Baseball Toaster Dodger Thoughts
Jon Weisman's outlet
for dealing psychologically
with the Los Angeles Dodgers
and baseball.
Frozen Toast
Google Search
Dodger Thoughts

02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

09  08  07 
About Jon
Thank You For Not ...

1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with

Preliminary AL Starting Rotation Rankings
2007-12-16 20:43
by Jon Weisman

As we discussed last week with the Preliminary NL Starting Rotation Rankings, my ranking system isn't meant to be scientific, but rather it's designed to give you a general idea of the quality and depth of a team's starting rotation. A margin for error intentionally exists. Points awarded based on the following categories (looking at three-year trends, with the most weight on the 2007 season):

  • 0 points: below-average pitcher
  • 1 point: mystery pitcher - wildly inconsistent pitcher or above-average recent track record but with dubious health
  • 1 point: young, up-and-coming minor-league pitcher with above-average potential in 2008
  • 2 points: average to above-average pitcher
  • 3 points: above-average pitcher
  • 4 points: super above-average pitcher

    Thanks again to the Dodger Thoughts commenters who supplied information. Further comments, suggestions and corrections encouraged. (Update: Revisions have begun.)

    Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (17 points)

  • Super above-average (4 points): John Lackey
  • Above-average (6): Kelvim Escobar, Jered Weaver
  • Average to above-average (4): Joe Saunders, Jon Garland
  • Mystery (1): Ervin Santana
  • Up-and-coming (2): Dustin Moseley, Nick Adenhart

    Cleveland Indians (15 points)

  • Super above-average (4 points): C.C. Sabathia
  • Above-average (3): Fausto Carmona
  • Average to above-average (4): Jake Westbrook, Paul Byrd
  • Mystery (2): Cliff Lee, Jeremy Sowers
  • Up-and-coming (2): Aaron Laffey, Adam Miller

    Boston Red Sox (14 points)

  • Super above-average (4 points): Josh Beckett
  • Above-average (3): Curt Schilling
  • Average to above-average (6): Tim Wakefield, Jon Lester, Daisuke Matsuzaka
  • Up-and-coming (1): Clay Buchholz
  • Below-average (0): Julian Tavarez

    Tampa Bay Rays (14 points)

  • Super above-average (4 points): Scott Kazmir
  • Above-average (3): James Shields
  • Average to above-average (2): Matt Garza
  • Up-and-coming (5): Jeff Niemann, Christopher Mason, Wade Davis, David Price, Mitch Talbot/James Houser
  • Below-average (0): Jason Hammel, J.P Howell, Jae Kuk Ryu, Edwin Jackson

    Toronto Blue Jays (14 points)

  • Super above-average (4 points): Roy Halladay
  • Above-average (3): A. J. Burnett
  • Average to above-average (6): Shawn Marcum, Dustin McGowan, Jesse Litsch
  • Mystery (1): Casey Janssen
  • Below-average (0): Gustavo Chacin, Randy Wells

    Minnesota Twins (12 points)

  • Super above-average (4 points): Johan Santana
  • Average to above-average (4): Scott Baker, Boof Bonser
  • Mystery (1): Francisco Liriano
  • Up-and-coming (3): Kevin Slowey, Glen Perkins, Nick Blackburn

    New York Yankees (10 points)

  • Above-average (6): Chien-Ming Wang, Andy Pettitte
  • Average to above-average (2): Philip Hughes
  • Up-and-coming (2): Joba Chamberlain, Ian Kennedy
  • Below-average (0): Kei Igawa, Mike Mussina

    Seattle Mariners (10 points)

  • Above-average (3): Felix Hernandez
  • Average to above-average (4): Jarrod Washburn, Miguel Batista
  • Mystery (1): Cha Seung Baek
  • Up-and-coming (2): Ryan Feierabend, Brandon Morrow
  • Below-average (0): Horacio Ramirez

    Detroit Tigers (9 points)

  • Above-average (3): Justin Verlander
  • Average to above-average (2): Kenny Rogers
  • Mystery (3): Jeremy Bonderman, Dontrelle Willis, Nate Robertson
  • Up-and-coming (1): Yorman Vazardo
  • Below-average (0): Chad Durbin

    Oakland A's (9 points)

  • Average to above-average (2): Joe Blanton
  • Mystery (4): Chad Gaudin, Rich Harden, Justin Duchscherer, Dan Meyer
  • Up-and-coming (3): Dana Eveland, Greg Smith, Dallas Braden
  • Below-average (0): Lenny DiNardo

    Kansas City Royals (7 points)

  • Average to above-average (6): Gil Meche, Brian Bannister, Zack Greinke
  • Up-and-coming (1): Luke Hochevar
  • Below-average (0): Kyle Davies, Jorge De La Rosa, Luke Hudson, Brandon Duckworth, Tyler Lumsden
    Comment: I want to move one of the top three up a point - but which one? I'm leaning toward Greinke.

    Baltimore Orioles (8 points)

  • Super above-average (4 points): Erik Bedard
  • Average to above-average (2): Jeremy Guthrie
  • Up-and-coming (2): Garret Olson, Adam Loewen
  • Below-average (0): Daniel Cabrera, Brian Burres, Matt Albers
    Comment: I did the Orioles, White Sox and Rangers in a rush. Names might be missing or truly misplaced.

    Chicago White Sox (7 points)

  • Above-average (3 points): Mark Buehrle
  • Average to above-average (2): Javier Vasquez
  • Mystery (1): Jose Contreras
  • Up-and-coming (1): John Danks
  • Below-average (0): Gavin Floyd

    Texas Rangers (6 points)

  • Mystery (2 points): Robinson Tejeda, Jamey Wright
  • Up-and-coming (4): Brandon McCarthy, Kason Gabbard, Edinson Volquez, Luis Mendoza
  • Below-average (0): Kevin Millwood, Kameron Loe, Vicente Padilla, John Rheinecker

  • Comments (173)
    Show/Hide Comments 1-50
    2007-12-16 20:49:25
    1.   Vishal
    whither bartolo colon?
    2007-12-16 20:54:11
    2.   silverwidow
    Tyler Clippard is not with the Yankees.
    2007-12-16 20:56:17
    3.   Jon Weisman
    1 - Colon's a free agent, right?
    2 - Thanks.
    2007-12-16 20:58:15
    4.   Bob Timmermann
    Erik Bedard and Scott Kazmir should rank the same.

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

    2007-12-16 20:58:46
    5.   KG16
    So, with the Angels having what may be the best rotation in the AL and the Dodgers having one of the best in the NL (does Kurdora give them another point or two?), does that mean we have a legit chance at a Freeway Series come October?
    2007-12-16 21:03:35
    6.   jujibee
    Beckett should be super above average in my opinion.
    2007-12-16 21:06:38
    7.   Jon Weisman
    6 - I don't know that his regular season stats justify that.
    2007-12-16 21:09:25
    8.   Bob Timmermann
    Excellent "Extras" finale BTW.
    2007-12-16 21:12:37
    9.   trainwreck
    Yeah, I thought it was very good. There were a little minor problems I had with it, but that is not a big deal.

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

    2007-12-16 21:13:29
    10.   das411
    Quick thoughts:

    -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...

    2007-12-16 21:14:07
    11.   KG16
    7 - I was going to agree, but looking at his career numbers, with the exception of last year, he's pretty close to John Lackey. I think one more year like this year should be enough to get him to super above average.
    2007-12-16 21:16:25
    12.   trainwreck
    Fausto has been much better than Garza so far in their careers. Why do you think they should switch spots?
    2007-12-16 21:21:33
    13.   jujibee

    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.

    2007-12-16 21:22:41
    14.   Jon Weisman
    8 - Watching it now.

    "I'm Clive Owen!"

    2007-12-16 21:28:02
    15.   milkshakeballa

    Beckett HAS to be a 4.

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

    I repeat...

    You DO NOT trade Billingsley. (period)

    2007-12-16 21:30:49
    16.   jujibee

    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.

    2007-12-16 21:31:05
    17.   Bob Timmermann
    And tonight's episode of "The Simpsons" had some of their most interesting animation ever. It was a very good episode in my opinion.

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

    2007-12-16 21:31:33
    18.   KG16
    Anyone know of a ju jitsu dojo in Orange County that is not Brazilian ju jitsu?
    2007-12-16 21:32:18
    19.   Jon Weisman
    I'll move Beckett up to 4, but do keep in mind that I'm looking at more than just last year.
    2007-12-16 21:33:09
    20.   stopthebeachballs
    7, 13

    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?

    2007-12-16 21:34:43
    21.   KG16
    19 - he's probably a boarder line case, and if 2008 is like 2006, then he would probably deserve to be a 3 but right now, 2006 looks like an outlier (maybe changing leagues, if that matters any more?)
    2007-12-16 21:35:55
    22.   Jon Weisman
    20 - It factors in, but I didn't think it should override the fact that he had an ERA+ of 95 in 2006. I mean, a year ago he was below-average. I was giving 4s to consistently super pitchers. I wanted to see Beckett have another great year.

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

    2007-12-16 21:36:46
    23.   Jon Weisman
    21 - He's been inconsistent, plain and simple.
    2007-12-16 21:37:32
    24.   Vishal
    josh beckett ERA+

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

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

    2007-12-16 21:38:44
    25.   Jon Weisman
    Kazmir, on the other hand, has turned in consecutive seasons of 116, 142 and 130 before his 24th birthday, with massive Ks.

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

    2007-12-16 21:40:27
    26.   trainwreck
    I do not think you will find much luck. Pretty much all jiu jitsu dojos are Brazilian in California.
    2007-12-16 21:41:50
    27.   Gen3Blue
    Good stuff Jon and DT volunteers. Look at the Yankees, it is interesting where money can get you. Colorado and Arizona didn't have to worry too much about the effects of money, but with long term contracts and large money for mediocre vets wierd things seem to happen.
    D Zap--amen to that from last post. Coletti has spent the money and protected us fromthe money affect.
    2007-12-16 21:44:33
    28.   MC Safety
    I agree with Jon, Beckett was a head case last year.

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

    2007-12-16 21:57:44
    29.   das411
    12 - Actually I think this was a case of too little information, specifically I had thought for some reason Garza had another season or two under his belt.

    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


    2007-12-16 22:02:06
    30.   trainwreck
    Yeah, Fausto was a reliever his first year and he did not have much success in that role.
    2007-12-16 22:04:25
    31.   milkshakeballa
    28, you feel it and I can actually SEE it! :)
    2007-12-16 22:05:49
    32.   Vishal
    29 garland's not a white sox player anymore, right? he got traded. and he wouldn't be up-and-coming anyway.
    2007-12-16 22:06:16
    33.   Vishal
    32 oh, nevermind. i didn't see the 2005 tag. :)
    2007-12-16 22:11:17
    34.   milkshakeballa
    Fellow BRO readers,

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

    2007-12-16 22:14:24
    35.   trainwreck
    Yeah, but we pretty much already knew that info.

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

    2007-12-16 22:36:35
    36.   Jon Weisman
    "Extras" was genius.
    2007-12-16 22:40:12
    37.   regfairfield
    Calling Washburn and Batista average to above average without giving the same honor to Jeremy Bonderman seems unfair.

    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.

    2007-12-16 22:56:46
    38.   dzzrtRatt
    Looking at this, I wonder why the Twins would trade Santana? With him, they're competitive if Liriano comes back.

    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...

    2007-12-16 23:00:19
    39.   regfairfield
    38 Because they have serious issues with their offense and have arguably the 2nd and 3rd best teams in baseball in their division.
    2007-12-16 23:11:21
    40.   bhsportsguy
    My hunch is that things will be pretty quiet from Dodger Stadium for the rest of 2007 and probably the first couple of weeks of 2008, aside from an update on the renovations until Joe Torre settles in and makes his rounds as he starts talking about the 2008 season.
    2007-12-16 23:16:43
    41.   KG16
    26 - that's what I was afraid of.
    2007-12-16 23:25:46
    42.   bhsportsguy
    Dodgers 2007-2008 Hot Stove Report Card

    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

    2007-12-16 23:33:27
    43.   milkshakeballa
    I like it BH I really do.
    2007-12-16 23:35:11
    44.   bhsportsguy
    Spring training questions:
    1. LaRoche vs. Garciaparra (and if Nomar loses, is he still on the team in April?)
    2. Middle infield utility position battle between Abreu, Hu and Valdez, Valdez is out of options but it seems unlikely that he would picked up on waivers, I would give the edge to Abreu.
    3. LH/RH pinch hitting roles, Delwyn Young, extra outfielder (Ethier, Pierre) or still signing a Sweeney/Tony Clark type.
    4. Back up catcher
    5. 1-2 more pitching spots, another lefty and/or multi-inning short man.
    6. Health of Jason Schmidt, Hong-Chih Kuo, Yhency Brazoban, Jason Repko, Scott Elbert, and Bryan Morris.
    2007-12-17 00:05:24
    45.   Strike4
    So I'm getting my hair cut last night about 7:30. In the mirror, I made out a family walking by with Grandpa carrying his grandson. Grandpa's face of complete joy drew me to look harder at... Vin Scully! He tapped on the window to get my haircutter's attention. When she turned, Vin held up the one year old and said proudly "Look who I've got!" Then they disappeared into the parking lot. She said "I cut his hair. We talk about family, and he's the nicest man I've ever met." When I could swallow I asked her to promise to be careful with her scissors because about ten million of us want him around for a real long time.
    2007-12-17 01:45:16
    46.   dzzrtRatt
    According to Halos Heaven, the A's "reloaded" in the Dan Haren trade:

    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.

    2007-12-17 02:46:19
    47.   Underbruin
    Jon, if I might make a recommendation for the rankings? Next to total points, I would include average points per player included. This helps handle some seemingly odd total points values like Tampa Bay, where there are TWELVE pitchers listed.

    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. :)

    2007-12-17 04:03:40
    48.   PDH5204
    Re the Rays, well, Kazmir was no better than Shields last year. Someone otherwise left out Price, and that's too bad since the hope is that in August the rotation is Kazmir, Shields, Garza, Niemann, and Price.

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

    2007-12-17 05:55:44
    49.   D4P
    This is why Ned's reluctance to trade any prospects seems like more than just a nod to a fan faction

    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.

    2007-12-17 06:02:48
    50.   D4P
    Fortunately, Ned realized in sufficient time to avoid making a huge mistake that improving one position wasn't worth making 3-4 other positions worse.
    Show/Hide Comments 51-100
    2007-12-17 06:38:14
    51.   D Money
    I'm not sure but, is John Lackey REALLY a super above average and Brad Penny is only an above average?
    2007-12-17 06:43:27
    52.   Hythloday
    46 The Target: 2011 post on Catfish Stew is also worth looking at. We're not under the same constraints, but nonetheless the D'Backs may not have sacrificed current depth, but they sacrificed future depth. Furthermore, as D4P says, they gave up players entirely from the farm and that isn't what we were being asked for as far as we know from news reports.
    2007-12-17 06:52:40
    53.   Eric Stephen
    Lackey gets the nod for being better in 2005 & 2006:

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

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

    2007-12-17 07:05:48
    54.   Jon Weisman
    37 - Open to changing, but Bonderman had one decent year, in 2006. I expect him to improve, but his 2008 performance seems to me to be very up in the air. Meanwhile, Batista has been solid for seven years in a row.

    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.

    2007-12-17 07:10:23
    55.   Jon Weisman
    45 - I would be getting haircuts every day after that. :)
    2007-12-17 07:16:34
    56.   Eric Stephen
    Pretty expansive blog entry on Iguchi signing with the Padres, plus more.

    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, 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.

    2007-12-17 07:19:38
    57.   Jon Weisman
    47 - Interesting way to handle the multiple pitchers issue. Let me think on that.

    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 ...

    2007-12-17 07:28:39
    58.   Jon Weisman
    48 - Open to the change - can you explain your thinking?
    2007-12-17 07:37:42
    59.   Bob Timmermann
    But that was World Series Hero Geoff Blum! He's a god in San Diego.

    A god who was not asked back.

    2007-12-17 07:48:41
    60.   Jon Weisman
    59 - By the way, why haven't the Dodgers pursued Rob Bowen?
    2007-12-17 07:55:52
    61.   Eric Stephen
    What was the Bowen good luck charm? Was it all the pinch-running appearances or something? I remember it had to do with him scoring a run somehow.

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

    2007-12-17 07:57:38
    62.   nofatmike
    Where's Andy Sonnanstine for the Tampa Bay Rays? I thought I wrote him in.
    2007-12-17 07:57:38
    63.   Benaiah
    57 - At some point you have to start thinking that some young guys have already proven their worth. Buchholz has no knocks against him, he has never struggled after being promoted and he dominated when he came up last year. Sure, sometimes young guys struggle, but there is no reason to believe Buchholz will. I would rather have him this year that any 2 starter up there, and more than most of the 3's too. A 1 is just crazy, though I would give Beckett a 3, so I guess it works out.
    2007-12-17 07:59:01
    64.   Eric Stephen
    62 see 37 .
    2007-12-17 08:06:07
    65.   MC Safety
    62 Sure you dont mean any 3 and a couple 2's. Buchholz is good, but Jon's three year window cant just be ignored.
    2007-12-17 08:06:59
    66.   MC Safety
    65 Is aimed at 63
    2007-12-17 08:09:50
    67.   MC Safety
    Hahahhah, I didnt realize you were going off the points Benaiah. I figured you were talking actual rotation postion. Ignore 65 . Carry on.
    2007-12-17 08:15:46
    68.   nofatmike
    48 I left David Price off because he has yet to pitch a game in the minors.
    2007-12-17 08:24:23
    69.   Andrew Shimmin
    We need to take turns surveilling the barbershop; doesn't seem fair making Strike4 do it all himself. Plus, it's harder to get restraining orders against fifty people than against one.
    2007-12-17 08:27:36
    70.   D4P
    Ned's barber:

    2007-12-17 08:28:21
    71.   Benaiah
    65 - Look at his last three years:
    2007: 22.2 IP, 10 BB 22 K, 298 ERA+
    2007: (AA,AAA) 125.1 IP, 35 BB 171 K, 2.80 ERA
    2006: (A+,AA) 119 IP, 34 BB 140 K, 2.42 ERA
    2005: (A-) 41.1 IP, 9 BB 41 K, 2.61 ERA

    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.

    2007-12-17 08:40:31
    72.   Marty
    There can't be much to cut from Vin either. He's been wearing a piece for years.
    2007-12-17 08:42:58
    73.   D4P
    I looked that up on The Google, but reached no definitive conclusion.
    2007-12-17 08:46:56
    74.   Bob Timmermann
    Vin Scully in 1970:

    Vin Scully in 1965

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

    2007-12-17 08:48:01
    75.   Bob Timmermann
    2005 Vin:
    2007-12-17 08:53:10
    76.   Eric Stephen
    Wait! Is that Vin on the far right? :)
    2007-12-17 08:55:07
    77.   kngoworld
    I would consider Fausto Carmona a Super Above Average Pitcher. He had a great year last year with an amazing second half. 19 - 8 record, 3.06 era, 137 k's, 61 BB. I guess he is young and that might be the reasoning behind the 3 points, but he was lights out for a long stretch of games last year.
    2007-12-17 09:07:55
    78.   Kevin Lewis
    From the last thread:

    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.

    2007-12-17 09:08:22
    79.   Connector
    74 75
    With or without his hairpiece, Vinny will remain my idol forever.
    2007-12-17 09:10:38
    80.   Jon Weisman
    77 - Thanks. I don't want to repeat myself, but I'm looking at more than last season, let alone the last half of last season. I am weighing last season more than the others, but I feel that this part of the criteria should be clear.

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

    2007-12-17 09:13:27
    81.   Jon Weisman
    Besides, Carmona's K/BB ration is pretty much 2/1. That's hardly exceptional. I don't have time to look closer at his stats right now, but I have to think he's skating by a little.

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

    2007-12-17 09:25:17
    82.   D4P
    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.

    2007-12-17 09:28:47
    83.   Benaiah
    82 - I definitely think so. A 3 is a front of the rotation pitcher, some years a 3 might be the best pitcher in the league (Derek Lowe had an ERA+ of 177 in 2002) but most years they are just good.
    2007-12-17 09:42:32
    84.   MC Safety
    Something similar to this comparing possible bullpens would be cool too imo.
    2007-12-17 09:52:16
    85.   dzzrtRatt
    49 Right, but this off-season, he hasn't trade anybody from the system. Even if he ruled Kemp, Loney, Billingsley, Kershaw and LaRoche off-limits, there are a lot of plus prospects he could have touched but didn't.

    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 for Hu, Abreu, Elbert, McDonald, Young, DeWitt...

    2007-12-17 09:52:50
    86.   Humma Kavula
    It could have been written for Slate. Instead, (but not the great King Kaufman) says, let's reduce the Hall of Fame!

    2007-12-17 09:55:12
    87.   D4P
    I think Ned probably found out that he wasn't going to get anything in return for Hu, Abreu, Elbert, McDonald, Young, DeWitt that was more useful to the team than those guys would be themselves. He wasn't gonna get a big bat or a good starting pitcher.
    2007-12-17 10:04:30
    88.   bhsportsguy
    85 Elbert - injured, need to see his recovery first
    Hu - want to see if offensive improvement was a fluke, still wondering about pitch recognition also ceiling is not an above average offensive SS.
    Abreu - also injury concerns
    Young - 4th outfielder ceiling right now
    DeWitt - does he have power for 3B, can he ever move to 2B?
    McDonald - one year wonder?

    I am not saying that those guys are not really good prospects (since with Meloan, they make up a good portion of guys that could be in LA next year) but they are not the high ceiling guys that people talk about with the Dodgers.

    Andrew G. said it right a couple of days ago when he said how come no one ever asks AZ for Upton or Drew but they do ask for Kemp and Kershaw? Not sure but that certainly was the case this off-season.

    I maintain that if Elbert, Morris and LaRoche were not coming off some injuries, this could have been a much different off-season but they had those issues so that is why it was either the 4-5 youngsters and no one else ever mentioned in the media.

    2007-12-17 10:09:13
    89.   D4P
    Andrew G. said it right a couple of days ago when he said how come no one ever asks AZ for Upton or Drew but they do ask for Kemp and Kershaw?

    A number of us have been commenting for some time now on how the Dodgers appear to be asked to give up more than other teams. And when other teams make trades, they seem to give up less than we thought we would have to give up.

    2007-12-17 10:10:31
    90.   bhsportsguy
    BTW - Today's lists some of the NL prospects that just missed their team's top ten lists, two Dodgers that are mentioned are Josh Bell 3B prospect likely going to Inland Empire (High A) and Andrew Lambo OF/1B who could go extended spring and then to Rookie ball in Ogden or they could just send him to Midland (Low A) but he would be one of the younger guys in that league.
    2007-12-17 10:10:42
    91.   Hythloday
    87 I'm pretty happy with the offseason so far. BH summarized what remains for spring training pretty well I think. Talking about trading prospects for someone like Haren, Bedard, or Santana is well and good, but who would we trade and where would we put them. I think our biggest challenge moving forward isn't who we can still acquire, but how we deal with the various mystery pitchers and deadwood already on the roster. No number of trades is going to fix that.

    Your point of contention is Haren vs. Kuroda I think. Of that group that you list who would you give up and how many? Hu, Elbert, McDonald, Young & Dewitt? That would be a comparable cost for us right?

    2007-12-17 10:11:40
    92.   CanuckDodger
    Just looking at Jon's up-dated 40-man roster plus salaries, I really wonder if Abreu is going to be on the bench, or, let me put it this way: it would be better for Abreu, and the Dodgers' post-2008 interests, to have Abreu playing everyday, with Hu, in Vegas. He's not a finished product, and he is expected to be a regular as early as 2009 Opening Day. I think the Dodgers kept Wilson Valdez on the 40-man roster expecting him to be the back-up middle infielder for 2008. It is fine to make Delwyn Young a bench player in 2008 only because we don't expect him to ever be MORE than that for us. Abreu needs to keep playing everyday.
    2007-12-17 10:12:51
    93.   Hythloday
    91 meant for 85
    2007-12-17 10:14:11
    94.   bhsportsguy
    89 Sure, I've said it, you've said it, many have said it, I just mentioned Andrew because he was the last one that I recall doing so.
    2007-12-17 10:16:52
    95.   Andrew Shimmin
    92- It'd also keep him out of the 3B death match, where he never belonged.
    2007-12-17 10:17:33
    96.   bhsportsguy
    92 If I show up on Opening Day and LaRoche is the starting 3B and Nomar is nowhere to be seen, then I think it is likely that Abreu will be on the team because he can play 3 infield positions. Otherwise if the Dodgers have both Nomar and LaRoche, then I think Valdez has the best shot with Abreu and Hu turning double plays in Vegas.
    2007-12-17 10:19:50
    97.   dzzrtRatt
    89 What started me thinking about this was the Halo Heaven post I linked to in 46 . The writer there believes Beane did extremely well in his haul of prospects for Haren, coming up with players who are going to make life hard for Anaheim and the rest of the AL West in the very near future.

    Were Arizona's second-tier prospects (i.e. behind Drew and Upton) that much more desirable than the Dodgers'? Or has Ned's philosophy changed about the need for a deep system? That's what I was trying to get at.

    2007-12-17 10:37:28
    98.   berkowit28
    89 A number of us have been commenting for some time now on how the Dodgers appear to be asked to give up more than other teams.

    I think that part of the reason for that has to be all the pseudo-platooning going on last year between the kids and the vets. None of the kids except Loney was ever established as the everyday holder of a position, and Loney only in the second half. The Dodgers were treating them like prospects, not like everyday players. Why wouldn't other GMs see them the same way? Then came the Kent ballyhoo against the kids at the very end, with the (barely) possible implication that to please Kent some kids could be traded.

    If you were a GM of another team, wouldn't you be trying to get the very best you could from the Dodgers in those circumstances? At least as your opening gambit?

    I think that the combination last year of Coletti being inclined to try to get the most he could from his "proven vets" for whom he paid a lot of money, his nervousness about letting kids play without "knocking the door down" (and not giving them many chances to do that), plus Grady Little's rather weak stature and personality (someone else might have tried harder to get the kids in seeing what the vets were doing) all added up to vacillation and keeping the kids as super-prspects. I'm not surprised that other GMs saw an opening here, going for what they couldn't hope to get from other teams.

    The best things about this off-season are that Colletti has realized that the kids are his best bet - in fact last year will have served to get that "proving themselves" business out of the way - plus Torre being a manager he has to respect and allow to manage without interfering. If Torre decides to play Kemp and Ethier and bench Pierre because the performances justify doing that, he'll do so. if that happens, Colletti will start looking for trade opportunities for Pierre.

    2007-12-17 10:41:30
    99.   D4P
    if that happens, Colletti will start looking for trade opportunities for Pierre

    I would have to think that Colletti could trade Pierre if he really wanted to, by which I mean if he didn't care about getting anything valuable in return and wasn't opposed to including a sizable dowry with Pierre.

    2007-12-17 11:00:20
    100.   GoBears
    89 D4P A number of us have been commenting for some time now on how the Dodgers appear to be asked to give up more than other teams. And when other teams make trades, they seem to give up less than we thought we would have to give up.

    The key words in the above comment (and kudos to D4P for being precise) are in bold.

    We really have no idea what was being asked of the Dodgers, or of any other team for that matter. All we have to go on is the deals that actually do happen, and what the rumor-mongers said about negotiations that didn't come to fruition, and we know how often they're correct about the deals that actually do go down.

    I won't believe that another team asked for the moon unless both teams' GMs agree publicly on the offers and demands.

    Show/Hide Comments 101-150
    2007-12-17 11:00:48
    101.   Daniel Zappala
    99 Maybe Colletti can give up Pierre and two cows for a backup catcher.
    2007-12-17 11:04:16
    102.   Humma Kavula
    101 Econ class debate:

    You have two cows. You also have Juan Pierre. Unfortunately, neither of the cows nor Pierre can play baseball. You find another farmer who has Johan Santana. You drug the farmer, kidnap him to the desert, take Santana, and leave the cows and Pierre. By the time the farmer comes around and accuses you of a crime, you have already won the World Series.

    2007-12-17 11:06:19
    103.   bhsportsguy
    97 Baseball America ranked 4 of the 6 prospects acquired in the Haren deal in AZ's top 8 (with 2 of those players not eligible to be traded since they only signed last year) Gonzalez and Anderson were Arizona's number one and three prospects. Greg Smith, the 5th player in the deal probably ranks in the 11-15 area and the 6th guy in the deal has bounced around a little bit but is pitching well in the Mexican Winter League/

    So the A's got 5 of Arizona's top 13-15 including 4 of their first 6 eligible to be dealt this winter. I think from a media viewpoint and for Beane to sell, it looks really good for the A's.

    Now there are questions abound for each of the six and outside of the guy pitching in the Mexican League, it might be a stretch for any of the other 5 to start the season in Oakland so the actual bounty may not be known for some time.

    2007-12-17 11:10:07
    104.   GobiasIndustries
    Juan Pierre could be had for two fish tacos and a Ryan Leaf jersey.
    2007-12-17 11:11:08
    105.   Bob Timmermann
    You are forgetting to take into account that we may have reached peak milk!
    2007-12-17 11:16:57
    106.   Humma Kavula
    104 But then what are you going to do with the cows? They're useless anyway, munching the outfield grass all day long. And if you thought Gonzalez was a terrible outfielder, you should watch the cows go after a fly ball.

    The cows are a much better fit for Minnesota, because they have no grass. The field crew can make sure they get food from other sources and the ground will still be green.

    And then, when the farmer wakes up, we can say that Cow-Pierre-Cow is better than whatever they plan on running out there this year, and maybe that will save us from the slammer.

    2007-12-17 11:19:01
    107.   Robert Fiore
    Pardon me if this has been brought up before, but instead of the awkward "Super above-average," how above "Superlative"? Or just plain "Ace"?
    2007-12-17 11:19:41
    108.   LogikReader
    Can we do one of those "hair comparisons" for Rex Hudler too? I believe I can arrive at a good conclusion by looking at a 1999 pic vs a 2006 pic.
    2007-12-17 11:26:32
    109.   Humma Kavula
    The Dodgers are John Sickels' next team to cover on Should be today or tomorrow.
    2007-12-17 11:29:56
    110.   bhsportsguy
    105 Latest rumor from Westwood, Norm Chow will be on campus either today or tomorrow for 2nd interview (this time including Chancellor Block).
    2007-12-17 11:35:30
    111.   kinbote
    107 Elite?
    2007-12-17 11:36:01
    112.   Bob Timmermann
    Will he be bringing any pigeons with him?

    My favorite racing pigeons are the Brockian types.

    2007-12-17 12:01:17
    113.   Disabled List
    Things to Trade Juan Pierre For

    Box of sunflower seeds
    Pair of tickets to Jersey Boys
    New trashcan for Jeff Kent
    Banana-flavored Laffy Taffy
    Lifetime subscription to Dodger Thoughts
    Glove oil
    New hairpiece for Ned or Vin
    A copy of Guitar Hero
    Curb Your Enthusiasm season 6 DVD set

    2007-12-17 12:06:36
    114.   Humma Kavula
    Banana-flavored Laffy Taffy

    Easily the worst flavor of Laffy Taffy.

    And still more tasty than Juan Pierre.

    2007-12-17 12:17:40
    115.   natepurcell
    This guy likes the Kuroda Acquisition

    2007-12-17 12:19:55
    116.   D4P
    He [Kuroda] will be in the sixth or seventh inning, sailing along, and he gets into a little trouble. Suddenly he grabs another gear

    Hmmm. Maybe he should try grabbing another gear before he gets into a little trouble in the first place.

    2007-12-17 12:20:05
    117.   natepurcell
    anyone have Kuroda's gb rates from Japan?
    2007-12-17 12:23:08
    118.   natepurcell

    So why would you waste more energy when you are already sailing along pretty well?

    2007-12-17 12:25:51
    119.   D4P
    First of all, what does grabbing another gear mean, and second of all, in what way does it involve wasting more energy?
    2007-12-17 12:30:52
    120.   uclasway
    two cows and pierre are better than the Twins OF?

    Are you forgetting about former #1 prospect and 94 RBI Delmon Young and young and talented Cuddyer?

    Jon, I know you're looking at 3 year averages, but how is Josh Beckett not in the Ace category? I think the AL points in general are a bit skewed

    2007-12-17 12:32:52
    121.   wronghanded
    119 When a pitcher is throwing well and a team has a comfortable lead (lets say 5-1), many pitchers go on "cruise control". No need to exert extra energy and pinpoint pitches when you are cruising right along with minimal damage. Often times however, while "cruising", the other team can start putting something together (ie. a couple hits/walks) and all of the sudden you're a 3 run bomb away from a close game. I think the report is basically saying that Kuroda knows how to lock back into his A game and extinguish fires.
    2007-12-17 12:34:08
    122.   regfairfield
    My opinion would improve on Kuroda drastically if he's actually as proficent at getting ground balls as the article says.
    2007-12-17 12:34:17
    123.   hernari

    No matter how good a pitcher is, some trouble is inevitable most outings.

    2007-12-17 12:36:26
    124.   uclasway
    Sorry Jon, misread Beckett. I think the A's Gaudin may have just had hip surgery. What about Javier Vazquez as above average (see his VORP)? Isn't Liriano a 2 point mystery? If he comes back healthy like everything I've read, he could be dominant.
    2007-12-17 12:36:29
    125.   Vishal
    116 seriously. he should never let any runners on base, ever. what a loser.
    2007-12-17 12:36:34
    126.   D4P
    When a pitcher is throwing well and a team has a comfortable lead (lets say 5-1), many pitchers go on "cruise control". No need to exert extra energy and pinpoint pitches when you are cruising right along with minimal damage. Often times however, while "cruising", the other team can start putting something together (ie. a couple hits/walks) and all of the sudden you're a 3 run bomb away from a close game

    Doesn't the fact that "cruising" can lead to the other team "putting something together" bely the claim that there's "no need to exert extra energy and pinpoint pitches"? If cruising gets you in trouble, don't cruise.

    2007-12-17 12:37:35
    127.   Humma Kavula
    120 Yes, two cows are better than all that, if you value the humor of my joke.

    It's not nearly as funny to suggest that the Twins' actual outfield is expected to perform better than cows.

    Of course, maybe you didn't like my play on the old econ "You have two cows" thought experiment. That is certainly your right.

    2007-12-17 12:38:02
    128.   D4P
    In other words, if Kuroda (or any other pitcher) has some "more effective way" of pitching that they use when they're in trouble, why not use the more effective way of pitching all the time so they are less likely to get in trouble in the first place?

    This is similar to the notion of "clutch" hitting. If a player has some approach to hitting that works better in clutch situations, he should use said approach all the time, not just in clutch situations.

    2007-12-17 12:38:29
    129.   hernari
    Some pitchers crumble after giving up a couple hits. It's not that hard to understand, they're saying he's the opposite of that.
    2007-12-17 12:39:32
    130.   regfairfield
    128 The analogy doesn't work because if his other gear means exerting more effort, he'll wear down faster.
    2007-12-17 12:42:18
    131.   D4P
    if his other gear means exerting more effort, he'll wear down faster

    Then his other gear isn't really worth all that much.

    2007-12-17 12:42:18
    132.   Jacob L
    120 127

    That just gives you the luxury of running one cow out there with Young and Cuddyer, while Pierre and the other cow provide much needed depth. Is one of the cows left handed?

    2007-12-17 12:42:57
    133.   Jacob L
    120 127

    That just gives you the luxury of running one cow out there with Young and Cuddyer, while Pierre and the other cow provide much needed depth. Is one of the cows left handed?

    2007-12-17 12:44:03
    134.   Jacob L
    That just gives you the luxury of . . .

    Never mind, if it wasn't funny the first two times, this won't help.

    2007-12-17 12:45:14
    135.   wronghanded
    126 I know from my personal experiences (I pitched in college for 4 years) that I would often cruise when I felt my team had the game in hand. You have to remember that pitching is a grind and that if you exert/overexert yourself for a start, you can bank on your arm being mediocre in your next outing. I never really cared about stats when I played (WHIP, K/9, ERA) I cared more about the outcome of the game. I think several pitchers use that philosophy and it probably serves them better in the 162 game grind of the MLB. Sure you may get burned sometimes, but it usually doesn't happen and you're making yourself as fresh as possible for your next outing.
    2007-12-17 12:48:59
    136.   MikeB
    This topic may have been discussed here previously but I wanted to add my 2 cents - nothing scientific - just a personal observation:
    I've watched the Kuroda press conference video (on Dodger web site) a few times now. My sense is that keeping the kids is more McCourt's idea - and less Colleti's. McCourt states in the opening moments of the video that he has been approached by fans and asked to hang on to the younger players - and that Ned did a great job improving the team without giving up the farm. For Ned's part of the video, I noticed his tone and body language did not appear to be that of someone enjoying a brief moment of organized celebration. A reluctant hero? Or just a tired one?
    2007-12-17 12:57:32
    137.   uclasway
    I loved the quote from Colletti that said he had never watched Kuroda play, and deferred entirely to Logan White's analysis. Why is this guy in charge of baseball operations? Shouldn't we just promote White in his place and let Ng handle the waiver process (which is allegedly Colletti's strength)?
    2007-12-17 13:00:35
    138.   Andrew Shimmin
    Everybody should drive 110 miles an hour at all times because if your car will go that fast, there's no point going some other speed, regardless of what it does to your fuel economy.
    2007-12-17 13:03:01
    139.   Eric Enders
    137 It's not really a GM's job to watch every player play personally. That's what they have scouts for. Talent evaluation is only one aspect of the GM's job, and these days the financial side of the job requires much more attention. And the best way for a GM to evaluate talent is probably to use stats and synthesize the scouting reports of others, rather than relying too greatly on one's own inexpert observation. Colletti comes from a sportswriting background and not a scouting background anyway. He may want to scout players sometimes for his own personal edification (as with Kershaw this past August), but it's not really part of his job description.
    2007-12-17 13:05:50
    140.   Eric Enders
    For 150 years pitchers have realized that it doesn't do any good to go full-bore on every pitch, and that you should save your best bullets for when you really need them. Otherwise they'd never make it through the game. Christy Mathewson even wrote a book about it 100 years ago called "Pitching in a Pinch."

    There is a word for a pitcher who uses maximum effort on almost every delivery: "Closer."

    2007-12-17 13:06:27
    141.   Eric Stephen
    Katie Couric uses the word "asterick".
    2007-12-17 13:07:36
    142.   Benaiah
    If Kuroda can induce a lot of ground balls then I am going from from lukewarm to optimistic about the signing. He hardly walks anyone, doesn't give up many home runs, K's about 5 a game, so combined with a solid GB% he is basically Derek Lowe. There has to be a place where we can see if "ground ball pitcher" means he got 45% GBs or 65% GBs.
    2007-12-17 13:07:43
    143.   D4P
    So, should we conclude that Kuroda is most effective on pitches when he throws really hard, and that he can't throw really hard very often?
    2007-12-17 13:08:33
    144.   Eric Stephen
    Andrew, for what it's worth, early reports suggest you will be ranked highly in the preseason 2008 commenter rankings.
    2007-12-17 13:09:26
    145.   Dark Horse
    135-I reckon that's correct. Plenty of good pitchers seem to pitch a little better, to conjure up a little extra when runners get on base. (Chad Billingsley--ahem--seems to excel at this.) The idea that pitchers should work at maximum effort or intensity at all times is patently ridiculous.
    2007-12-17 13:10:38
    146.   D4P
    Plenty of good pitchers seem to pitch a little better, to conjure up a little extra when runners get on base

    So Kuroda's not really unique in that respect...

    2007-12-17 13:10:47
    147.   natepurcell

    Stop twisting words around. You loss this argument, man up.

    2007-12-17 13:13:48
    148.   SG6
    141 - Was she referring to Rick Ankiel? I'm all for the asteroger! Did she mention that?
    2007-12-17 13:14:05
    149.   natepurcell
    Seriously though, Kuroda's GB rates have to be somewhere.
    2007-12-17 13:14:33
    150.   wronghanded
    143 The term pitch to contact comes to mind for me. It does require extra energy/effort to nibble the corners and put a little giddy-up on your fastball. When pitching with a big lead it's simple, throw strikes.
    Show/Hide Comments 151-200
    2007-12-17 13:14:39
    151.   natepurcell

    I think this is a job fit for a librarian....

    2007-12-17 13:15:13
    152.   uclasway
    Colletti hasn't been particularly adept at synthesizing scouting reports and statistical analysis if you ask me. Signing Nomar to a 2 year deal blocking Loney, Juan Pierre for 5 years, and picking up Loaiza for 7 million are indicative of this. Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt on the Schmidt and Furcal deals (much of DT won't), tell me what transactions HE has done that you deem successful?
    2007-12-17 13:16:25
    153.   Andrew Shimmin
    144- Too, too late. You've become the Grammies; the only good thing about your list is the jokes other people will make about it.


    2007-12-17 13:16:38
    154.   D4P
    Stop twisting words around. You loss this argument, man up

    I think we've reached that conclusion that Kuroda is no different from many/most pitchers in terms of "trying harder" in certain situations than others.

    2007-12-17 13:17:21
    155.   natepurcell
    icking up Loaiza for 7 million are indicative of this.

    Andrew (truebluela Andrew) agrees with me on this, but picking up Loaiza for 7 million for only one year was a good move considering

    1.our need for SP
    2.the options available in the free agent market.

    If Loaiza's healthy, he is league average. If he is not healthy, he doesn't pitch and its only 7 million insurance policy.

    2007-12-17 13:17:53
    156.   Humma Kavula

    Let's say I'm Rick Asadoorian, just as an example. I'm a marginal baseball talent, looking to be the 25th guy on a roster somewhere. My agent tells me that my best shot is to be an NRI for a team and hope to catch on. I'm disappointed, but it beats selling patio furniture, so I'm on board.

    Why does my agent call the Dodgers? Asadoorian's a pitcher these days. The Dodgers are loaded with pitchers. I would guess that it's extraordinarily unlikely that Asadoorian will get the opening day call and highly unlikely that he would see action in LA all season long. Meaning that Asadoorian's best and perhaps only shot to see action in the majors might be for his agent to work the phones, find a team that needs him, and get the Dodgers to release or trade him. Meanwhile, he's pitching in Vegas, which doesn't do any pitcher any favors.

    I would imagine that Asadoorian doesn't have a lot of say in the matter -- if there were a market for his services, he wouldn't be on an NRI, right? But if I'm the agent, isn't my first call to the Brewers?

    2007-12-17 13:18:42
    157.   natepurcell

    So what exactly is your point? Your main argument of "why doesn't he go full speed all the time" was eloquently refuted by Shimmin in 138 .

    What else are you trying to say?

    2007-12-17 13:18:59
    158.   hernari
    154 You don't like the signing. We get it.
    2007-12-17 13:19:29
    159.   Eric Enders
    154 Perhaps you meant for your third word to be "I've" and not "we've."
    2007-12-17 13:20:51
    160.   uclasway
    The Astros, Cardinals, Reds, and Nationals also come to mind
    2007-12-17 13:20:51
    161.   Bob Timmermann
    I don't see any figures that look like ground ball rates here:
    2007-12-17 13:21:51
    162.   Eric Enders
    156 My impression has always been that agents in such situations call almost every team and then gravitate toward the club that has the most enthusiastic response.
    2007-12-17 13:22:41
    163.   Jon Weisman
    2007-12-17 13:23:28
    164.   natepurcell

    If you can't do any better than that, I don't know how I will be able to vote you on the annual Librarian all star team.

    2007-12-17 13:23:36
    165.   hernari

    For me, that page raises more "???'s" than it answers.

    2007-12-17 13:25:30
    166.   D4P
    Andrew's 138 was irrelevant. Driving fast works well in some situations but not others. But if pitching hard works better when runners are on, it also presumably works better when runners aren't on.

    This isn't about the signing, it's about being a warrior and buckling down and grabbing alternative gears.

    No, I meant "we've".

    2007-12-17 13:29:48
    167.   wronghanded
    166 , 154 I think its safe to say his effort is no different than many pitchers. His success/failure with that approach is what will ultimately set him apart from others. It is encouraging to hear his former manager say he's got a track record of success with that approach.
    2007-12-17 13:30:04
    168.   wronghanded
    166 , 154 I think its safe to say his effort is no different than many pitchers. His success/failure with that approach is what will ultimately set him apart from others. It is encouraging to hear his former manager say he's got a track record of success with that approach.
    2007-12-17 13:30:17
    169.   wronghanded
    166 , 154 I think its safe to say his effort is no different than many pitchers. His success/failure with that approach is what will ultimately set him apart from others. It is encouraging to hear his former manager say he's got a track record of success with that approach.
    2007-12-17 13:31:00
    170.   wronghanded
    sorry about that my computer just went crazy. It won't happen again.
    2007-12-17 13:39:08
    171.   PDH5204
    58 Starting with the Royals, Greinke appeared in 52 games but only started 14. He began and ended the year as a starter. Meche started the whole year. Re Meche's last 10 starts, on 2 occasions he gave up 3 runs, all the rest were 2 runs or less. Of the 10, he lost both 3 run games and 2 of the 2 run games, so there wasn't much run support and so his W-L is a little misleading. Greinke's and Meche's end numbers are about the same, but I credit Meche for being a full-time starter. With some run support, Meche could otherwise have been slightly above .500.

    Re Bannister, well, his numbers, his ERA at least, got skewed by 3 bad starts near the end there. Last start was 5 ERs in .2 IP. Start before was 6 ER in 5 IP. Then skipping the start before that last one, on 10/8 he gave up 7 ER in 5 IP. Prior to that, well, from 6/1 to that 10/8 start, Bannister went 12-4. He gave up 6 ERs on 6/23 v. the Brewers, 4 ERs on 6/17 v. the Marlins, 4 ERs on 7/4 v. Seattle, and 4 ERs on 7/16 v. the Red Sox. Bannister gave up 3 ERs on 8/1 [Twins] and 8/12 [Jays]. He had 3 starts with 2 ERs [8/17-22-28], 5 starts with 1 ER [6/1; 6/29; 7/22; 8/7; 9/2; 9/14], and 3 starts with 0 ER [6/6; 6/12; 7/27]. My own personal bias is that I had a pitcher go on the DL in late May on 3 of my fantasy teams and I picked up Bannister and he did just fine until those last two starts cost 2 of the 3 teams the fantasy league championship [killed the ERA and HRs allowed]. I don't have a crystal ball, but I'd like to think that the end there was simply the end of a long first season starting for him. His April and May was otherwise 0-3, with 4 ERs on 5/26, 3 ERs on 4/24; 4/29; and 5/20, and 2 ERs on 5/4 and 5/15.

    Re the Rays, well, remember that one discussion about the one bad start skewing the ERA. It did for James Shields. 7/22 at Yankees and he gave up 10 ERs in 3.1 IP. Owing to the fiascos that were the two prior games, Shields was left out there to die [as it were]. All of the runners he otherwise had on base when he left ended up scoring. Absent that single horrendous start when the entire pen but for Al Reyes had already been gassed in the prior 2 games, well, his ERA would be 3.49 [as opposed to 3.85]. Shields was also shut down for his last two starts, whereas Kazmir pitched to the end. But even so, Shields threw 215 innings, was 12-8, with 184 Ks and 36 BBs, and a WHIP of 1.11. In contrast, Kazmir threw 206.2 innings [so almost a game shy of Shields with Shields shut down for his last 2 scheduled starts], had a 3.48 ERA [the most ERs he gave up was 6, on a single occasion, 8/20 v. Red Sox], he K'd 239 and BB'd 89, with a WHIP of 1.38.

    I'm in for it Shields since while he certainly didn't strike out as many as Kaz, 184 K's in 215 IPs is nothing to sneeze at and he ended up pithing more innings despite being shut down for his last 2 starts and he only walked 36 to Kaz's 89, and his WHIP was 1.11 to Kaz's 1.38. I'd otherwise like to think that Shields' improvement last year will stick.

    2007-12-17 13:58:43
    172.   scareduck
    Since nobody else has posted this: Dodgers signed Gary Bennett, one year and $850k:

    2007-12-18 06:56:00
    173.   Andrew Shimmin
    166-I'm rubber, you're glue. . .

    Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.