I don't know if it's 3 or 4 though.

I expect the Screen Jam/DT crowd to like it more than a lot of people.

-someone more awake than I could (should?) make an argument that Verlander and perhaps King Felix merit 4s instead of 3s as long as Kazmir does

-Fausto and Matt Garza might be well served by switching their respective rankings, based on seasons as a starter each have had so far

-As likely the only person here who was there on April 30th 2003, I kinda feel obligated to stick up for Kevin Millwood and protest his 0 ranking.

Then I remember how he fared against the Juan Pierre-led Marlins late in that season and it allllll makes sense...

Kazmir 13-9 3.48 ERA
Beckett 20-7 3.27 ERA

Beckett definately had more offense behind him, but after looking at the stats, if Kazmir is a 4, Beckett should definately be a 4.

"I'm Clive Owen!"

Beckett HAS to be a 4.

Also from the last post, you do not trade Billingsley...

I repeat...

You DO NOT trade Billingsley. (period)

I'd even say there's an argument who had the better year between Beckett and Santana

Beckett 20-7 3.27
Santana 15-13 3.33

Bottom line is, Beckett should be a 4 based off of last season, or others should warrant a 3.

Homer's life flashing before his eyes was very well done.

I'm certainly surprised that Beckett wasn't a "4". I'm up for knocking any Red Sox down a notch based solely on the criteria that they get over-hyped, but in this case I think Beckett deserves a 4.

Jon, I'm interested in your statement about his regular season stats being the issue. Why shouldn't his post-season success factor in?

But I certainly don't feel like fighting over it.

2004: 108
2005: 118
2006: 95
2007: 145

scott kazmir ERA+
2005: 116
2006: 142
2007: 130

But I'll move Beckett and Bedard up to 4.

15 Bills is going to be a beast next year, I just feel it.

Looking at them more closely head to head, it's a fascinating comparison; Garza is a month older and has had two fairly short seasons, with ERA+ of 78 in 2006 and 118 in 07, whiles Fausto had an awful 2006 (1-10, 5.42 ERA although still an 83 ERA+) and then of course an outstanding 2007 that, if he can repeat, would make a 3 too low a ranking for him. Thanks for calling me out on this, I guess now I know a little more about how great Fausto was last year, and that his season was closer to that awesome 9-inning shutdown of the Yanks in the ALDS than the next week when he got pounded by the Red Sox!

Jon, under your methodology, what would the 2005 White Sox have looked like? It may be necessary to call in Scott Long to arbitrate, but would/could you have rated them something like:

2005 Chicago White Sox (9 points)

Above-average (3 points): Mark Buehrle

Average to above-average (2): Freddy Garcia

Mystery (1): Jose Contreras, El Duque

Up-and-coming (1): Jon Garland, Brandon McCarthy

?

Did you guys see Tracy's post on what Nelson Resario said?

I really hope we keep Rosario. That guy is going to be awesome.

I would also but Wade Davis and David Price ahead of several people on the Rays, as well as dropping Andy Sonnastine off up and coming, but the Rays do have a ton of young arms, so that ranking is appropriate.

Why shouldn't they wait til July, see where they are, then if the season's not turning out so well, trade him at a point of maximum leverage?

The case for trading Bedard is stronger. The Orioles are hopeless and need to be making plans for 2013. The Twins have a shot unless Liriano's done.

Apparently, they need a center fielder...

Goodbye to:
Grady Little
Randy Wolf
David Wells
Mark Hendrickson
Rudy Seanez
Roberto Hernandez
Luis Gonzalez
Ramon Martinez
Olmedo Saenz
Mark Sweeney
Mike Lieberthal
Shea Hillenbrand
Chad Moeller

Hello to:
Joe Torre
Andruw Jones
Hiroki Kuroda

Still in town:
Brad Penny
Derek Lowe
Chad Billingsley
Jason Schmidt
Estaban Loiaza
Scott Proctor
Joe Beimel
Jonathan Broxton
Takeshi Saito
Russell Martin
James Loney
Jeff Kent
Rafael Furcal
Nomar Garciaparra
Andy LaRoche
Juan Pierre
Matt Kemp
Andre Ethier
Delwyn Young
Tony Abreu
Chin-Lung Hu

http://tinyurl.com/2aajdn

And yet, somehow, the D-backs don't seem appreciably weakened.

This is why Ned's reluctance to trade any prospects seems like more than just a nod to a fan faction. The D-backs are building a dynasty. The Dodgers are the only team remotely able to challenge them.

As these are all starters, there is to a degree a limitation on valuing players beyond the 6th or 7th pitcher. I feel like it might help clarify the scores by making a note of how many players each team has listed. Average score per pitcher, and perhaps the score for the 'top 5' as well (optimal rotation), would help flesh out the idea of the strength of the staffs.

I took the liberty of doing so (both average, and top 5 score) for the AL staffs, just to give you an idea of what the numbers would look like. For the most part, they follow the same order as the regular list, but a couple of outliers stick out (Blue Jays and White Sox in particular). I would like to point out that the inclusion of lots of below average pitchers for the purpose of "depth" does end up hurting some teams in the average score. Maybe restrict it to 8 or 9, as I think it's unlikely most teams will use more than 8 or 9 SPs a significant amount. Even the Dodgers in '07, having extremely heavy injuries within the rotation, used only 9 players for more than 5 starts. Anyway:

(Team Name: Average points per player; top 5 player values)

Angels: 2.125; 14
Red Sox: 2.286; 14
Indians: 1.875; 12
Blue Jays: 1.75; 13
Rays: 1.167; 11 (outlier, 12 listed pitchers)
Twins: 1.714; 10
Yankees: 1.429; 10
Mariners: 1.429; 9
Tigers: 1.286; 8
A's: 1; 6
Royals: 0.778; 7
Orioles: 1.143; 8
White Sox: 1.4; 7 (outlier, 5 listed pitchers)
Rangers: 0.6; 6

In addition, I was hoping to make a couple of comments on some individual players... Okay, really all it is is Red Sox bashing for a moment.

For one, Dice-K. I might get some disagreement here, but I'd personally put him in the 'mystery' category. This past season, he was good, but not great - ERA of 4.4, WHIP of 1.324 (ERA+ 108). And this was in a season where no major leaguers had seen him pitch before. Is it out of the question that the league could catch up to him? Look at Nomo - after his monster rookie season, his second year was much worse (though still better than Dice-K's season this year), and after '97, his ERA+ in his next two seasons was 91 and 84.

Two, I can't really agree with putting Clay Buchholz in the "average to above average" category. He's pitched 4 games (3 starts) at the MLB-level, 1.59 ERA, a total of 22 2/3rds innings. Edwin Jackson, 2003: 4 games (3 starts), 2.45 ERA, 22 IP. High-level prospects with a few brilliant games do not guaranteed above-average starters make. In my opinion, he probably should be in either the 'mystery' or 'up and coming' category.

Ahh, much better now that I have that off my chest. :)

Re the Royals, Greinke? Bannister then Meche then Greinke.

I'm not sure Ned is reluctant to trade any prospects. The problem is that he's always being asked to trade four at a time, and we're talking four top prospects, not 1-2 plus a couple scrubs. Plus, as has been pointed out, some of the "prospects" we're asked to trade aren't really prospects at all: they're major league starters.

Lackey ERA+
2007: 151
2006: 128
2005: 123

Penny ERA+
2007: 151
2006: 104
2005: 105

Washburn, I don't mind knocking down a point.

"I would also but Wade Davis and David Price ahead of several people on the Rays, as well as dropping Andy Sonnastine off up and coming, but the Rays do have a ton of young arms, so that ranking is appropriate. "

Will take Sonnastine off and add Davis and Price. Combining Talbot and Houser as one point to mitigate the impact all these young arms could have.

http://tinyurl.com/2g8k9m

The highlights:

Iguchi turned down 2 year plus an option from Colorado, and 3 years from Philly to go to San Diego for 1 year.

U-T writer Tom Krasovic calls out the Padres for not getting Iguchi last summer (for a middling prospect), who he feels would have made the difference in getting to the playoffs. Krasovic argues, and rightfully so I think, that the benefits from a playoff berth outweigh the $1.8m savings from not acquiring Iguchi in 2007.

I looked up on Baseball-Reference.com, that Marcus Giles (16 games) and Geoff Blum (41 games) started every game at second base after July 31, and here were their stats from Aug 1 to the end of the year:

Blum: .266/.324/.401 in 212 PA
Giles: .207/.309/.293 in 69 PA
SD combined: .252/.320/.376

Iguchi: .288/.331/.400 in 137 PA

Iguchi didn't do better than Blum, even playing in Philadelphia, but I agree in principle with the idea of not giving Geoff Blum regular playing time.

I could knock Dice down a point, though I'm comfortable with the idea that he'll improve this season, given his age (27).

Buchholz, I don't know. You have a point, but his track record is so good. A bit better than Jackson's I feel, and he's older. I think he's ready to contribute. But yes, I could knock him down a point too - then wait for the Red Sox fans to get wind of it and start sending me hate mail ...

A god who was not asked back.

Bowen's teams are 28-10 in games in which he scored at least one run.

http://tinyurl.com/2r5rnp

He struck out a batter an inning and threw a no hitter in the majors, confirming what he did in 2006 and 2007 in the minors: struck out about 11.5 batters per 9 with a K/BB of 4.5. Do pitchers have to have three good years in the majors before we rate them above the average to above average vets? Buchholz is Kershaw without the walks and another year of domination in AAA.

Vin Scully in 1965
http://jpg2.lapl.org/pics36/00052712.jpg

People don't develop more after 42 or 37 years.

I can't get the Me-n-Ed's SoCal locations to pop up on their website. Only the NorCal and the Canadian locations are opening for me. That smells fishy.

I'm not going to be able to update until later today, but keep leaving those suggestions.

A 3 is a plenty good rating. I've only got about 20 people in the league with that rating.

So, 3 or above constitutes "Ace" status. Actually, maybe a little bit less than 3.

It could be that other GMs are so dazzled by the guys who've already made an impact on the Dodgers and/or are mythical creatures that they devalue everyone else, but I can't believe Ned's gotten no offers