chicago Cubs (AA, 24)
Yup, here's one of those mashers without a glove ... real nice walks and power. The NL absolutely will not let the Cubs DH Sing. Sing is definitely running a couple years late. But you could call him a Grade C+. Somewhat similar to Justin Leone is his career arc.

Again, Dr. D wouldn't bother.

3 Jarred Ball, OF, Arizona (22, AA)
Excellent OBP, plays center field, steals bases, scores runs ... and he's not so behind at 22. But who needs a leadoff hitter with those kinds of K's?

Dr. D passes again.

4 Ryan Mulhern, OF, Cleveland (25, AA)
Did zero at age 23 in the low minors (coming out of college) ... then last year, hit 32 homers in 400 at-bats at A/AA (despite being hit in the face with a pitch and missing a month).

D-O-V would have possible BALCO concerns. But here is a guy I might draft, to see if he follows up on his massive 2005 power explosion.

5 David Espinosa, OF, Detroit (24 AAA)
Former 1st-round pick who failed in the infield and didn't come along quickly at the plate. It would be like trying to salvage Michael Garciaparra, kinda.

D-O-V? Nada. (Easy for me to sit and criticize ...)

6 Mitch Maier, Utility, Kansas City (BA #2)
Terrific college player, found the low minors tougher going ... seeking a Frank Catalanotto every-position career.

D-O-V gazes out the window and whistles innocently :-*

7 Jason Miller, LHP, Minnesota
A 10k/gm lefthander who walks 5+ per nine, out of the pen.

A better version of Matt Thornton. A typical high-upside Rule V pick, if you have room for him on your roster. I doubt the M's do.

8 Matt Chico, LHP, Arizona
What's he doing on here? You're going to cut a power lefty like this loose at 22? ...guess the D-Backs are loaded ...

Peripherals nowhere near as bad as his ERA's. This is the kind of amigo you would think the M's would have scruffed around for in the Torrealba trade, maybe :-)

9 Adam Boeve, OF, Pittsburgh (25, AA) We'll give you Regan here...

Why the Pirates opted to protect a guy like Yurendell DeCaster who has zero upside instead of Boeve is beyond me. Boeve is a toolsy guy who’s really put things together the last couple years. He’s got speed, once stealing 29 bases in 55 games in his last year of college. Shows solid on-base ability and is very athletic and versatile, having played catcher early in his college career. Could catch on as a 4th/5th OF.

10 John Hudgins, RHP, Texas (24, AAA)
Hudgins is the most polished pitcher in Regan's top 10. ...he had 7k, 3bb, and 1.0hr last year, but some sort of defensive Bermuda Triangle turned that into 11h and 5.87 runs per game.

He could come to somebody's camp and compete for a #5 slot, you would think.

11 Nick Pesco, RHP, Cleveland (22, AA)
Wow, great stats -- 7+ k, 2+ bb, and no homers. g-moneyball would love this guy except that Pesco is supposed to have outstanding stuff. :-)

D-O-V sez: the pick of this litter, or he would be if we knew anything about the minors.

The Rest

12 Jamie Vermilyea, RHP, Toronto (23, AAA) (Think Rich DeLucia)
13 Drew Meyer, OF, Texas (24, AAA) (Utterly failed 1st-round pick)
14 Bob Zimmermann, RHP, LA Angels (24, AA) (Finally, an Angels overflow - GRAB 'IM)
15 Rafael Rodriguez, RHP, LA Angels (21, A) (BA's #5, "most electric stuff in draft")
16 Chris Cooper, LHP, Cleveland (27, AAA) (Fringe LOOGY could pitch in bigs)
17 Brian Barden, 3B, Arizona (24, AAA) (Fringe MLB corner infielder with good glove; Leone type)
18 Bill Murphy, LHP, Arizona (24, AAA)
19 Billy Sadler, RHP, San Francisco (24, AA) (Bobby Jenks-type project) (BA #7)
20 Glenn Tucker, RHP, Atlanta (24, AAA)

Regan's comment on Tucker:
The Braves left Tucker unprotected, but that doesn’t mean they don’t like his potential. In fact, they plan on giving him a shot at a bullpen job this spring should he stay in the organization. Sent to the AFL to refine his command, Tucker held a host of top hitting prospects to a .230 avg and showed improved control. He’s posted a career minor league ERA of 2.71 and has yet to have any major struggles at any level. Could have a nice career as a workhorse reliever.

Also watch: Vince Sinisi, 1B, TEX; John Jaso, C, TB; Bobbie Brownlie, RHP, CHC; Tom Mastny, RHP, Cleveland;; Brooks Conrad, 2B, HOU; Jake Blalock, OF, PHI; Kevin Kouzmanoff, 3B, CLE; Charlie Morton, RHP, Atlanta; Carlos Guevara, RHP, Cincinnati; Davis Romero, LHP, Toronto; Ben Francisco, OF, CLE; Pat Misch, LHP, San Francisco; Matt Coenen, LHP, Atlanta; Brian Snyder, 3B, Oakland; Anthony Webster, OF, Texas; Jason Cooper, OF, CLE; Gregor Blanco, OF, ATL; Kevin West, OF, MIN; Charlie Zink, RHP, BOS; Dale Thayer, RHP, SD.
.

Baseball America
These players weren't on BP's list at all, even down through 40: http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/news/051202rulefive.html

3 Josh Muecke, lhp, Astros
The Astros used Muecke as a starter and a reliever over his first two seasons, but he jumped into a starting role at high Class A Salem in 2005 with varied results. A fifth-round pick in 2003, Muecke has average velocity in the 88-91 mph range with good command. His curveball showed flashes of being a plus pitch at times, and though he doesn't use his changeup enough, it was much improved from 2004. Muecke is tough and durable, but needs to learn how to consistently repeat his delivery.

4 Ricky Barrett, lhp, Twins
Barrett didn't do much to impress scouts in the AFL, going 0-3, 9.00 in 12 innings for Grand Canyon. But he's a lefty with a low 90s fastball and complements that pitch with a slurvy breaking ball and changeup that rates as average. Repeating his delivery was Barrett's biggest menace in 2005. He got hit hard at Triple-A Rochester (6.71 ERA), and that carried over to the AFL. When he commands the zone, he can be dazzling, and could fit in perfectly as a middle reliever if he can iron out the mechanical lapses.

6 Chris Cooper, lhp, Indians
Cooper has always been somewhat of a sleeper in the Indians' organization, but the 35th-round pick in 2001 has solid-average stuff and could find a role as a lefty specialist. Cooper features an 89-91 mph fastball with good movement, and mixes in a hard slurve with an above-average changeup. He struggled keeping his body under control in his delivery early in his career, but has smoothed out his mechanics since dedicating himself to a more stringent weight-training regimen.

8 Matt Wilkinson, rhp, Diamondbacks
Sure, he's 28, but Wilkinson profiles as a power bullpen arm with mid-90s velocity. The Australia native had Tommy John surgery in 2004, but came back to record 15 saves at high Class A Lancaster last season. Wilkinson complements his fastball with a late-breaking slider, though his changeup is further along at this point.

9 Jeff Ridgway, lhp, Devil Rays
Ridgway drew attention during the second half of the season when he went 2-2, 2.79 in 29 innings through July and August. That success carried over to instructional league, where Ridgway topped out at 94 mph several times. He shows better command pitching at 89-92, and also features a hard, slurvy breaking ball and a solid changeup. Ridgway has some medical baggage, however, being two years removed from elbow and shoulder injuries.

10 Lincoln Holdzkom, rhp, Marlins
Holdzkom missed all of 2004 due to Tommy John surgery, but returned this past July to make 12 appearances and finished at high Class A Jupiter. When he came back, his velocity wasn't quite what it was before the surgery when his fastball topped out at 97 on a regular basis. He should regain that velocity as his arm strength comes back. A physically imposing righthander, Holdzkom is as fiery as it gets on the mound. He still needs to refine the command of his hard-breaking curveball.

Torrealba for ... What? :-)

2005-12-07T23:49:00.000-08:00

USSM assumed that Torrealba was traded for a Rule V player, and D-O-V assumed that Yorvit was traded for a Grade C prospect, but BobbyDon deduced that Torrealba was traded for ... Marcos Carvajal?! ... We'll see...
.

Q: How good is a Rule V player?

A: Usually it's a Grade C prospect. ...bear in mind you are talking about a player who (1) is not one of an organization's top 40 commodities, and (2) is not somebody the team could trade, shuffle chairs for, or otherwise roster-accommodate ... over the past year.

Q: What is a Grade C Prospect?

A: It's one level below a Grade B prospect.

;-) Okay --

Grade A prospect: a very talented, fast-track player about whom there are no serious concerns.

It's a player who rips up high A ball at 20, or who rips up the Southern League at 21, or who smacks down in the PCL at 22. And who has no big glaring concerns, like Dallas McPherson's K rate or Bobby Livingston's lack of velocity, etc.

We remember a year or two ago, haveing a ferocious argument ;-) over whether Jose Lopez was as good a prospect as, specifically, Dallas McPherson. My dance partners insisted that McPherson's huge K rates -- and, later, his slightly non-overwhelming age-to-league results in 2004 -- meant absolutely nothing.

Sorry. A Grade A prospect is a player for whom ALL lights are green. Such as, for example, Jose Lopez.
.

Grade B prospect: a player who probably has Grade-A type talent ... but who has a serious question mark.

He's a guy who might be as talented as the Big Boys, but there's something there that makes you stop and say, "well, waitaminnit, though."

Like, McPherson's K rates (actually he was an A-/B+ prospect); Ryan Shealy not having a position maybe, or Clint Nageotte having arm problems and spotty command, or a player being a year or two late on his development.
.

Grade C prospect: a player who just does not show Grade A talent, even in patches. He's going to be a couple years behind a player like Shin-Soo Choo. And yet, a Grade C prospect has the potential to be a fringe major leaguer or even a regular if everything breaks right. He is a prospect because he has MLB potential.

Frank Catalanotto was, in his day, probably a Grade C prospect (and in fact a Rule V pick), and he fashioned a nice little MLB career. Catalanotto is the kind of career that Grade C'ers aspire to (unless they're Travis Hafner!)
.

Q: So what kind of Grade C's do you get in the Rule V?

A: You get:

(1) DH's without a position, Bucky Jacobsen types, or you get
(2) Andy Sisco-type setup relievers if you're lucky, or you get
(3) Talented SP projects (like a Matt Thornton type), or maybe you get
(4) Willie Bloomquist bench players who can definitely play in the majors, but who can't start.

Once every ten years a miracle occurs and somebody gets a Johan Santana or a George Bell. Sometimes project players pan out, of course.
.

Q: Meaning the M's got what?

A: I'll just take a wild guess :-) and say they got a power arm who doesn't know how to pitch.
.

Q: Should they have given Torrealba up for a Grade C prospect?

A: Bill Bavasi is a win-win GM. He cares about people. When he can do something good for them, he will, and he did something good for Yorvit Torrealba.

Now, bring on Piazza to back up. ;-)

Cheers,
Dr D ...........

Millwood update

2005-12-07T13:51:00.000-08:00

It will take 5/$60m
Okay, so you're married to Felix and Millwood as your 1-2 punch. Little tip: you are going to be married-- whether you give Millwood 4 years or 5.

Stop hesitating on this bride. She's the right one. In April you won't be worried about an extra million or year. Once you get to the baseball honeymoon, you'll be glad you did. We promise.

====================

1. Per a reliable listener (MacMariner), Will Carroll sez on MLB radio that the 4/$44m offer (which we didn't make, remember? said the Seattle Mariners' website) was "REJECTED" by Kevin Millwood.

2. Our take has been that Boras is deadly serious about topping Burnett's deal.

3. The term "rejected" rings true -- Boras told the M's in decisive terms that he is not going to be "nice guy" on this one. This snippet absolutely confirms our prediction that Boras would want 5 years, hard on the barrelhead -- because he knows the M's (or somebody) is smart to give it. And he wants the extra million. There's a Boras shocker, neh?

4. The M's would be wise, very wise, to comply.

5. If it's any consolation, Boras' relationship with Bavasi DOES assure that if Bavasi is first to the 5th year, then Boras will recommend it to Millwood.

Look, we preached this until we cleared the room out, on Miguel Tejada. When you find exactly the house you want, exactly the hot tub you've always dreamed of, perfect little side yard, yada yada yada, THAT IS NOT THE TIME TO CHISEL ON PRICE.

"Chiseling" is finding precisely the item you are looking for ... and then seeking a discount on it. Chisel the discounts when you're not sure if you want the item! Don't chisel when you are talking about a 150-RBI shortstop, pokey.

It isn't a million more-or-less that we are all looking back on, with then Sexson or Beltre deal. It is whether the player produces.

Kevin Millwood is precisely the starting pitcher the 2006 Seattle Mariners need, and he is a low-risk SP if there is such a thing. Stop dickering and get the job done.

We predicted, confidently, that Boras would demand 5.00 guaranteed years. We are predicting, gingerly, that Bavasi will go back to Howard Lincoln and talk some sense into him about the 5 years, and wrap this thing up.
.

Spy Hunter Dept.
Remember that awesome video game where you could fire missiles, throw down oil slicks, and hit a button on the wheel to choke all the paparazzi :-) with billowing smoke? Have the M's laid a smoke-cloud on us the last couple days, or what?

Everybody is so confused this week because the M's have started doing something that they didn't used to do (much): they've started fibbing.

The TNT has it right on Wednesday:

Team officials denied making an offer to the right-hander who led the American League in ERA. But a source familiar with the situation said an initial offer of four years and $44 million was made.

One American League executive suggested the Mariners might be looking to add as many as two pitchers.

.

Yes, Virginia, the Mariners HAVE offered Millwood 4/$44m, with indications that they would vest the 5th year and might not be opposed to doing more on the 5th season.

But the team officially denied that, and there was no formal offer over the fax, and Jayson Stark ran with that, and the internet took the team's words at face value.

Re-calibrate your baloney tuner on the Mariners. Their "posturing" now includes outright fibbing. (So far it has been team reps OTHER than Bavasi who have prevaricated.)

Remember too, that three days before Adrian Beltre signed, we weren't sure what was going on. Boras likes to take recommendations back to his clients and give them time to be sure. He'll stiff-arm teams until his client has gotten comfortable. You're not going to rush Boras unduly.

The M's are at 4/$44m on Millwood, ready to negotiate it up, and we'll see in the next couple days.

Cheers,
Dr D

14th Hottest Head In Sports History Dept.

2005-12-07T00:55:00.000-08:00

'
Okay, so Dr. D threw so many paper-airplane messages complaining about Jacque Jones, that the Mariners decided to punish the whole class. And give us Jones already ... minus the defense and classy personality.

But don't kid yourself: the Mariners are way ahead of us on this one. They have forseen many non-sabermetric advantages to an Everett signing:
'

Top 20 Things the Mariners Are Thinking On Carl Everett

20. Mariner Moose stadium infestation likely to be "taken care of" for them, after first Everett strikeout of the opening homestand

19. Might combine with Mike Piazza (C/DH) to show the Mariners an affordable +20 runs from the #10 hitter slot

18. Might combine with Mike Piazza (C/DH) to show the Mariners the most entertaining shared cab ride in history (after Piazza's "friendly" greeting - picture tasmanian devil scene from The Mask )

17. Team-store rep had great presentation, on possible blue-and-teal "UNABATTER" jersey

16. Team optimistic that Everett might have big year, then make large contribution to Pacific Science Center in M's name

15. Going easy on the offensive spending will make two-ace strategy possible (Millwood, Clement)

14. Going easy on the offensive spending will make excellent CEO report possible (Lincoln, Yamauchi)

13. Everett might save at least one blowout loss by snapping, hijacking booth and "outing" opposing players (M's bench comes back against other team's bench)

12. Exceptionally unlikely that Everett will request clause requiring M's to pay for his cryogenic freezing

11. 25 lefty HR's: $3m x 1. .... Breaking up Sexson and Beltre in lineup for Hargrove: $3m x 2. ... Witnessing press conference in which player whispers, "I SEE DEAD PEOPLE": Priceless

10. About time the reporters saw some sparkly rings around the clubhouse, already

9. On grass fields, Everett plays the OF much better than people think (about average)

8. In basebrawls, Everett goes to the body much better than people think

7. Eat a live frog first thing in the morning principle: after Everett's glowering mug shot is 'net-posted in March, Sexson's court appearances will draw little attention

6. "Easily-found $500-stash anti-burglar" strategy: after ump gives Everett the heave-ho for the evening, he'll call it a day ... can't really toss Sexson and maintain credibility

5. Team considering Ibanez-for-Clement, Everett upgrading Ibanez, and then another bat

4. Team considering Ibanez-for-Tsao and then moving to Asia

3. Daffy version of creationism will give Dr. D an excuse to haul out tired Stephen Hawking quotes on "Intelligent Design"

2. Safeco will turn a league-average, but LH pull, hitter into a park-matched, impact hitter check this out

1. Howard Lincoln was sick to the gut of listening to Dr. D whine about "easy management"

We kid because we care,
Dr D

g-moneyball on Chin-Hui Tsao

2005-12-06T18:06:00.000-08:00

SportSpot chat thread linked in title bar.

POTD on Tsao is right Here.

For info-tainment poiposes, D-O-V staples on a virtual interview after-the-fact. :-)

Q: You like the Tsao rumors?

A: Would I trade Yorvit and Mateo for Tsao? Once an independent medical crew cleared him... In. A. Heartbeat.

Best pitcher I saw in ST? Tsao.
Best pitcher I have ever seen pitch for the Sky Sox? Tsao.
Best can't-miss pitcher of the last decade who has missed so far due to injury? Kerry Wood. Well, Tsao's top two...and better than Gil ever was.

Q: So, what's he got?

A: He has a devastating slider, decent change, and can bring the heat. He throws it 90-96, though, kinda like Bartolo Colon was when he was younger - throw it when he wants it, leaves it down when he doesn't want it (cept Bartolo had a few more mph on it than that).

Good move to first, big strapping lad, but he seemed to wear down a lot late in games for the Rox which is one reason they moved him to closer. Personally? I think it was labrum issues even then. I think he was fine for 40 pitches and then his arm started to get…weird…on him, til something finally gave.

As I've said before, he’s an amazing talent camoflauged by altitude. Get the kid in a real park, get him some real instruction (something sorely lacking 'round Denver) and he could be the second-best arm on the team - again, if healthy.

Q. You da medicine man 'round here. Is the shoulder surgery a career-ender?

A: He just had a labrum tear. How lucky have we ever been with that? Mads proved you CAN come back from one to be a great pitcher, but not that you can have a sustained career with that injury. Meche proved you can come back and throw a lot of innings, but he has yet to do so successfully. So Tsao would be a rehab project.

For our backup catcher, it's not a bad deal, sort of like getting Foppert instead of some lower-risk, lower-reward player. He’s better than Foppert, too, btw.

He was throwing from 60 feet in September, is ahead of schedule in his rehab and wants to compete for a ST job. A healthy Tsao would be the best arm in the farm instantly (assuming we sent him on extended rehab).

I just can’t say if he’s healthy. He COULD be. His rotator cuff was said to be fine when they checked it out prior to fixing his labrum issue. His injury wasn't nearly as bad as the one Mads recovered from, nor even Gil's.

But you have to be concerned about a guy who has already been through TJ surgery (2001), hamstring pulls, finger blisters, shoulder issues and then labrum surgery. His track record for staying healthy ain't great. I hope his offseason conditioning regimen has become automatic now with all the rehab he’s had to do. The TJ didn’t do anything to his velocity, so that’s fine. The only real question is whether he’s gonna be somebody who can finally come back from a labrum injury and regain superstar status.

With his arm action (he has a LOT of arm velocity and could probably use more leg drive to help offset his weakened shoulder joint) there are small mechanical adjustments that could be made to make him less risky without throwing off his whole game. Taking him out of the altitude where every pitch is do-or-die could help too. Every inning up here is a stressful one.

Q. How do you see the risk/reward here? Buy low, sell high type opportunity?

A: Much like the price for Griffey was never lower before this past season, the price for Tsao is never gonna be lower than it is now short of another devastating/career-ending injury. He's a risk, but a cheap one. His salary is miniscule and the Rox asking price ain't much.

AFAIK he still has FIVE years of service time until he hits FA, so if he does turn out to be healthy he’s an absolute steal for a backup catcher and replaceable middle reliever. We're talking Johan-Santana-in-the-Rule-5 kind of steal. I don't know how you pass on that.

IF he gets a clean bill of health, I just don't see how you can let him get away.

Churchill at ITP tips us that the Rockies aren't opposed to talking about Tsao if it gets them the pieces they need (presumably Yorvit and a RP like Mateo).

Tsao sounds like he'd be a deal not to fill the #5 spot in the rotation, but to land an MLB-ready arm that might be ready at some point in 2006. We'll see.

Thanks g,
Dr D

White-Knuckle Time :-)

2005-12-06T14:02:00.000-08:00

'
Tuesday UPDATE:
Amigo at ITP says that MLBradio has Millwood possibly to the M's .. tonight? Despite the loss of the 2nd round pick? Hm...

Didn't hear MLB radio my ownself, but if true, this is the kind of smoke that usually precedes the fires of celebration :-) Post re: MLBradio

Monday: D-O-V Time Displacement Algorithm
Last fearless forecast, D-O-V (with huge assist from DG) crunched Kenji Johjima's decision a week early. A 97% confidence coefficient on that one. It seldom gets that high.

Here comes the 2nd definite forecast of the winter, this one at 80% plus confidence.

Taking our own crunch of the public-domain files, and regressing them against some key intel to be sourced later ...

1. If Millwood would take $11-12m x 4 years, 5th year VESTS at any reasonable IP threshhold ... the M's would pull the trigger 90 seconds ago.

2. If the Mariners would flat-out guarantee the 5th year, then Boras/Millwood would sign in Seattle right now (believe this one).

3. The money isn't the holdup. $11m is fine. Boras might bump, but it is not the issue.

4. It sez here, that 2010 means very little to Bavasi and to Lincoln, who are under pressure right now. Boras is well aware of this. He realizes that the M's aren't in a mood to sacrifice the 2006 chances, over an abstract risk in 2010.

5. Kevin Millwood is a good risk for 5 years, if any pitcher is a good risk for 5 years. He's the perfect age, the perfect track record, the AL card, everything. (At 5 x $11m you could just as well figure 4 x $13.5m, fifth year free....)

6. It says here that the M's will offer the 5th year, but ONLY this way: "Okay, Scott, if we WERE to go to the 5th year, would we have a deal right now?"

7. To which Boras says, "I would take that back to my client with a very strong recommendation to sign."

8. Deal done by about Friday.

The D-O-V read of the negotiations past and future is: Millwood to the M's this week, probably because the M's guarantee the 5th year. 80-85% confidence ... hey, don't knock it. That is probably more than Bavasi has right now. ;-)

We'll see,
Dr D

POTD: Chin-Hui Tsao

2005-12-06T13:11:00.000-08:00

'
Q: Whassup?

A: The M's are looking hard at their 2nd-SP in from the Rockies, because it would cost them nothing (Torrealba and, perhaps, Julio Mateo).

Mateo seems to have a ton of value; he is talked about as the key to an Aubrey Huff deal, too. Whatever, man.
.

Q: Which 2nd-SP in?

A: With a tip o' the DOV cap to our man DG ... the Rox won't cough up Cook; the M's dunno if they wanna settle for Jennings; Tsao could be da man.
.

Q: Where's g-money when you need him?

A: As D-O-V readers were instanter to point out, Tsao had labrum surgery last May. On the other hand, the M's don't seem put out by this.

There's major surgery and there's "cleanup." g-moneyball is both powerful and wise, Frodo. He'll know what to do! ... um ....

g-moneyball is da medicine man, and lives in Colorado to boot. Lessee what he has to say..

g-moneyball on Tsao

Q: How good is/was Tsao? What are his road splits like?

A: Get it out of your head!, that you can judge Jason Jennings (or any Rockie) by looking at road splits.

Look, when you give up four taters on good pitches in Coors, it's not like you can go to Milwaukee later in the week and pitch as if nothing happened. Coors electro-shocks pitchers into nibbling.

Coors just messes up pitchers, period. Tsao is another example of this -- a guy who laid a scorched-earth blitzkrieg on baseball's minor-league system, and then went to Coors and gave up 2 HR per nine.
.

Q: While we're on it, what kind of pitcher WOULD succeed in Coors?

A: No kind. Bill James answered this question by saying, "get coaches who will tell the pitchers it's okay to give up six runs a game."

The theory is, get fastball pitchers, since curves don't break. James snuffs this idea: "Hitters don't strike out on fastballs. They strike out on breaking pitches."

I would TRY straight-change pitchers with good location - Eddie Guardado, Brad Radke.

But especially, guys like Tsao (95 heater, hard-spin slider) will look bad in Coors.
.

Q: Okay, is Tsao any good?

A: Tsao is gnarly, dude.

Well, his performances have been gnarly, anyway, and he has been rated an uber-prospect by the tools scouts.

10.5 k's a game in the minors ... and only 2+ BB's. When's the last time the M's had a guy like that? Even Felix' peripherals are not quite as good as Tsao's (although he's a better pitcher, naturally).

Going into 2004, he was the Rockies' #1 prospect and projected to be an NL star. In fact, he became a philosophical discussion as to whether the Rockies could HAVE a pitching prospect (because Tsao was kind of the ultimate prospect).
.

Q: What does he throw?

A: We'll tag out to Baseball America (link in title bar). Later days amigos :-)

Top Prospect: Chin-Hui Tsao, RHP

Age: 22 Ht.: 6-2 Wt.: 175 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: Taiwan, 1999
Signed by: Tim Ireland

Background: Tsao became first Taiwanese pitcher and just the second Taiwanese player to appear in the majors when he pitched 6 1/3 innings to beat the Brewers on July 25. .... He has mastered English and has shown he has fully recovered from Tommy John surgery in 2001.

Before joining the Rockies, he made a strong impression in his half-season at Double-A Tulsa, ranking as the top prospect in the Texas League.

Strengths: Tsao has a devastating slider, though he has been limited in how he can use it since his elbow surgery. The Rockies don’t want him to overextend himself with the slider, which has given him more opportunity to refine his changeup.

He has an exploding fastball that can run up to 96 mph and usually sits in the low 90s. He can add and subtract from his heater, depending on what the situation calls for.

Just as important as his stuff, Tsao has command of the strike zone. He has averaged 10.5 strikeouts and just 2.3 walks per nine innings during his minor league career.

He is athletic and moves off the mound quickly. He also is a good baserunner, able to challenge an outfielder’s arm. Pressure isn’t an issue for Tsao. He’s carrying the hopes of an entire nation, so what’s a baseball game?

Weaknesses: Tsao’s focus came under question in Colorado. Until arriving at Coors Field he always had been so much more talented than his competition that he was able to excel with ease. In the big leagues, he’s going to have to develop game plans. He must adjust to what the advance scouts, pitching coach and catcher believe he should do instead of continually shaking off his catcher. He needs to get stronger and develop more stamina so he can carry his stuff later into games. (This is all generic scouts' "don't get ahead of ourselves" stuff - Dr. D)

Japan & the WBC

2005-12-06T01:00:00.000-08:00

NPB Dream Team, Dept.

It's fun to read Japanese fans' take on their own World Baseball Classic lineup.

Here is a typical lineup you find in the above thread (linked in title bar):

1. Ichiro Suzuki (RF)
2. Shinya Miyamoto (SS)
3. Tamura Hitoshi (CF)
4. Hideki Matsui (LF)
5. Kenji Jojima (DH)
6. Nobuhiko Matsunaka (1B)
7. Michihiro Ogasawara (3B)
8. Atsuya Furuta (C)
9. Tadahito Iguchi (2B)

SPs Uehara, Matsuzaka

NPB fans disagree about quite a few things, but they agree on a few:

1. Ichiro, Godzilla, Johjima, and Iguchi are as universal at their positions as, say, ARod and Pujols would be at ours.

2. Iguchi is often placed as the #9 hitter in the order; he's the best second baseman in a 12-team player pool, but not considered a keyston hitter.

3. The fans consistently place a third batter into the class with Ichiro and Hideki Matsui, that batter being Kenji Johjima. Notice that in the lineup above, he has the other Dream Team #4-5 RBI slot -- as a designated hitter. (Most fans' lineups have him catching and hitting 5 behind Godzilla.)

Founding Father Dept.

Among the many ways that Bill James is unique: when he researches baseball history, he is very interested in the way that a baseball player was perceived by fans, writers, and managers.

James figures that if a player was truly great ... then there would be "elephant tracks in the snow," that you could find the people of the time remarking on this greatness.

The typical modern sabermetrician would never be interested in what fans or writers thought of Dom DiMaggio; he would assume that the fans and writers of the time knew little or nothing about which players were good or bad.

James (and I) take a different view. The assumption here is that the average baseball writer, manager, and fan, had a good idea of who Johnny Bench was, and a good idea of who Dom DiMaggio was.

The average NPB fan regards Johjima as the Japanese Johnny Bench -- one of a small handful of players who, like Ichiro, Godzilla, and Matsuzaka, towered over this generation.

They've got Johjima knocking in runs behind Hideki Matsui on their Dream Team. Ain't that a kick? ;-)

Enjoy,
Dr D

mini-POTD: Russell Branyan

2005-12-05T22:13:00.000-08:00

Q: Is this what D-O-V means by "platoon bat"?

A: Russ Branyan is the BEST platoon hitter available to the M's right now, period. ...or let me put it this way: if somebody can find a LH platoon hitter in baseball, who would do more damage in Safeco Field, I'd really enjoy seeing that player. Fire away.

The Mariners playing in Safeco Field, I have no idea why they'd hesitate. ...and Branyan is willing to play part time. ...I'd probably give you Clint Nageotte for Branyan, maybe more.

Branyan is simply the ideal #10 hitter the Mariners could acquire.
.

Q: What's this about an Earl Weaver bench?

A: Some managers prefer to have four switch-hitting shortstops on the bench (well, y'know), like Desi Relaford and Mark McLemore and Willie Bloomquist all at the same time, because it makes their job easy. They are never caught in an awkward situation in the 8th.

But Earl wanted specialized tools for his bench: A great defensive OF, and a base-stealer, and a lefty masher, and a righty masher. Rather than have five swiss army knives, Earl would have a screwdriver, and a wrench, and a wirestripper.

He then made it his responsibility to match those specialty tools to the situation.

Which was one reason his teams were always over Pythag.
.

Q: Can Branyan hit, or is he kind of smoke-and-mirrors, being held out of "overexposure"?

A: There are some lefties with big swings who are plenty dangerous against curves breaking into them ... but who are duck soup for MLB lefthanders.

Branyan is a legitimate thumper, if and only if the ball is coming via 3B. He'll still strike out a lot vs RHP, but he can cope with the holes in his swing and out-guess the RHPs his share of the time.

Against LHP's, they just have too many ways to get him out, and he can't cover the plate. Against RHP's it is a different story -- Branyan can hit any given pitch provided he is looking for it. So even good righties are sweating bullets against Branyan.
.

Q: What would you expect from him?

A: Short and sweet: if you ever gave him a fulltime platoon job ... in Safeco, Branyan would hit .260 with lots of BB's (.360 OBP) and 25-30 homers in part-time play.

Back when the blog-o-sphere was recommending a platoon for LF, Tony Clark and Russell Branyan were the first couple names we recommended as being legit platoon bats.
.

Q: Most-comparable player?

A: This mighta been before your time, but the Mariners used to have a hitter exactly like the modern Branyan. That being Ken Phelps.

Platoon-Branyan is a carbon copy for Digger -- .250 with tons of walks and tons of homers.

That is a great thing, in case y'missed the point. ;-)
.

Q: Is Branyan a good match for Safeco?

A: Ricky R? Is that you?
.

Q: What about defense?

A: How would Earl Weaver answer that question?

When somebody is going to hit you 25-30 homers in 400 AB's, it is the manager's job to find a way to hide the player on defense.

For example: left field, on days when Felix Hernandez pitches (since outfielders don't matter then). Third base, against lefty lineups. You get the idea. First base now and then. Plenty of DH.

Q: What's his ideal role?

A: Second bat into the club this year. Get a legit left fielder, Jenkins or whoever. Then:

Keep Ibanez and use Branyan as your #10 bat -- 15 of Beltre's games, 10 of Sexson's games, 20 of Ibanez' games, 15 of your left fielder's games, and fill in when somebody hits the DL ..... and one AB in the late innings of every close game.

Use a lefty masher to win you games in the 8th inning. It's fun. Give it a try.

Q: Will he accept a part-time role? Can you find a platoon partner for him?

A: Branyan highest total is 217 AB's over the last five years. Despite rust and lack of use, he routinely slugs .500.

Every right-hand hitter in baseball is a platoon partner for a guy like Branyan. It's the lefty part of the platoon that takes work.

Q: What's the big deal about a #10 hitter?

A: Four words: Mark McLemore, 116 wins. #10 hitters give an offense consistency night-in, night-out. Because when the regs take a day off, your lineup doesn't fall off.

I've got no idea why the Mariners never put an Earl Weaver bat on the bench, do you?

Cheers,
Dr D

WINTER MEETINGS Crystal Ball :-)

2005-12-05T15:08:00.000-08:00

Edit to Add
M's fans swooooooooning away at $11m per season?

What did you guys expect: Byrd-Loiaza money plus 10%? BJ Ryan money minus 10%?

Get a grip. To scale, Millwood is worth $15m this offseason.
.

Kevin Millwood

The TNT gives next-to-nothing on this: That could help the Mariners, considering Boras and Bavasi have a strong working relationship, especially after Seattle signed Beltre, a Boras client, to a five-year, $64 million deal last December.

According to USSM, the Mariners "came way up" on their offer to Millwood on Monday morning, and are pressuring Boras to finish the deal.

Dr. D is an RE and F-500 horse trader from wayyyy back :-) .... so here's the D-O-V interpretation of the Millwood situation. You have two choices: (1) take it, or (2) leave it.

Either's fine by us, but it's where we're at. B'leeDAT. ;-)

=========================

1.
Boras wants to place clients with Bavasi when he can, because Bavasi is one of his best "customers." Boras wants to nurture the cash cow that is Bill Bavasi. He does not want to alienate Bavasi if he can conveniently avoid it. It would be one less "resource" for him.

2.
The Mariners had already offered Millwood a nice contract. So when we hear that the Mariners "came way up," you're talking an eyebrow-lifting offer here.

Earlier the M's offer would had to have left "bump room" to close a deal; this one will not have left "bump room." This is the M's offer in terms of PRICE -- except that there might be haggling over TERMS (such as the 5th year).

3.
Bavasi means it, and Boras knows he means it: Either this offer is good enough, right now, or we will go in another direction.

The conversations really do go down like this. "Look, Scott, we want a deal here and so do you. I can't afford to wait around and lose out on my other deals. Now we will make you a really sweet deal, but I've got to know. Does Kevin Millwood want to pitch here or are you jerking us around? Fine. Come on in and we'll make it good, but it's time to stop talking about it and make a decision."

4.
Boras will look at this and know that if he says "OK, thanks, but not right now," that the M's WILL start aggressively pursuing pitcher trades ....

And that he, Boras, has until the M's make a trade to come trotting back with Millwood.

That's not much comfort to Boras, from a negotiation standpoint. In real terms if he says "not right now," then Millwood probably won't be in Seattle.

=====================

Fearless Prediction Dept.

Flying by our instruments, not our instincts, it looks like the Mariners should be able to reach a deal with Millwood this week.

But in real estate or in F-500 or any time you're talking serious money, it is white-knuckle time until you actually sit down at the closing table.

Bavasi himself doesn't know whether he will be able to haul in this fish, but as we read this morning, he is giving the do-or-die yank on the line. :-) Stay tuned.

Cheers,
Dr D

Seattle Times Articles and Reaction of Japanese Media

2005-12-05T03:42:00.001-08:00

The reaction of Japanese media to the Times article was as I expected not so hot.
But I want just report here what was the interest. (because I had interest in it too)

1. Sponichi reports the denial of discord between Hargrove and Ichiro with Hargrove's comments: "Did we have some differences over strategy? Yes. Did we talk a number of times? Yes. That stuff happens all the time between a manager and his veteran players. But to make this out to be any kind of battle or chasm or rift, between Ichiro and me or between Ichiro and his teammates, is just not so."

2. Chuuspo reports comments from agent Attanasio:"In my 34 years as an agent, I have never heard of a player meeting with CEOs, team presidents, GMs, managers and others, 100 percent of the top people in an organization, and having such an open exchange with them as Ichiro did."
"Mr. Yamauchi takes great pride in the success of Japanese players in the U.S., particularly [Ichiro]," Attanasio said. "His players are required to pay him a call in the offseason. But this meeting turned out to be something special. It lasted several hours, something that would be rare in this country between a player and owner, and is unheard of in Japan."

I hope that what Ichiro said in the interview was just a tip of an iceberg. I hope also that he spoke to Mr. Yamauchi not in terms of baseball but about quality control and customer satisfaction; terms which Mr. Yamauchi can understand.

I think there are not many if not none veteran player who can speak openly to CEO, president and owner of a club. Ichiro got the special franchise player status at M's. He got it not because he is Japanese; he got it because his intense for baseball.

As a side note there has been 3 J to E translation in Times article. Philip Gabriel, a professor of Japanese literature at the University of Arizona; Asuka Brown, who lives in Seattle and works as a translator and for Jiji Press; Isamu Maruhashi, of Tokyo, who is a Japanese-to-English translator and lived in the United States for 10 years.

Though I don't have the original Japanese of Mr. Konishi's special article, the translation of Prof. Philip Gabriel is outstanding. He has the nuances how Mr. Konishi is writing a article in Japanese. Worth a read.

In golf terms Prof. Philip Gabriel translation is a birdie if not albatross, the translation of Asuka Brown and Isamu Maruhashi are exact and par, as for my English it is double boogie. But I hope my content is par.

Another side note. If you are a graduate student and need a master degree in media related sociology, and you are bilingual in English and Japanese, such ping pong of media articles is a very nice subject to make your work.

I think for a thesis you must have a bit more pepper and salt.

Dr.Naka

POTD: Nomar Garciaparra

2005-12-05T00:37:00.000-08:00

'

Our amigo PositivePaul likes No-Mah and wants to see the warped D-O-V take on 'im. Careful what you ax for :-)

Nomar has never been Dr. D's kind of player, exactly, although he was of course an MVP candidate up through 2003.

So, a couple of thematic questions: (1) Could you make a Safeco case for Nomah, if he were cheap enough?, and (2) What about the general idea of "cheap stars with something to prove"? (...upcoming article.)
.

Q: Exactly how good has he been, the last two years?

A: If you're talking about his bat in LF, then in 2005 he was about as good as Ricky Ledee or Orlando Palmeiro.

Nomah's .300/.350/.450 translation adds to about 5 RC/gm ... meaning that a lineup of 9 Nomars would get you 5.0 runs a game.

For a LF, that's as limp as day-old bacon. Jay Gibbons is at 5.5; Geoff Jenkins is at 7.0. ...hey, even Jacque Jones is at 4.5. ;-) Putting a 5.0 RC guy in left field is an admission of defeat.

Granted, in 2004 he was better -- .320/.370/.500 and that's a much harder 6.0 RC/gm. That's a worthwhile LF.
.

Q: So his trend down is clear? Fuhgeddaboutim?

A: Not so fast!

You're talking about a HOF talent here, who has been injured -- just like Ken Griffey Jr. Don't rush him off to the glue factory at 31! Like Junior, Nomar probably has a rebound or three in him. Never write off the Big Men On Campus talents.

Nomar's batting skills show signs of life, just like Junior's did before 2005:

1) His K rates are totally unchanged from his prime. Nomar still gets the bat on the ball like he ever did.

2) His line drive rate, at least in 2004, was as good as ever. Interestingly, he is getting on top of the ball even a little more than he used to.

3) Nomar has really been making contact about as well as he ever did -- but his ISO is down (he hasn't been hitting the ball as hard.

4) But! Nomar has been injured a lot the last two years.

Putting all these facts together, I'd say that the, ahem, juice in Nomar's bat is down, in part because of his injuries.

Don't write Nomar off. He could easily rebound to at least near-2004 levels (say, .320/.360/.480).
.

Q: You think anybody is going to agree with you? He's not being overwhelmed with offers.

A: Shandler, before the 2005 season, captured the Griffey-esque "don't write him off" spirit:

"Forget his injury-plagued first half. Second half was the same old Nomar: eye, LD rate, Hit rate, contact %, PX and OBP were all superb (2H 2004).

"UP: .340-25-100"

We're not saying Nomar will hit .340 in 2006, but don't knee-jerk and assume Nomar's career is over. It would be unusual for a player of his magnitude to be done at 31.
.

Q: Who needs that, though? What's the big deal if he could hit .310/.360/.480 as you think he might?

A: What would you say if Chris Snelling hit that for you next year? You'd do backflips and predict a pennant.
.

Q: How many times can he juggle a soccer ball?

A: I'll bet Mariner Geek's googlead revenue that he has begged off the soccer field every single time he was invited. :-)

Q: Do you expect him to have a big 2006?

A: Players who start getting hurt a lot at 30 aren't my idea of a good bet for a huge decade coming up.

He's not the greatest match for Safeco, he's a prima donna, and he doesn't have the 40-homer upside like Junior.

We're just saying that he remains a hard .300 hitter with gap power (.450 SLG), and with his huge natural talent, there's a lot of upside beyond that in a "rebound" year.

Don't overblow the Safeco concern; Nomar gets on top of the ball pretty well. He's not a warning-track guy; he's a line-drive guy.

.
Q: BALCO worries?

A: Supposing there were, Nomar is still going to be a .300 hitter with gap power. In LF that's ho-hum. At 3B it's a championship-level piece to the puzzle.
.

Q: Would Hargrove try to teach him to work the count full?

A: If the first pitch is in the strike zone, Nomah is lettin' it fly, babe. He makes Ichiro look like a statue up there.

Last week, Hargrove was quoted loudly that he never told Ichiro to take any first pitches (despite Ichiro's horrific 1st-pitch results in 2005). The point is: Hargrove learned something from The Ichiro Firestorm. He's not going to be bothering Ichiro any more about attacking the pitcher, and this would extend to Nomar.

It's all purely hypothetical, of course. But Hargrove would cheer up the first time he saw Nomar's glove-fastening routine, you know that much.

Q: Do the Mariners have any interest?

A: Zero that I know of.

...if they got desperate, it's not impossible to imagine them offering Nomar a short-term deal at, say, $5m a year to play left ... but Garciaparra will be offered a SS/3B job by somebody.

Bavasi is well capable of shufflecups in the trade market -- Reed-for-Pavano and then prospects-for-Pierre ... see the next question. The Reed/Pierre swapout has its counterpart with Nomar...
.

Q: Under what circumstances would you want him on the Mariners?

A: If the Mariners traded Beltre, they could let Nomar and JLo share 3B/2B until Cabrera was ready. That would be cool.

Failing that, a .300/.350/.450 left fielder -- with BMOC upside -- might be okay as a stoploss in LF, if every good option fell through. Not to keep harping on it, but I'd much rather have Nomar HOF Garciaparra hitting 5th than Jacque Blinkin' Jones or somebody like that.

But Nomar's value is that he's a great 3B/2B add, compared to your other options out there (have you seen them?!)

If you vacuum-blew Beltre out the decompression hatch ... spent the $12m on Manny ... and then put Nomar at 3B for two years ... ehhhh? Hmmm?

Enjoy,
Dr D

Seattle Times Articles and Keizo Konishi

2005-12-04T14:47:00.000-08:00

Seattle Times Sunday, December 4 edition has 4 articles about Ichiro's interview.

Lost in translation: Ichiro's season of discontent
By Bob Finnigan
Reporter aims to get it right
By Keizo Konishi
New translation of original articles from Kyodo News Service
Translation of Ichiro interview in "Number" magazine

The translation of "Numbers" was at Deanna's Seattle Marinerds for weeks.
I thought that something like that was coming after reading Keizo Konishi's article at Shuukan Baseball Dec 12th edition. (This weekly magazine was available from 29th Nov. in Japan. I think you can buy it in Seattle at Kinokuniya)
In this article Konishi explained that he got inquiry e-mails from Morosi (P-I) about the Kyodo Interview which he did. He suggested strongly to Morosi to confirm Ichiro what he said in the interview. But Morosi did not and wrote his article.
After the article of P-I came out he strongly protested to Morosi via e-mail that he missinterpreted but the answer was (from Morosi):"We may have made some misunderstandings" "But I have confidence in what I wrote"

The Post-Intelligencer obtained three translations, according to sports editor Ron Matthews, who said one did not agree with the other two. Matthews acknowledges that Konishi had several exchanges with his reporter over the translation's accuracy, but that Konishi never asked the editor for a correction after the story's publication, nor did Ichiro or his agent.

I think Morosi never reported to the editor about protest from Mr. Konishi.
Now you can judge by yourself how this article in question was.

Ichiro unhappy with M's
Star player decries lack of leadership and commitment
By JON PAUL MOROSI

Jeremy Reed On The Block?

2005-12-04T14:20:00.000-08:00

Dec 4 Update
Lisa Mariner at SportSpot points out the following link: NJ.com

Florida's Juan Pierre is likely to be traded, since the Marlins are cutting costs and Pierre is eligible for arbitration and due for a raise to more than $5 million. The Seattle Mariners recently dangled Jeremy Reed in talks about Carl Pavano, but the Yankees passed.

It's no accident that those two ideas are "stream-of-consciousness"-ed in one paragraph. Well, maybe it was an accident on the writer's part -- but now y'know why the Mariners are connected with Juan Pierre.

Let's say you did deal Reed for Pavano. What then?

"Juan Pierre," then. Capiche? ;-)

That last part "The Yankees passed," just roll your eyes at that one. The Mariners and Yankees dickered over salary help, secondary players, etc etc .... the New York writer has to throw in "The Yankees passed." LOL.
.

Nov 5 - Strickly Hot Stove, Dept.

D-O-V reported on Nov. 5 that Jeremy Reed is in play. And Reed's value would certainly be higher than most fans think:

1) A huge number of teams need a CF. e.g., NYY, SD, LAD, LAA, TEX, Balt, Bos, ChiC, FLA, Philly.

2) There aren't enough true CF options to go around: Torii Hunter (of all people) is drawing superlative offers; there's Mike Cameron, Pierre, P Wilson, Patterson, Damon, most of whom have their drawbacks. Do you want to pay Johnny Damon $10m per season for a .280/.340/.435 line outside of Fenway?

3) Let this saying sink deeeeeeeeep into your ears: ;-) MLB teams value defense in center, as much as fans value 35 home runs there. To us, defense in center is a nice luxury. To your typical MLB organization, defense in CF is as necessary as defense at shortstop, or having a closer.

Jeremy Reed right now is considered, by many insiders, the best defensive CF in the American League. Not by D-O-V, but by many insiders.

4) Jeremy Reed is suuuuuuuper cheap. Reed solves a GM's problems without straining his budget.
5) MLB GM's understand about player development arcs, and Reed's .400+ average in AA.

============================

DG didn't say what the *Mariners* are thinking about defense in CF, if they did deal Reed. At that point they'd have to ask Ichiro to play there, right?

Zona the "Perfect" Trade Fit?
Chad Tracy of Arizona is 25 years old, lefthanded, and slugged .550 last year. He's cheap and would be "lefthanded sock" that could be added to the M's while still pursuing two pitchers and Kenji Johjima.

Tracy, by the way, is a solid-to-good corner OF glove (as well as a solid 1B/3B), posting a nice 105 RATE in 45-odd games in right field in 2005.

"Co-author" Justynius ;-) is annoyed that he doesn't hear more M's-DBacks rumors. As he points out, the DBacks are overloaded with lefthanded power, wanting to find a place for Conor Jackson, Carlos Quentin, and others:

"They're the PERFECT fit for us.
They are flooded with LH power that needs to be traded, and they'll probably find some difficulty finding trading partners for all of it. I think it's very probable you see all of the following traded this offseason....
a) either Luis Gonzalez or Shawn Green
b) Chad Tracy - .308/.359/.553 in 503 AB in his age 25 season
c) Tony Clark (30 HR in 349 AB).

Except for Clark, you're probably buying low on any of these players too.

I think they're trading Glaus too, lol. and Luis Terrero....and Scott Hairston.... and Alex Cintron....and Chris Snyder....

The D'Backs could very easily be trading enough hitters this offseason to equate to a league average or better offense, and still keep all their central players.

IMO, they have more hitting depth than any other club in baseball save for the possibility of a Guerrero/Ramirez/Wood trio in Anaheim."

Glaus of course has been mentioned in the Manny/Erstad/Glaus/prospects three-way blockbuster.

Since AZ would like a CF and LHRP, you could probably package Reed with George Sherrill and come pretty close to Chad Tracy.

Leaving you with your war chest intact.

======================

Tony Clark still has a lifetime slugging percentage of .494. He also slugged .636 last year and slugged .684 against RHP. He made $750,000.

If you really are thinking platoon bats, that's what we're talkin' about. Be nice to get both Tracy and Tony Clark -- but wouldn't Tony Clark be exactly the type of #10, #11 bat that a championship team needs?

Crooked Numbers, Dept.
So the two big FA's would be Giles and Burnett or Millwood, and you'd trade for Tracy and maybe Tony Clark. You'd add Johjima but no other SP's. In 2006 salary that might be $8.5m Giles, $9.5m starting pitcher, $4m catcher for $22m.

1 Ichiro cf
2 Tracy rf
3 Jenkins lf
4 Sexson 1b
5 Ibanez dh
6 Beltre 3b
7 Johjima c
8 Lopez 2b
9 Betancourt ss

1 Felix
2 Millwood
3 Moyer
4 Nageotte
5 Foppert
6 Some $2m pitcher
7 Harris and all that gang
8 Livingston

What a lineup. Big boys 1-7, then your DP combo. Lefthanded. Good on defense.

Alternatively, if two SP's are your offseason .... put Tony Clark in there for Giles, and get a good #4 OF to rest Ibanez out of LF.

Cheers,
Dr D

POTD: A.J. BURNETT

2005-12-04T13:18:00.000-08:00

Quick bump to hold the fort :-)

Latest & Greatest Dept.

Dec. 4th, 2005 - Update:
The Cardinals seem to be the frontrunner in the Burnett sweepstakes. However, they are hesitant to guarantee a fifth year.
According to the StL-Post-Dispatch: "Along with the Toronto Blue Jays and Seattle Mariners, the Cardinals general manager continued to wait Saturday for free-agent pitcher A.J. Burnett to decide on the club's four- year offer worth roughly $40 million. If Burnett accepts the Cardinals' offer - something sources say he is prepared to do should the club guarantee a fifth season - then the meetings' cornerstone will be laid. "
"He has not been a No. 1 result-wise. But he more than anybody out there possesses that ability," said pitching coach Dave Duncan, who spoke with Burnett within the last 10 days. "It's mostly the quality of his arm. When you watch him pitch, I think an improved approach could make a considerable difference."

A decision seems imminent. Stay tuned.
---------

1. Sunday's Toronto report describes a Jays tour for our hero -- despite the fact that offers can't even be made yet.

Baseball GM's are smart. While fans fret about Burnett's stats, GM's are well aware that he is the next Kevin Brown.

=======================

2. The Sun gives 4 teams ... Washington, Toronto, Balmer, and the M's.

Don't go for the head-fake. Those aren't (necessarily) the four teams that are out in front; they're the teams that make sense to the writer.

=======================

3. The real frontrunner, going into The Tour, has gotta be the Washington Nationals. Burnett's wife, Karen, is from Annapolis, Maryland. Underestimate THAT at your peril.

In September, during the season, as a Marlin, Burnett said this about the Nats:

"I'd consider going and playing there and raising my family," he said. "It
definitely would help out with the family situation.
"I always said that would be a good team if they ever got out of Montreal. They've got some fans now, they've got a good ballpark to play in, and they're a good group of guys. I think it would be a good situation."

4. Who wins the derby? Ballplayers really do what you or I would do: they make sure the big bucks are there, and then they look around to see where they'd be comfortable and where it would be fun to play. Usually, first on the list is whether they like the ballplayers and management there.

Fans analyze "who is likely to win more games?" Dream on. ARod, and everybody else, rationalizes the re-build after the owner kisses their toes and the restaurants were fun.

If Karen Burnett doesn't insist on D.C., then the Mariners have just the right guys in place to seal the deal with His Sliderness.

=======================

5. "As much as 5/$65mm" says the Sun, again. If that's all he'll cost, don't let him leave town. ;-) The first AJ Burnett (Kevin Brown) was 5/$75mm ten years ago.

Felix and Burnett are the only two pitchers in baseball who K batters and throw grounders and never give up HR's. ...they are the next Koufax and Drysdale. ;-)

It is NOT whether you pay an extra $2mm. It is whether the player produces. Check Sexson and Beltre. Don't find exactly what you want and then chisel for a bargain, like you did with Tejada. When you find exactly what you want -- and AJ Burnett in GAME TWO BAB-EH! is exactly what you want -- lock him up!

We Return You To Previously-Scheduled Programming, Dept.
So the word comes out that the next Kevin Brown is a free agent -- and that the Mariners want him!!

Down at the local chat room, they're throwing their caps in the air like Army just bloomin' scored on Navy, right? :-)

Nay verily. They wringin' they hands about 5 years, about TOR money when he ain't one, yada yada. We want $4/39.95m max, bro'. Wring, clasp, furrow.

I would cry if they signed Burnett at 15 million per. I'd much rather have Millwood at 10 or even 11 million per. Which I still think is overpaying.I'm comforted by the fact that I'm positive Orioles management will be willing to overpay for Burnett's services. - FutureMsGM

Finnigan has taught us WELL, bro's!

Montreal can Bake The Cake, St. Louie can Eat It, and We'll Pay For It, Dept.
You could stack Felix and Burnett up against any two pitchers you wanted to name. Pedro and Schilling, Koufax and Drysdale, whoever.

"He hasn't done anything yet" y'say? Fine -- go pay Larry Walker for what he HAS done and "has been." I personally am interested in paying the next Ichiro or Santana for what he WILL do. You pay for 2003 performance. I'll pay for 2007 performance.

Mashing Their Taters Dept.
The Seattle 'net has gotten distracted by Burnett's weirdly high G/F rate in 2005.

It doesn't matter whether his G/F rate is high or not. What matters is that Burnett never gives up any HR, either way.

He has given up only 35 HR in 550+ IP since 2001. Yowza!

Since '01 Burnett has fanned 8.6 men per game and yielded a paltry 0.5 HR per nine. You get those two things together and you are talking about Kevin Brown. Name another SP who gives up fewer than 0.5 HR?! There ain't any, babe.

======================

Burnett's g/f rate went up because he cut down his mechanics after TJ, and got more movement on the ball. A moving 95-mph fastball gets chopped into the ground a lot, as we saw with Felix and used to see with Freddy.

But it doesn't matter. Kevin Millwood is Jeff Fassero from the right side, but AJ Burnett is Kevin Brown just before Brown got famous.

Kevin Brown Family Of Pitchers
There are two pitchers in major league baseball who combine overwhelming stuff (1K/1IP) and overwhelming groundball rates (2+), or more to the point with Burnett: the corresponding micro HR rates.

Those two pitchers are Felix Hernandez and A.J. Burnett.

The last such great pitcher was Kevin Brown -- when his ERA was 1.98 every year. This family of pitchers has three-and-a-half recent members I'm aware of: Kevin Brown. Felix Hernandez. The real young Tim Hudson being the half. And A.J. Burnett.

========================
TALE OF THE TAPE: AJ Burnett 2005 vs Kevin Brown 1997
========================

K -- 8.5 ... 7.8
BB - 3.4 ... 2.5
Ctr -- 2.5 ... 3.1
HR - 0.5 ... 0.4
H -- 7.9 ... 8.2
G/F - 2.4 ... 3.6 (2.6 typical for Brown)

xERA - 3.18 ... 2.88
ERA - 3.44 ... 2.69

=========================

Burnett in 2005 was not quite Kevin Brown. Of course, he doesn't have to be. Kevin Brown averaged a 170 ERA+ over a fantasy six-year run that was one of the most incredible of all time.

Granted, Burnett has not established himself as a 3.0 groundball pitcher; he's got one year at a huge grounder rate. But then again, Burnett's lifetime HR rate is below 0.7!

The bonus is that ERA should be LOWER for a groundball pitcher than xERA, as Brown's was.

Dee-L Dee-Cisions Dept.
In his 20's, Burnett battled arm problems.

We're not concerned with whether Burnett was injured. We're concerned with whether he will be injured.

All pitchers are health risks, but:

(1) AJ Burnett has a new elbow ligament.
(2) He has returned from that surgery. Beautifully.
(3) During his recovery, his shoulder tissues got a year off.

Burnett is coming into his 30-ish birthday, the ideal age for a FA pitcher.

Burnett could get injured, but so could any other pitcher. It's not clear why Millwood or Matsuzaka or Schilling or Eaton would be better health risks than Burnett.

Buy HIGH Sell Low?! Dept.
Smart: make the guy prove he can win 24 ---- and THEN bid on him. ;-) ...while he's in the 2nd year of a five-year deal with the Rangers.

If we'd said in 1995 that Kevin Brown was about to become one of the great pitchers ever, people woulda said "he ain't done nothing yet." And missed out on his run of 2.00 ERA seasons, natch. http://baseball-reference.com/
b/brownke01.shtm

Burnett is evolving as a pitcher, as Brown evolved. And what he is evolving into, is something really frightening -- a 9k/game, 0.5hr/game, 2.5groundball firebreathing monster. It's impossible to run those kinds of peripherals and NOT dominate.

Sighhhhhhhhhhhhhh. The Mariners whisper to us about Felix Hernandez on Opening Day, A.J. Burnett on Day Two, with Yuniesky Betancourt hoovering every ball the hitters manage to get their wimpy little cut-down swings on. And M's fans have tears welling in their eyes about AJ being a Mariner for 5 years instead of 4.

BUY LOW, amigos. Have the guts to move on somebody BEFORE the whole world has the cameras at their door.

Bringing A Blue-And-Teal Knife To The Gunfight Dept.

Put AJ Burnett's xERA of 3.18 in Safeco Field -- in front of Beltre and Betancourt -- and you are talking 2.75 ERA without breaking a sweat.

A 3.00 ERA, as opposed to Jo-El's 5.50 for 2005, gains the Mariners +55 runs. At one position!

Add it to Felix' +40 for a full season. Sure, Koufax and Drysdale are worth +100 runs over Sele and Franklin. Whuddjathink? Where do you think a hundred runs come from? They come from having players like Felix and Burnett.

You got Koufax already. So what's Drysdale worth? $13mm for the PAIR too rich for your blood, amigos? Go catch the Rainiers then. :-)

This is 21st-century pro sports. The other teams do not go down with a light shove to the shoulder.

=============================

Sometimes you think that M's fans WOULD refuse the 30-year-old Don Drysdale a 5-year contract.

...Yeah, pitcher contracts are scary. Tell you what. Let's make a rule: the Sandy Koufaxes of the league always play on the other team, so we don't get burned by the contracts. :-

Burnett, and Safeco, and YuBet, would make some awfully sweet music together. Crescendo'ing in a long string of heart-stopping Burnett ERA's.

B'lee DAT,
Dr D

POTD: PAUL BYRD

2005-12-04T11:40:00.000-08:00

Byrd to Indians - 2 Years, $14.25 m

The contract amazes a lot of fans. But! Paul Byrd received MANY offers in the $5-7m range from saavy GM's -- including from Bill Stoneman, who watched him at close range in 2005.

Sorry, amigos ... just because you're not used to thinking of Paul Byrd as a good starting pitcher, does not mean he isn't one. This is a case of our PERCEPTION being behind the curve of Byrd's REALITY.

The analysis of Byrd below concludes that he is roughly as valuable as, say, Esteban Loaiza. Certainly, Byrd's results the last four years have been superior to Loaiza's (much better ERA+).

Byrd's and Loaiza's contracts also imply that Kevin Millwood and AJ Burnett are worth the extra buck!

POTD

Byrd is a poor man's Brad Radke -- check his walk rates the last three years, and remember that he did not get torched for HR's (1.0 per game). It's easy to challenge hitters and wind up with gopheritis. Byrd walks nobody and keeps the ball in the park:

2003 - 1.1
2004 - 1.2
2005 - 1.1

There is just no overstating how much harder it is for an offense to score runs -- if nobody ever walks!

Steady As A Surgeon's Hand, Dept.
John Benson pointed out that you can often choose between two pitchers by comparing their worst years. When you find a pitcher who has acceptable "down" years, you've got a keeper.

Byrd's lowest adjusted ERA+ in four years is 109. Compare Byrd's adjusted ERA+ to Esteban Loaiza's:

2002 - 109 vs 78
2003 - 132 vs 154
2004 - 110 vs 84
2005 - 112 vs 105
Life - 108 vs 99

And yet Loaiza will score $6-7m a year, while Byrd grovels for Gil Meche money.

Byrd's xERA's are always in the high 3's -- which they will be for any 1.0-walk pitcher who keeps his HR's down. Show me a 1.0 BB, 1.0 HR guy, and I'll show you a guy who can pitch for Dr. Detecto.

As you can see at left, Byrd can't figure it out either. He runs them a nice 112 ERA+, and the Angels *still* get a coupla goons to toss him off the dock by two ankles and two wrists.

Strength Belongeth To The Young, Wisdom To The Old Dept.
Inexperienced SP's .... Jo-El Piniero, Gil Meche, Matt Thornton, whoever ... suffer from four major disadvantages compared to a Paul Byrd:

1) They haven't figured out their own mechanics. (See Jeff Sullivan's site lookoutlanding.com, which shows that even now, Jo-El can't keep his release point straight.)

2) Their arms and shoulders are easily injured.

3) They haven't been through all the adjustments to "the book" -- hitters keep figuring them out.

4) They haven't mastered their own games, their own pitch sequences.

A pitcher like Paul Byrd is incomparably more reliable than a 27-year-old pitcher. Byrd is one of the least volatile stocks of the winter. You know what you're going to get: 3.75 ERA in a neutral park, or 3.40 in Safeco.

Safe At Home Dept.
Byrd's one flaw is that he strikes out few batters (which doesn't matter as much if he can keep the ball in the park).

As Bill James pointed out, defense matters more as K's and HR's go down. So Paul Byrd is a pitcher who benefits disproportionately from good defense and good parks.

Byrd is an above-average pitcher, period. But in Safeco, his performance would be aided even more than would most pitchers'. Byrd's sail is one that will catch the Safeco wind in full gust.

Sign the Citation Here, Please
Once you give Loaiza or Weaver $7m+ you are in violation of Stars & Scrubs Law ... you might as well cash them in with a $3m player and get a real star, right?

Paul Byrd is my favorite value SP right now after A.J. Burnett. He was my #6b going into the winter. Right now he's my #2, after Burnett.
.
.
Edit: Will Paul Byrd Contract Gopheritis?

Seattle blogger: I have no real interest in Paul Byrd. The whole fascination with him rests on a fallacy that he possesses an ability to give up a ton of fly balls without giving up home runs, which is simply not a skill. When someone tells you that home run rate for pitchers is predictive, run away, because they don’t know what they’re talking about. ( ::rollling eyes:: - Dr D)

But still, we’re looking at an 35-year-old with a history of injuries that should be expected to post an ERA of 4.5-5.0 if he stays healthy.

D-O-V: Paul Byrd has a 115 ERA+ over the span of four full years, 2002-2005. Bartolo Colon's lifetime ERA+ is 117. Byrd's consistently fine ERA's are not a "fascination"; they're part of his performance record.

A few comps:

115 - Paul Byrd's ERA+, 2002-2005
108 - Freddy Garcia's
107 - Esteban Loaiza's
116 - Kevin Millwood's

Byrd's ability rests not on his ability to outsmart HR's; it rests on his outstanding command within the strike zone. He can walk 1.0 men per game while not centering pitches!

USSM apparently expects Paul Byrd to suddenly contract gopheritis -- and considers it stupid to expect otherwise?!

It's taking a pet theory -- fly ball rates dictate HR's -- and waving off Byrd's last four years of fine HR prevention. Byrd has NEVER had gopheritis. His HR rates the last four years have been average-solid each and every year.

The error in USSM's analysis is threefold:

1. Byrd's flyball rate is only slightly above average (0.93). He's hardly an extreme flyball pitcher.
2. It fails to account for Ron Shandler's "mistake prevention/HR rate" paradigm -- that some pitchers center fewer pitches than others. (Some guys -- Ayala, Franklin -- center more, right?)
3. It makes too much soup out of one (flyball=HR) oyster. The analysis gets too transfixed on the pet flyball theory, and reads a super-consistent pitcher as due to perform completely differently in 2006.

But hey. Let's say flyballs absolutely do equal HR's, end of story. ... Average HR rate is 1.1, and Byrd has a generally middle-of-the-road HR rate. He's already well within typical HR norms.

So what is the rational projection here? To ignore what Paul Byrd has actually done for four years in a row, or to use those four years as his established level of performance?

Expected ERA's, Dept.
I dunno if Byrd "should be expected to run a 4.50-5.00 ERA if healthy" ... I'll leave that to better men than I. ;-)

But what I do know is that the last three years, Paul Byrd HAS run ERA's of 3.74, 3.94, and 3.90. ...and his xERA's are better than that.

Show me a pitcher who runs 1.0 BB rates without gopheritis, and I'll show you a guy who can pitch for me. Just don't make me put Jacque Jones behind him. A good pitcher does need 4-5 runs to win.

Cheers,
Dr D

Rohrschach Test :-)

2005-12-03T20:16:00.000-08:00

I know nobody asked me, but if anybody did ....

"Would you allow Felix to pitch in the World Baseball Classic if you were Howard Lincoln and it were your call?" ... I view that question as an inkblot test.

That test being, "am I all about myself -- or do I see life through others' eyes also?"

As MacMariner eloquently put it at SportSpot, if he had been invited to play for Scotland's World Cup team, nothing on earth could have stopped him. It is literally the fulfillment of a person's life dream.

It doesn't always have to be about our own rights, even if theoretically it were our right to keep Felix from pitching. Sometimes it can be about what others want, too. Most will argue this in terms of laws and legalities -- hey, simple enough. If it's my legal right, I will assert it. Next question!

My question is, how does it argue in terms of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." What would two reasonable men, both concerned about the other, and both trying for a win/win relationship, agree about the WBC?

Felix isn't our slave. He's a human being with a life. He pitches for the Mariners sometimes. It doesn't mean that we own him the way we own a plasma TV.

So Dr. D is in a minority of one again. What else is new :-) Convince us we're wrong.

LOL,
Dr D

! Quick note !

2005-12-03T16:53:00.000-08:00

Blogger's "Word Verification" is screwed up today. We apologize if you weren't able to express your opinions and thoughts through the comment area for a while. We temporarily turned it off.
And for all you Spammers: Stay away and harass other people !!!!!

Snelling "Ahead Of Schedule"

2005-12-03T14:47:00.000-08:00

.
So we hear that Yoda's knee rehab is going great -- that he may come back early.

I know, I know, fill in your own punch line about "early for what, his next injury?" After we've had our round of those, what does that mean, that his ACL rehab is ahead of schedule?

Dr. D remembers that everybody had written off a young Jay Buhner because of recurring injuries. Like Snelling, Bone was a little too gung-ho and a little too prone to step on his own feet wrong ... Carlos Guillen is another example. They just seem to step and walk awkwardly.

But Snelling's in his early 20's. You can write him off :-) ... not me.

g-moneyball is easily the most expert medical voice in the Seattle blog-o-sphere, to my knowledge. In August, he briefed us on the situation. Link to SportSpot thread is in the title bar.

================

I have a medical background. In fact, I used to help people recover from almost exactly these types of injuries.Some semi-random opinions ;-)

1.
If you're going to blow out something, blow out your knee. It's a hinge joint (like the elbow) which means it's only gonna go back and forth, with some stretch side-to-side but not full rotation like a hip or shoulder.

The shoulder's even worse than the hip because it's a modified ball-and-socket with cartilage and stuff holding the ball to the shoulder socket rather than a complete ball-and-socket which is deeper and more secure. Compared to those, the knee is relatively simple, mechanically speaking. It just takes a while to heal.

There are three main ligaments tying the lower leg bones to the upper leg bone. The ACL (anterior, in front) is the most crucial to knee stability. The PCL (posterior, behind the knee) is also important. The MCL (medial, in the middle) is actually not that important if the other two are strong. You can tear an MCL and not have surgery, because the recovery time waiting for the aggravation to go down is less than the recovery time for the surgery.

When they replace your ACL, the completely new (to the joint anyway) ligament they graft on should be fairly free from wear, so re-injury without further significant trauma to the knee is rare. Of course, Snelling is a rare bird. Maybe his ligament graft was defective, who knows.

2.
His knee injury this year may or may not have been new. He tore his meniscus, which is a cartilage pad that cushions the femur as it pounds against the lower leg bones when you walk or run. You've got two, one for each side of the femur. They can get damaged during knee injuries, but often form what are called "bucket tears" which means they are torn, but the torn piece isn't torn completely off and just slides back to rest in the hole. It's a flap that can take a while to open again. When it does, it's very painful, but it doesn't have to be indicative of a new injury.

Does it surprise me that Chris has had his knee surgery completely botched? No. Is it all the doctor's fault? Probably not.

3.
There are simple injuries and there are complex ones. If Chris played a different sport (say he was a running back) he'd probably be done. But he plays baseball, which consists mostly of jogging, with the occasional sprint, and very little lateral movement (plant one way, push off the other way) required.

I'd bet he's gonna get some serious arthritis in that knee later in life, but as to whether his career is done...it depends on how much more rehab he wants to suffer through. There are other tendons that can be used instead of whatever he did use, and because the knee is a hinge joint the surgery SHOULD be fairly straightforward.

4.
The stability of his knee, provided the new ACL ligament is actually structurally sound this time, shouldn't really be in question. It's all up to him - and getting a good surgeon instead of our in-house sawbones.

I hope he's up for another 8 months of rehab. I hope he can get back and stay healthy. If he decides to throw in the towel, I'll feel badly for him, but I'll understand.

But Snelling isn't some 350 pound behemoth who has had bad knees all his life and can't play baseball anymore. He's in shape, he understands conditioning, and he doesn't need his knees to recover to 100% of what they were before his injuries in order to be successful. A running back without knees is retired. A hitter without knees plays LF or DHs. Luckily, we have needs at those positions...

5.
Unluckily, we can no longer count on him to fill either one. So if he makes it back and makes the decision tough for us, fine, but Chris can't be a part of our '06 and '07 plans going into this offseason. If he makes it back like I think (and hope) he will, that's tremendous, but we can't keep a place in line for him.
.
================

So objectively speaking, there's nothing about an ACL that derails Snelling's future. As y'know, there isn't a lot of sideways torque on the knee when you play baseball. The paths around the bases are predictable :-)

If 8 months is the typical rehab, and Snelling had the ligament transplant at the start of September, that puts him back on the field around May ....

And Snelling is said to be ahead of that. Whatever that means.

Cheers,
Dr D