When the 2006 season ended, the Astros were coming off an 82-80 record, and a final two-month stretch where they went 33-24. On September 28, 2006 Roy Oswalt beat Tom Gorzelanny and the Pirates, 3-0, to close the Cardinals' division lead to half a game. Roger Clemens lost a 4-1 game to the Braves' Chuck James (while the Cardinals beat Milwaukee, 10-5) to push the Astros back to 1.5GB, the final deficit of the season.
But the Astros, at least on paper, had reason to feel good. They were a year removed from a World Series appearance, and had been 1st or 2nd in the division for six straight seasons (and twelve of the previous thirteen seasons from 1994-2006). If you didn't really look at the minor-league system, the Astros had put together as dynastic a franchise as you could find in the NL Central.
Sure, the average age of the position players was 30.5 (and pitchers 29.8), but the Astros were going to do what they had always done - and that was compete. The Astros didn't rebuild. And they had money to spend. Roger Clemens ($12.2m) and Andy Pettitte ($16.4m) were coming off the books for 2007. Oswalt, Adam Everett, Morgan Ensberg, etc, would be getting raises, but nothing approaching the $28m available for free agents.
In 2006, the Astros were last in batting average (.255), next-to-last in slugging (.409), and were in the lower half of OBP (.332), resulting in a .741 OPS, ever-so-slightly higher than the Cubs, and only better than the Pirates. Preston Wilson was the primary LF in 2006, hitting .269/.309/.405 until he got released on August 12 (and signed with the Cardinals six days later), and the Astros could look at possible replacements.
28-year old Luke Scott got 249 PAs, and hit .336/.426/.661 (including 50 games at LF, where he hit .340/.426/.612). Would they give him a chance to be the everyday left fielder?
When free agency opened, there were some big fish out there. Alfonso Soriano, Carlos Lee, and Aramis Ramirez (who opted out of his deal with the Cubs) were the prime position players in addition to Barry Zito, Jason Schmidt, and a Japanese pitcher named Daisuke Matsuzaka.
The name that stood out to most Astros fans was Carlos Lee. Lee was traded midway through the 2006 season by the Brewers (when they realized they weren't going to be able to re-sign him to a long-term deal) to the Rangers on July 28, who were 2.5GB of the Angels, and 2GB of the A's. But the Rangers weren't interested in re-signing Lee.
During 2003-2006, Lee hit .290/.344/.513 (119 OPS+), with 131 homers, 329K:206BB, for (according to FanGraphs) a 14.1 WAR over those four seasons. Also, Lee had a cattle ranch in Wharton. Surely he would be interested in Houston, with its short left field?
But Houston wasn't the only team looking to spend the owner's money. Nick Cafardo listed the Cubs, Red Sox, Orioles, and Astros as the four major players in the 2006 free agent market. The Cubs were interested in Soriano and Lee, as were the Orioles, the Dodgers, and the Phillies.
Phillies' GM Pat Gillick, on Lee:
"He's a nice looking player, someone who would definitely draw some interest," Gillick said, adding he has spoken to Lee's representatives...Lee is listed at 6-foot-2 and 240 pounds and there have been questions about him being out of shape, but Gillick said his size isn't a concern. "Lee is a heck of an athlete," Gillick said.
Baltimore VP Jim Duquette, on Lee:
"We're in the mix, definitely,"
And the Astros were working on signing one of the two - Soriano, or Lee. And then the Cubs signed Soriano to an 8-year, $136 million deal, surprising all of baseball, and surprising Tim Purpura:
"If it's to the numbers that are being reported, we've certainly not been involved to that level. We've certainly been involved to a high level. But to the terms and the dollars (reported for Soriano in Chicago) we haven't been involved that high."
With Soriano off the board to the Cubs (who allegedly outbid the Angels by $50m), those other teams might be persuaded to step up their pursuit of Lee. Meanwhile, Purpura knew he was in a balancing act:
"It's not just about today, it's about tomorrow and on to the future. You don't have the record we've had over 14 years by being shortsighted. It's a real balancing act. You've got to take care of today as well as tomorrow."
The cost of Carlos Lee was getting out of control. On November 21, Justice labeled it an "understatement" to say that the bidding was "far beyond" what the Astros expected.
The Associated Press began free agency predicting that the winning team on Lee would need to go to four years, and $50 million to sign him. But that was before the Soriano deal rocked the market, which meant anyone who wanted Carlos Lee was going to have to fly past the 4yr/$50m mark. Richard Justice said on November 19 that it was down to the Orioles, Phillies, and Astros. And the Orioles were offering six years at $80-90 million, which which Justice suggested the Astros should pass on.
They didn't.
Tim Purpura:
When we met this offseason to plot our strategy, we set up our goals for what we wanted to accomplish in the offseason market in the free-agent market and the trade market. Our first priority was to increase our offensive production in the outfield."
Carlos Lee:
"I know this is a team where I have a good chance to win a championship. I've always liked this team, they're always very good, and I like this ballpark. I like a lot about Houston. That's why I told my agent this was one of the places I'd like to play."
Was it too much money for too many years? Everyone seemed to think so, but it was worth it - at least for now.
Justice:
Drayton McLane overpaid to get Carlos Lee, but he did get him. And because he got him, the Astros didn’t just get better Friday. They got way better. That six-year, $100-million deal is considerably more than the Astros thought they’d have to spend, but the market took a dramatic turn upward with Alfonso’s Soriano’s $136-million deal.
There were concerns about his fielding ability, but the Astros had two power bats in the lineup for the first time since Bagwell left.
Tim Purpura:
"This is a historic commitment to winning,"
Phil Garner:
Carlos will fit very nicely in the middle of that lineup -- oh, my goodness, that's going to be nice. I'm sure that Berkman is over there enjoying his turkey dinner a lot better right now, knowing there's just no way now they're going to get around him. By adding these two guys we'll be definitely better."
Even The Crawfish Boxes (or at least StrosBro) were fired up:
I think we overpaid for Lee, but I think we should have. I'm ecstatic on both of these signings.
Drayton:
"I remember watching Carlos with the White Sox and with the Brewers and he broke our hearts a few times. His statistics are as good as they get...This is by far the biggest single commitment in the history of the Houston Astros."
Ultimately, the Astros made too long of a commitment at too high a price. But that's what we know now. Sure, there was the pre-diarrhea feeling that things were going to go badly, but at the time, from a major-league standpoint, Lee made the Astros better. And after the run the Astros had since 1994, standing pat would upset the fan base.
The deal worked out exactly as it was supposed to, except the Astros weren't ready for it. And the point of the whole preceding Whatever is to show that Lee was highly sought-after, his salary was inflated by the obscene Soriano contract, and the Astros weren't in a position (from your casual "Hey-let's-go-to-the-game-tonight" fan) to start rebuilding one season removed from the World Series.
If you look at the guys around him, Morgan Ensberg dipped from a .283/.388/.557 line in 2005 to a .235/.396/.463 (still enough for an .858 OPS, but propped up by 101 walks in 495 PAs) line in 2006. He made it through 85 games of weakened numbers in 2007 before getting cut. Biggio was gunning for Hit #3000. Berkman was coming off a 1.041 OPS year. We criticize the Astros for not blowing it up earlier, but the Astros wouldn't be really interested in letting Biggio try to get his 3000th hit in an empty stadium.
It's easy to criticize the Carlos Lee deal now that he's going to take up about a third of the Astros payroll in 2012, the final year of his contract. But the context is important.
We didn't come out here to play tiddlywinks, son.
-Hal Smith
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Interest in Wandy "seems non-existent"
Take it for what it's worth, but Jon Heyman is tweeting that interest in Wandy "seems non-existent" (perhaps because it didn't come up when he was shining Jack Morris' shoes), and adds this helpful tidbit:
Astros should have let #rox take him on claim last summer
Oh yes, that's very helpful, Mr. Heyman.
Otherwise, it looks like Wandy is going to have to put up a solid first-half to draw interest in regards to a trade.
Over the past three seasons, here are Wandy's 1st-Half splits:
20-33, 316.1IP, 322H/133ER, 265K:113BB, 3.78 ERA/1.38 WHIP.
If Wandy posts a first half similar to the last three seasons, would it be worth pulling the trigger on? Especially with his 2nd-Half over the last three seasons:
16-12, 275.1IP, 235H/88ER, 272K:87BB, 2.88 ERA/1.17 WHIP.
Astros should have let #rox take him on claim last summer
Oh yes, that's very helpful, Mr. Heyman.
Otherwise, it looks like Wandy is going to have to put up a solid first-half to draw interest in regards to a trade.
Over the past three seasons, here are Wandy's 1st-Half splits:
20-33, 316.1IP, 322H/133ER, 265K:113BB, 3.78 ERA/1.38 WHIP.
If Wandy posts a first half similar to the last three seasons, would it be worth pulling the trigger on? Especially with his 2nd-Half over the last three seasons:
16-12, 275.1IP, 235H/88ER, 272K:87BB, 2.88 ERA/1.17 WHIP.
And in non-news...
Fox Sports' Jon Morosi says that:
#Astros hearing from a few teams on Carlos Lee but nothing is close, sources say. He would be a terrific fit for #Indians.
Crazy. It's almost like we suggested the same thing on December 6.
#Astros hearing from a few teams on Carlos Lee but nothing is close, sources say. He would be a terrific fit for #Indians.
Crazy. It's almost like we suggested the same thing on December 6.
Ross Wolf signs with Baltimore
Looks like there are going to be some spots open at OKC, now that the Orioles have signed Ross Wolf to a minor-league deal.
Wolf appeared in 56 games for OKC in 2011, with a 4.76 ERA and 1.49 WHIP. Wolf came to the Astros' system from Baltimore in 2010, after he was traded to the Orioles by the A's for Jake Fox.
Wolf appeared in 56 games for OKC in 2011, with a 4.76 ERA and 1.49 WHIP. Wolf came to the Astros' system from Baltimore in 2010, after he was traded to the Orioles by the A's for Jake Fox.
All of you can calm down about Keith Law now
Keith Law tweeted a few minutes ago that he will not be joining the Astros' front office:
I have chosen to stay with ESPN. It was a difficult decision, and I'm very grateful to the Astros for the opportunity.
However you feel about Keith Law, this would have at least made for an entertaining hire.
I have chosen to stay with ESPN. It was a difficult decision, and I'm very grateful to the Astros for the opportunity.
However you feel about Keith Law, this would have at least made for an entertaining hire.
Astros sign Tomas Lopez
Via DPL Baseball, the Astros have signed 17-year old 6'3" 190lb RHP Tomas Lopez for $70,000 (Update: DPL Baseball responded to a question to clarify that Tomas Perez is 18 years old).
DPL Baseball:
Lopez throws from a High ¾ arm slot with fastball velocity at 90-91(92), he shows flashes of a solid Curveball with tight rotation and his changeup is deceptive with movement down in the zone.
Update: The Astros have also signed 16-year old RHP Carlos Vasquez and 17-year old Edward Santana.
Felix Francisco, on Santana:
“He’s not a big power guy right now and more of a guy you can project will hit 15-20 home runs. His power will come with time, but he does have good bat speed and good extension.”
DPL Baseball:
Lopez throws from a High ¾ arm slot with fastball velocity at 90-91(92), he shows flashes of a solid Curveball with tight rotation and his changeup is deceptive with movement down in the zone.
Update: The Astros have also signed 16-year old RHP Carlos Vasquez and 17-year old Edward Santana.
Felix Francisco, on Santana:
“He’s not a big power guy right now and more of a guy you can project will hit 15-20 home runs. His power will come with time, but he does have good bat speed and good extension.”
Monday, January 9, 2012
A geographic breakdown of the No Bagwell contingent
So I have spent the past hour and a half fuming, and decided to plot the writers who are listed as Nays on Bagwell-to-the-HOF (compiled from LeoKitty and the BBWAA lists) on a Google Earth map. The placemarks aren't their addresses, just reflecting of the cities where the writer is based. Here's what I found... (click the image to enlarge)
But this isn't telling the whole story. Take a closer look at the Chicago Bloc:
Seriously? Nine writers from Chicago didn't think that Bagwell is a Hall of Famer? What the hell? Did Bagwell piss in the river, or ruin the St. Patrick's Day Parade?
But this isn't telling the whole story. Take a closer look at the Chicago Bloc:
Seriously? Nine writers from Chicago didn't think that Bagwell is a Hall of Famer? What the hell? Did Bagwell piss in the river, or ruin the St. Patrick's Day Parade?
Bagwell falls short on 2nd try at Hall of Fame
Well, the Base Ball Writers Association had their heads entrenched firmly up their collective tailpipes yet again. On his 2nd year on the Hall of Fame ballot, Jeff Bagwell received 56% of the vote, up from the 41.7% he received in 2011.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Qs, As with Maury Brown
Many of you are familiar with Maury Brown, founder of the Business of Sports Network (AC links here), mainly because he has been outspoken about Jim Crane for the past several months. In addition to his own site, he is a contributor to Baseball Prospectus, Forbes, and has been referenced for material by the New York Times, Time, USA Today, and a bunch of other publications with which you are already familiar. He also has a tendency to rile up Astros fans, so Maury was good enough to answer a few questions for us...
AC: You were perhaps the most prominent media member outspoken against the ownership of Jim Crane, while most were content to just sit back and let everything play out. What was the motivation behind the exposes on Crane?
MB: Looking at ownership background is something that I've done for over a decade, and doesn't include current owners, but them historically. My look at Crane was only different in the fact that he had been part of several bids (Astros, Cubs, Rangers, and then back to the Astros), and he'd always been portrayed as "unapprovable". I never fully understood that, so I went looking deeper. From there, it became a matter of seeing what had transpired to his businesses and how that fit in with owning an MLB club. I said this for my Forbes piece, but I passionately believe owning a sports club is different than any other business as they are a community asset. The local team instills great emotion in the fans, who have a vested interest. Myself and others, when looking at what had gone on with owners in the past, and now with Frank McCourt, was to say, 'Has baseball, and the fans of the Astros, really addressed everything they need to about who is the steward of the club, or has what has occurred something that can be explained away and was part of the past?' All, I'm sure, are hoping it's the latter.
AC: How would you address the (ad nauseum) comments that, if you're critical of a team, you must certainly hate them?
MB: Blind allegiance is something that's never healthy. Being critical of one aspect does not mean you are critical, as a whole. I've spent many hours researching the history of the Astrodome, the Colt .45s, and the Astros. Judge Hofheinz is one of the most incredible people in the history of, not just baseball, but sports as a whole. So, the "Astros" will continue on in history. Good and bad aspects are parts of all things over time, and that holds true of sports clubs depending on where you look at a snapshot. I certainly don't hate the Astros. If anything, I tend to be more caught up in the moment of what's happening in terms of some of the club's history that's going to be stopped (read: the move out the National League). Fans have a large interest in their local and regional teams. I often write what I do because they matter most.
AC: Who should Astros fans be mad at: Bud Selig, Jim Crane, Drayton McLane, or someone else?
MB: I don't know if "mad" is the right word. In the cold reality of business, there was a seller (McLane) and a buyer (Crane) and there were $680 million reasons for the deal to go through. Mr. McLane has been a perfect member of baseball;s ownership fraternity, and with it, the league surely wanted the sale to work out for all involved. But, I mentioned the situation with McCourt prior and that cast a pale over the owners. If you think about it, owners have run into problems after coming into the league, but few have had the problems Crane had in his background before being approved. McLane had been saying, "Don't trust this guy" after backing out of the sale in 2008, and here he comes saying, "He's great" when the money in the sale is so large. In the end, I'm not going to pass judgement on how Crane runs the Astros. He hasn't had enough time at the helm to be judged one way or the other. But, there are certainly a lot of people paying closer attention to him than some others that have been approved this early on. I believe that's a good thing for the Astros and fans of the team.
AC: On Twitter you said that you wanted to see the Astros get back to being a great franchise. When, do you think, were the "Glory Years" of the Houston Astros?
MB: It's a great question as "glory years" for the Astros comes in a couple of different forms for me. Certainly the creation of the Harris County Domed Stadium, later christened the Astrodome, is something that is one of the greatest feats in the history of sports business. It was full of so many firsts that are now commonplace... roofed facility, luxury suites, in-stadium restaurants, even the colored seating was revolutionary. In terms of the team, I so vividly remember that 18-inning, 7-6 win over the Braves in the postseason of 2005. That team "felt" as if it had all the parts, and the club was riding high. So, it's a little of both. The recent sell-down over the past couple of seasons to get player payroll more manageable for the sale from McLane to Crane was discomforting. It put some front office people in a difficult position, and, as last season clearly showed, it didn't help the Astros in the standings. But, there's a new regional sports network that will infuse the Astros with additional revenues. If the money is used wisely in free agency and wrapping up key talent, while player development is done soundly, there's no reason that the Astros can't be back in the thick of it sooner rather than later.
AC: Astros fans are obviously pretty upset about getting moved to the Kids Table, I mean the American League. As you cover the business side of sports, what's the financial impact of the Astros moving to the AL?
MB: I think the move to the AL, financially, is not as bad as it's being portrayed. I've spent hours speaking to those that are involved in television rights deals, and while this deal has a wrinkle (the Rockets and Comcast being partners with the Astros in the RSN), the fact is while having games starting later due to West Coast games can be partially off-set by saying, look at all the day games in the Eastern Timezone that the Cubs play. And while it's never good to say that the visiting team is a large part of the attendance and TV draw, the fact is, the Astros will be seeing more of the Yankees and Red Sox and as much as there is a large quarter that loathes them, television and attendance numbers will likely be up -- way up -- when they come to Houston. The biggest downside is having to pay for a DH, which often comes with a healthy price tag in the free agency space, and yes, having the late start time for games being played on the West Coast. The biggest thing for the fans is the loss of nearly 50 years of NL history. Coupling that with what Bud Adams did to the Oilers name, and it's just "one more thing". The one thing everyone can agree on is, good or bad, well.... 2013 is going to be a very, very different year for the Astros.
-
UPDATE: I know many if you are upset with me not asking about the Character issue. Fact is, there were things Maury Brown would discuss, and things he would not. His sources about Crane's character were not open for discussion, and I was okay with that. Sorry to disappoint you with this free service, I sincerely hope that you were not put out too terribly much.
Big thanks to Maury Brown for taking the time to answer these questions.
AC: You were perhaps the most prominent media member outspoken against the ownership of Jim Crane, while most were content to just sit back and let everything play out. What was the motivation behind the exposes on Crane?
MB: Looking at ownership background is something that I've done for over a decade, and doesn't include current owners, but them historically. My look at Crane was only different in the fact that he had been part of several bids (Astros, Cubs, Rangers, and then back to the Astros), and he'd always been portrayed as "unapprovable". I never fully understood that, so I went looking deeper. From there, it became a matter of seeing what had transpired to his businesses and how that fit in with owning an MLB club. I said this for my Forbes piece, but I passionately believe owning a sports club is different than any other business as they are a community asset. The local team instills great emotion in the fans, who have a vested interest. Myself and others, when looking at what had gone on with owners in the past, and now with Frank McCourt, was to say, 'Has baseball, and the fans of the Astros, really addressed everything they need to about who is the steward of the club, or has what has occurred something that can be explained away and was part of the past?' All, I'm sure, are hoping it's the latter.
AC: How would you address the (ad nauseum) comments that, if you're critical of a team, you must certainly hate them?
MB: Blind allegiance is something that's never healthy. Being critical of one aspect does not mean you are critical, as a whole. I've spent many hours researching the history of the Astrodome, the Colt .45s, and the Astros. Judge Hofheinz is one of the most incredible people in the history of, not just baseball, but sports as a whole. So, the "Astros" will continue on in history. Good and bad aspects are parts of all things over time, and that holds true of sports clubs depending on where you look at a snapshot. I certainly don't hate the Astros. If anything, I tend to be more caught up in the moment of what's happening in terms of some of the club's history that's going to be stopped (read: the move out the National League). Fans have a large interest in their local and regional teams. I often write what I do because they matter most.
AC: Who should Astros fans be mad at: Bud Selig, Jim Crane, Drayton McLane, or someone else?
MB: I don't know if "mad" is the right word. In the cold reality of business, there was a seller (McLane) and a buyer (Crane) and there were $680 million reasons for the deal to go through. Mr. McLane has been a perfect member of baseball;s ownership fraternity, and with it, the league surely wanted the sale to work out for all involved. But, I mentioned the situation with McCourt prior and that cast a pale over the owners. If you think about it, owners have run into problems after coming into the league, but few have had the problems Crane had in his background before being approved. McLane had been saying, "Don't trust this guy" after backing out of the sale in 2008, and here he comes saying, "He's great" when the money in the sale is so large. In the end, I'm not going to pass judgement on how Crane runs the Astros. He hasn't had enough time at the helm to be judged one way or the other. But, there are certainly a lot of people paying closer attention to him than some others that have been approved this early on. I believe that's a good thing for the Astros and fans of the team.
AC: On Twitter you said that you wanted to see the Astros get back to being a great franchise. When, do you think, were the "Glory Years" of the Houston Astros?
MB: It's a great question as "glory years" for the Astros comes in a couple of different forms for me. Certainly the creation of the Harris County Domed Stadium, later christened the Astrodome, is something that is one of the greatest feats in the history of sports business. It was full of so many firsts that are now commonplace... roofed facility, luxury suites, in-stadium restaurants, even the colored seating was revolutionary. In terms of the team, I so vividly remember that 18-inning, 7-6 win over the Braves in the postseason of 2005. That team "felt" as if it had all the parts, and the club was riding high. So, it's a little of both. The recent sell-down over the past couple of seasons to get player payroll more manageable for the sale from McLane to Crane was discomforting. It put some front office people in a difficult position, and, as last season clearly showed, it didn't help the Astros in the standings. But, there's a new regional sports network that will infuse the Astros with additional revenues. If the money is used wisely in free agency and wrapping up key talent, while player development is done soundly, there's no reason that the Astros can't be back in the thick of it sooner rather than later.
AC: Astros fans are obviously pretty upset about getting moved to the Kids Table, I mean the American League. As you cover the business side of sports, what's the financial impact of the Astros moving to the AL?
MB: I think the move to the AL, financially, is not as bad as it's being portrayed. I've spent hours speaking to those that are involved in television rights deals, and while this deal has a wrinkle (the Rockets and Comcast being partners with the Astros in the RSN), the fact is while having games starting later due to West Coast games can be partially off-set by saying, look at all the day games in the Eastern Timezone that the Cubs play. And while it's never good to say that the visiting team is a large part of the attendance and TV draw, the fact is, the Astros will be seeing more of the Yankees and Red Sox and as much as there is a large quarter that loathes them, television and attendance numbers will likely be up -- way up -- when they come to Houston. The biggest downside is having to pay for a DH, which often comes with a healthy price tag in the free agency space, and yes, having the late start time for games being played on the West Coast. The biggest thing for the fans is the loss of nearly 50 years of NL history. Coupling that with what Bud Adams did to the Oilers name, and it's just "one more thing". The one thing everyone can agree on is, good or bad, well.... 2013 is going to be a very, very different year for the Astros.
-
UPDATE: I know many if you are upset with me not asking about the Character issue. Fact is, there were things Maury Brown would discuss, and things he would not. His sources about Crane's character were not open for discussion, and I was okay with that. Sorry to disappoint you with this free service, I sincerely hope that you were not put out too terribly much.
Big thanks to Maury Brown for taking the time to answer these questions.
Get your wallets out, Corpus
Hey Corpus, head to the Omni Bayfront Hotel at 11:30am on February 3 for the Astros CAREavan Luncheon.
Tickets are $25, and you'll get to see Shane Reynolds (!), Milo Hamilton (please get him to say something about Berkman, or Beltran), Chris Johnson, J.B. Shuck, and Brian Bogusevic.
Tickets are $25, and you'll get to see Shane Reynolds (!), Milo Hamilton (please get him to say something about Berkman, or Beltran), Chris Johnson, J.B. Shuck, and Brian Bogusevic.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Three off to Rookie Career Development Program
Zachary Levine tweeted that J.D. Martinez, Kyle Weiland, and Paul Clemens to the MLB Rookie Career Development Program.
Jonathan Mayo has a 3m30s video on the program (and here's a 2008 profile by Yahoo's Tim Brown.
Jonathan Mayo has a 3m30s video on the program (and here's a 2008 profile by Yahoo's Tim Brown.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
The Astros' front office is officially smarter than all of us combined
This broke last night, but Jeff Luhnow made two hires:
-Sig Mejdal, who had been with the Cardinals for the past six years, to be the Astros' Director of Decision Sciences.
Luhnow described Mejdal's new role as a systematic method of combining all the information you can collect on players, whether it's using previous performance information, health and medical information and opinions of scouts who have laid eyes on players.
How about Mejdal's background:
Mejdal earned two engineering degrees at the University of California at Davis and later completed advanced degrees in operations research and cognitive psychology/human factors. He has also worked at Lockheed Martin in California and for NASA.
-Stephanie Wilka, coordinator of amateur scouting. Wilka was previously with the Red Sox in PR (More Sweet Caroline, Pam!), and the executive director of the philanthropic arm of the Dodgers. She has an undergrad degree from Harvard, and a law degree from Pepperdine.
(By the by, the Sporting News' Stan McNeal firmly established himself as a douche, labeling Mejdal's title "pretentious," and calling Wilka "a former cheerleader," making specific mention of her womanness. As if that matters.)
All of this is horrifically alarming. How are we supposed to criticize moves if it's obvious that they have been vetted? What if Luhnow makes a trade with the Phillies? How are we expected to be Bloggy Bloggerson if there is this much data-driven analysis behind the team? Being a fan blogger is way different than being a fanboy blogger, but that's what I'm in serious danger of becoming.
-Sig Mejdal, who had been with the Cardinals for the past six years, to be the Astros' Director of Decision Sciences.
Luhnow described Mejdal's new role as a systematic method of combining all the information you can collect on players, whether it's using previous performance information, health and medical information and opinions of scouts who have laid eyes on players.
How about Mejdal's background:
Mejdal earned two engineering degrees at the University of California at Davis and later completed advanced degrees in operations research and cognitive psychology/human factors. He has also worked at Lockheed Martin in California and for NASA.
-Stephanie Wilka, coordinator of amateur scouting. Wilka was previously with the Red Sox in PR (More Sweet Caroline, Pam!), and the executive director of the philanthropic arm of the Dodgers. She has an undergrad degree from Harvard, and a law degree from Pepperdine.
(By the by, the Sporting News' Stan McNeal firmly established himself as a douche, labeling Mejdal's title "pretentious," and calling Wilka "a former cheerleader," making specific mention of her womanness. As if that matters.)
All of this is horrifically alarming. How are we supposed to criticize moves if it's obvious that they have been vetted? What if Luhnow makes a trade with the Phillies? How are we expected to be Bloggy Bloggerson if there is this much data-driven analysis behind the team? Being a fan blogger is way different than being a fanboy blogger, but that's what I'm in serious danger of becoming.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
The Hardball Times' HOF prediction
With a captip to Hardball Talk, The Hardball Times' Chris Jaffe has some HOF projections. Jaffe - as Craig Calcaterra notes - has a good track record in his HOF projections, posting a 2.4% margin of error last year.
Where does he place Bagwell? 54% - up from 42% in 2011 - behind Barry Larkin (82%) and Jack Morris (65%).
Jaffe:
Bagwell actually had a nice debut last year at 41 percent. Aside from players still on the ballot, all who did at least that well in their first year on the ballot later made it to Cooperstown. Yes, there are steroid rumors, but then again Larkin and Sandberg were both considered clear Hall of Famers and their first years were nowhere near 75 percent. Bagwell’s start was below theirs, but not that much below.
Where does he place Bagwell? 54% - up from 42% in 2011 - behind Barry Larkin (82%) and Jack Morris (65%).
Jaffe:
Bagwell actually had a nice debut last year at 41 percent. Aside from players still on the ballot, all who did at least that well in their first year on the ballot later made it to Cooperstown. Yes, there are steroid rumors, but then again Larkin and Sandberg were both considered clear Hall of Famers and their first years were nowhere near 75 percent. Bagwell’s start was below theirs, but not that much below.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Bagwell Hall of Fame Scorecard
So let's try to keep a running list of whom is and isn't voting for Jeff Bagwell for the Hall of Fame in 2012, shall we? And, many thanks to those of you sending in the articles you find! Special note: Thanks to Citizen Bill for pointing out this link, aggregating all ballots.
(Last update: Jan 2 - 7:00 AM)
Quick Tally: 63 ballots "counted"
38 ballots "Yes"
25 ballots "No"
Total ballot percentage: 60.3%
Total ballot percentage needed: 75%
Bagwell's in
Peter Abraham, Phil Arvia, Andrew Baggarly, Peter Botte, Steve Buckley, Ron Chimelis, Tim Cowlishaw, Ken Davidoff, Tony DiMarco, John Erardi, Jeff Fletcher, Peter Gammons, Teddy Greenstein, Richard Griffin, Mike Imren, Phil Jackman, Tim Kawakami, Bob Klapisch, Dave Krieger, Thom Loverro, Jack McCaffery, Sean McClelland, John McGrath, Bruce Miles, Jim Molony, Jose de Jesus Ortiz, Joe Posnanski, Tracy Ringolsby, Phil Rogers, Ken Rosenthal, Chaz Scoggins, Mike Silverman, Bob Smizik, Larry Stone, T.R. Sullivan, John Tomase, Mike Vaccaro, David Wilhelm
Bagwell's out
Mel Antonen, Barry Bloom, Bob Brookover, Garry Brown, Tom Dienhart, Chris Elsberry, Mark Gonzales, Evan Grant, Scot Gregor, Philip Hersh, John Heyman (allegedly), Jeff Jacobs, Fred Klein, Dave Lariviere, Ron Kroichick, Fred Mitchell, Mike Nadel, Bob Nightengale, Mike Puma, Mike Purdy, Barry Rozner, Jeff Schultz, Tom Singer, Paul Sullivan, Dave Van Dyck,
(Last update: Jan 2 - 7:00 AM)
Quick Tally: 63 ballots "counted"
38 ballots "Yes"
25 ballots "No"
Total ballot percentage: 60.3%
Total ballot percentage needed: 75%
Bagwell's in
Peter Abraham, Phil Arvia, Andrew Baggarly, Peter Botte, Steve Buckley, Ron Chimelis, Tim Cowlishaw, Ken Davidoff, Tony DiMarco, John Erardi, Jeff Fletcher, Peter Gammons, Teddy Greenstein, Richard Griffin, Mike Imren, Phil Jackman, Tim Kawakami, Bob Klapisch, Dave Krieger, Thom Loverro, Jack McCaffery, Sean McClelland, John McGrath, Bruce Miles, Jim Molony, Jose de Jesus Ortiz, Joe Posnanski, Tracy Ringolsby, Phil Rogers, Ken Rosenthal, Chaz Scoggins, Mike Silverman, Bob Smizik, Larry Stone, T.R. Sullivan, John Tomase, Mike Vaccaro, David Wilhelm
Bagwell's out
Mel Antonen, Barry Bloom, Bob Brookover, Garry Brown, Tom Dienhart, Chris Elsberry, Mark Gonzales, Evan Grant, Scot Gregor, Philip Hersh, John Heyman (allegedly), Jeff Jacobs, Fred Klein, Dave Lariviere, Ron Kroichick, Fred Mitchell, Mike Nadel, Bob Nightengale, Mike Puma, Mike Purdy, Barry Rozner, Jeff Schultz, Tom Singer, Paul Sullivan, Dave Van Dyck,
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Dive into the inner workings of Phil Rogers' mind, won't you?
The Chicago Tribune's Phil Rogers has a new column (I know it links back to the Boston Herald, but it's the right article) in which he has a crisis. His crisis? He doesn't know what to do, and needs the Hall of Fame to bail him out of his crisis. Here's an annotated guide to the inner thoughts of Phil Rogers.
One year. One measly year.
That’s all the time left before the three-player crash that proves once and for all how broken the Hall of Fame voting process has become.
Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa are due on the Hall ballot for the first time next December.
Oh noes! Three of the greatest players of our generation are going to come up for judgment by writers just like me. Not now, though, in a year. So let's hurry this crisis up by creating one.
Barring direction from the Hall of Fame’s board of directors, 580-plus voting members of the Baseball Writers Association of America again will be left to determine how to handle the legacies of players implicated in the use of performance-enhancing drugs.
The BBWAA again will be left to determine how to handle the legacies of players, just like they have since 1936. Those lucky Base Ball Writers of yore never had to deal with players of ill repute. Lucky sonsaguns. If only the non-profit organization who keeps the plaques clean could provide some sort of moral compass!
Was it OK to get some chemical help because so many players were doing it? Or does being a steroid guy disqualify you from membership, as voters are asked to consider the "integrity, sportsmanship, character" of candidates?
Is it okay for me to take an Excedrin? Can my over-inflated sense of importance and ego handle the anti-inflammatories? Am I going to die?
My take on the brokenness of the process is this: 581 voters, 581 standards.
How dare Indvidualism overrun this sacred process! You know what we need? RIGHT NOW? The Hall of Fame to provide a guidebook that can be inserted into our brains to tell us what to do! While they're at it, how about a PDF of feelings? Someone get me a flow-chart. STAT.
It’s ridiculous to expect me and the other 580 who voted a year ago to sort this out. Many of my brethren disagree, but we hardly have the information we need for these calls. We don’t know who did and who did not use steroids, and we never will.
We have only dedicated our lives to the covering of Base Ball, and have to be an active member of the BBWAA for ten years to even get a paper ballot asking us to put a check beside our own moral code. If only we could get some sort of omnipotence pill that would allow us to see inside the hearts, minds, and history of each player we have to choose whether or not to bestow an honor upon...Hall of Fame, you need to get on that, too. It's ridiculous to think that we cannot be omnipotent, and be hoodwinked by the very players we have spent our lives covering.
All we know is which guys have been implicated publicly, through positive tests (Manny Ramirez and Rafael Palmeiro), the Mitchell Report (Clemens) and reporting (Bonds, Mark McGwire). Then there are guys like Alex Rodriguez, David Ortiz and Sosa, who are reported to have tested positive in 2003 survey testing, which was done under a since-violated guarantee of anonymity.
All we know is what Major League Baseball and a former senator has been able to uncover through gradually stronger testing. And for those other guys, we had to rely on snitches for us to know and pass crushing judgment on. That's not enough information. We need more. Get on that, Hall of Fame.
The whole thing is beyond a slippery slope. It’s an icy crevasse.
A slick sinkhole. A kickball field full of loose gravel for us to fall and skin our knees. A mineshaft of motor oil. Nobody will live. We will all die because of this. Help us, Hall of Fame, avoid these pitfalls.
The one thing that is clear is that players with any link to performance-enhancing drugs aren’t currently welcome in Cooperstown. McGwire, the test case, has been on the ballot five years, never has received more than 23.7 percent of the vote and received 13 fewer votes in 2011 than in 2010.
Here's what is clear: my compatriots in Base Ball, whom I have just acknowledged do not have enough information to pass judgment, have passed judgment. And Mark McGwire was found wanting by three-quarters of them. Am I saying that Mark McGwire should be in, because the Base Ball Writers aren't smart enough? Perhaps.
While Jeff Bagwell never was linked to steroid use, he improved his body taking androstenedione when it was sold off the shelves at GNC and told ESPN in 2010 that he had "no problem" with a player juicing up.
Jeff Bagwell had the help of GNC, those conniving bastards. It's a place so reprehensible that there are 4800 of these brothels of Base Ball, for players to get their wicks wet in the hazards of making themselves better over the counter. How dare he speak his mind to ESPN? What kind of world do we live in where you can't be held accountable for your mother-f***ing opinions? F*** your opinions, says this Base Ball writer.
It’s impossible to know if that 42 percent rating is a reflection on his play - he’s a Hall of Famer in my book - or if he’s considered a steroid user, even if his only real tie is to androstenedione when it was sold over the counter.
He only got a hit in 29.7% of his at-bats throughout his career. Is there a correlation between this number and 42? Jackie Robinson wore 42. Did he take steroids? WE DON'T KNOW. Vote him out.
My interpretation says guys who took advantage of baseball’s lack of testing to do as they pleased - Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, Clemens, Rodriguez and Palmeiro, among others - disqualified themselves for the Hall because integrity is among the listed factors for voting. But I need some evidence. I don’t believe I can eliminate every brawny player on suspicion alone.
I think that, if there wasn't a good system in place, and someone was able to beat that system without breaking any laws whatsoever, he clearly has no integrity. I'm suspicious. But I can't be suspicious. I need cold, hard facts to tell me if someone was unduly strong. Get on that, Hall of Fame.
If the New York Times had not reported Sosa was on the list of 104 players testing positive in 2003, I would have felt I had to vote for him even though he seemed as complicit as Bonds and McGwire. There has to be some standard of fairness, even if it allows a good cheat to beat the system.
If a reporter - maybe even a Writer of Base Ball - had not published what was supposed to be an anonymous test, I would not be in this crisis. There has to be some standard of fairness, as long as it doesn't apply to my profession.
Rather than reward some cheaters and sanction others, you can say - as ESPN’s Buster Olney does - players should be judged only by what they have done on the field. But I can’t get there in my thinking when voting rules cite "integrity, sportsmanship, character ..."
See how my ellipses cause me confusion, consternation, and crisis...? I am hamstrung by arbitrary rules. Buster Olney, that sanctimonious bastard, ignores these rules because he does not have a conscience, and because he freely admits that he is not omnipotent.
Jane Forbes Clark, chairman of the Hall’s board, needs to take some ownership of the issue. The BBWAA serves at the Hall’s discretion. There has been discussion at recent BBWAA meetings about seeking clarification from the Hall, but a vote asking for help was rejected in 2010. That doesn’t mean voters don’t need help; it means many aren’t humble enough to ask for it.
The chairman of the board of the Hall of Fame needs to address this. See, at one point, we all had a vote - similar to the way we have a vote on who should get into the Hall of Fame - on whether or not we should ask for some clarification. But we couldn't come to an agreement on whether or not to ask for help from a non-profit organization. This clearly means that we aren't capable of making decisions. Except for Buster Olney, that sanctimonious bastard. Help us Hall of Fame, if we ask for it. But we won't, for we are too arrogant.
Jeff Idelson, president of the Hall, cites the BBWAA’s stance in explaining why the Hall hasn’t entered the discussion. "The Hall of Fame has always been an open book with the BBWAA," Idelson said. "Always willing to listen to the concerns the BBWAA has, always willing to discuss them. At this point in time, we have great faith in the organization to continue voting with the integrity it has since 1936."
Having been rebuffed by Jane Forbes Clark's unwillingness to recognize that we need help but won't ask for it, we turned to the Hall of Fame's president who said that, since we have been doing this every year for 75 years, they trust us. This is clearly a mistake. Why won't Idelson override our unwillingness to ask for help? Because of 75 years of tradition and history? When does that play a factor in Base Ball?
Trouble is, it’s not the voters’ integrity that is in question. It’s the perceived integrity of the candidates, and everyone has a different take on that. This is the last chance for the Hall to get in front of the argument, and there’s no indication it feels the need.
How dare you read between the lines and think that it's OUR INTEGRITY in question? We're the ones who are making arbitrary judgments on other people's character here. And until you have covered Base Ball for a print newspaper, you are not allowed to do so. Why won't the Hall of Fame give us a color wheel where we can be told what to think? If the Hall of Fame won't tell me what to do, how am I supposed to do it?
One year. One measly year.
That’s all the time left before the three-player crash that proves once and for all how broken the Hall of Fame voting process has become.
Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa are due on the Hall ballot for the first time next December.
Oh noes! Three of the greatest players of our generation are going to come up for judgment by writers just like me. Not now, though, in a year. So let's hurry this crisis up by creating one.
Barring direction from the Hall of Fame’s board of directors, 580-plus voting members of the Baseball Writers Association of America again will be left to determine how to handle the legacies of players implicated in the use of performance-enhancing drugs.
The BBWAA again will be left to determine how to handle the legacies of players, just like they have since 1936. Those lucky Base Ball Writers of yore never had to deal with players of ill repute. Lucky sonsaguns. If only the non-profit organization who keeps the plaques clean could provide some sort of moral compass!
Was it OK to get some chemical help because so many players were doing it? Or does being a steroid guy disqualify you from membership, as voters are asked to consider the "integrity, sportsmanship, character" of candidates?
Is it okay for me to take an Excedrin? Can my over-inflated sense of importance and ego handle the anti-inflammatories? Am I going to die?
My take on the brokenness of the process is this: 581 voters, 581 standards.
How dare Indvidualism overrun this sacred process! You know what we need? RIGHT NOW? The Hall of Fame to provide a guidebook that can be inserted into our brains to tell us what to do! While they're at it, how about a PDF of feelings? Someone get me a flow-chart. STAT.
It’s ridiculous to expect me and the other 580 who voted a year ago to sort this out. Many of my brethren disagree, but we hardly have the information we need for these calls. We don’t know who did and who did not use steroids, and we never will.
We have only dedicated our lives to the covering of Base Ball, and have to be an active member of the BBWAA for ten years to even get a paper ballot asking us to put a check beside our own moral code. If only we could get some sort of omnipotence pill that would allow us to see inside the hearts, minds, and history of each player we have to choose whether or not to bestow an honor upon...Hall of Fame, you need to get on that, too. It's ridiculous to think that we cannot be omnipotent, and be hoodwinked by the very players we have spent our lives covering.
All we know is which guys have been implicated publicly, through positive tests (Manny Ramirez and Rafael Palmeiro), the Mitchell Report (Clemens) and reporting (Bonds, Mark McGwire). Then there are guys like Alex Rodriguez, David Ortiz and Sosa, who are reported to have tested positive in 2003 survey testing, which was done under a since-violated guarantee of anonymity.
All we know is what Major League Baseball and a former senator has been able to uncover through gradually stronger testing. And for those other guys, we had to rely on snitches for us to know and pass crushing judgment on. That's not enough information. We need more. Get on that, Hall of Fame.
The whole thing is beyond a slippery slope. It’s an icy crevasse.
A slick sinkhole. A kickball field full of loose gravel for us to fall and skin our knees. A mineshaft of motor oil. Nobody will live. We will all die because of this. Help us, Hall of Fame, avoid these pitfalls.
The one thing that is clear is that players with any link to performance-enhancing drugs aren’t currently welcome in Cooperstown. McGwire, the test case, has been on the ballot five years, never has received more than 23.7 percent of the vote and received 13 fewer votes in 2011 than in 2010.
Here's what is clear: my compatriots in Base Ball, whom I have just acknowledged do not have enough information to pass judgment, have passed judgment. And Mark McGwire was found wanting by three-quarters of them. Am I saying that Mark McGwire should be in, because the Base Ball Writers aren't smart enough? Perhaps.
While Jeff Bagwell never was linked to steroid use, he improved his body taking androstenedione when it was sold off the shelves at GNC and told ESPN in 2010 that he had "no problem" with a player juicing up.
Jeff Bagwell had the help of GNC, those conniving bastards. It's a place so reprehensible that there are 4800 of these brothels of Base Ball, for players to get their wicks wet in the hazards of making themselves better over the counter. How dare he speak his mind to ESPN? What kind of world do we live in where you can't be held accountable for your mother-f***ing opinions? F*** your opinions, says this Base Ball writer.
It’s impossible to know if that 42 percent rating is a reflection on his play - he’s a Hall of Famer in my book - or if he’s considered a steroid user, even if his only real tie is to androstenedione when it was sold over the counter.
He only got a hit in 29.7% of his at-bats throughout his career. Is there a correlation between this number and 42? Jackie Robinson wore 42. Did he take steroids? WE DON'T KNOW. Vote him out.
My interpretation says guys who took advantage of baseball’s lack of testing to do as they pleased - Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, Clemens, Rodriguez and Palmeiro, among others - disqualified themselves for the Hall because integrity is among the listed factors for voting. But I need some evidence. I don’t believe I can eliminate every brawny player on suspicion alone.
I think that, if there wasn't a good system in place, and someone was able to beat that system without breaking any laws whatsoever, he clearly has no integrity. I'm suspicious. But I can't be suspicious. I need cold, hard facts to tell me if someone was unduly strong. Get on that, Hall of Fame.
If the New York Times had not reported Sosa was on the list of 104 players testing positive in 2003, I would have felt I had to vote for him even though he seemed as complicit as Bonds and McGwire. There has to be some standard of fairness, even if it allows a good cheat to beat the system.
If a reporter - maybe even a Writer of Base Ball - had not published what was supposed to be an anonymous test, I would not be in this crisis. There has to be some standard of fairness, as long as it doesn't apply to my profession.
Rather than reward some cheaters and sanction others, you can say - as ESPN’s Buster Olney does - players should be judged only by what they have done on the field. But I can’t get there in my thinking when voting rules cite "integrity, sportsmanship, character ..."
See how my ellipses cause me confusion, consternation, and crisis...? I am hamstrung by arbitrary rules. Buster Olney, that sanctimonious bastard, ignores these rules because he does not have a conscience, and because he freely admits that he is not omnipotent.
Jane Forbes Clark, chairman of the Hall’s board, needs to take some ownership of the issue. The BBWAA serves at the Hall’s discretion. There has been discussion at recent BBWAA meetings about seeking clarification from the Hall, but a vote asking for help was rejected in 2010. That doesn’t mean voters don’t need help; it means many aren’t humble enough to ask for it.
The chairman of the board of the Hall of Fame needs to address this. See, at one point, we all had a vote - similar to the way we have a vote on who should get into the Hall of Fame - on whether or not we should ask for some clarification. But we couldn't come to an agreement on whether or not to ask for help from a non-profit organization. This clearly means that we aren't capable of making decisions. Except for Buster Olney, that sanctimonious bastard. Help us Hall of Fame, if we ask for it. But we won't, for we are too arrogant.
Jeff Idelson, president of the Hall, cites the BBWAA’s stance in explaining why the Hall hasn’t entered the discussion. "The Hall of Fame has always been an open book with the BBWAA," Idelson said. "Always willing to listen to the concerns the BBWAA has, always willing to discuss them. At this point in time, we have great faith in the organization to continue voting with the integrity it has since 1936."
Having been rebuffed by Jane Forbes Clark's unwillingness to recognize that we need help but won't ask for it, we turned to the Hall of Fame's president who said that, since we have been doing this every year for 75 years, they trust us. This is clearly a mistake. Why won't Idelson override our unwillingness to ask for help? Because of 75 years of tradition and history? When does that play a factor in Base Ball?
Trouble is, it’s not the voters’ integrity that is in question. It’s the perceived integrity of the candidates, and everyone has a different take on that. This is the last chance for the Hall to get in front of the argument, and there’s no indication it feels the need.
How dare you read between the lines and think that it's OUR INTEGRITY in question? We're the ones who are making arbitrary judgments on other people's character here. And until you have covered Base Ball for a print newspaper, you are not allowed to do so. Why won't the Hall of Fame give us a color wheel where we can be told what to think? If the Hall of Fame won't tell me what to do, how am I supposed to do it?
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Astros interview Keith Law
Via MLBTR, we find this piece from Rosenthal/Morosi that the Astros have interviewed Keith Law for "a number of front-office roles" including that of scouting director.
The piece is quick to note that no offer has been made, as of yet.
Those of you who follow Law on Twitter can get excited that, should this take place, the Astros' farm system will be the best-fed, most well-read system in baseball.
The piece is quick to note that no offer has been made, as of yet.
Those of you who follow Law on Twitter can get excited that, should this take place, the Astros' farm system will be the best-fed, most well-read system in baseball.
The Perils of Transparency
The Hall of Fame voting members of the Base Ball Writers Association of America have until December 31 to turn in their ballots containing up to, but not exceeding, ten names for election to the Baseball Hall of Fame in July 2012. In last year's election, there were 539 voting members (voting members must have covered baseball for ten years prior to their first vote).
We're keeping a tally of the ballots that are published, and how they apply to our very own Jeff Bagwell. At present, Bagwell is appearing on just over 76% of the ballots that we've been able to dig up (thanks, Google) - which would be a 35% jump should that hold up. But I do not expect it to hold up.
One of the things that fans want from writers is transparency. Coaches polls in college football, congressional votes, we want to know why everyone thinks what they think - and it works out great, as long as they agree with our lines of thinking.
The week between Christmas and New Year used to be a slam-dunk, "This-is-how-I-voted" cherry pick column. But I'm seeing less of them this year, and I think that's because if a writer didn't vote for Bagwell, they're going to get called out on it.
Hardball Talk has been linking to various ballots over the course of the past couple of weeks, and is either praising Ken Davidoff's sanity, or questioning Barry Bloom's.
(To be fair, Barry Bloom's ballot is fairly ridiculous - voting for Steve Garvey, and not Bagwell). Hell, I've called a prominent Hartford journalist "lazy", because he wants to wait on voting for Bagwell.
There's simply no motivation for the baseball writers to be transparent, because if they have an opinion that runs contrary to what is accepted as "general knowledge," they're going to catch hell - from the comments section of their site, from Twitter, and from blogs. It was quite entertaining to see Barry Bloom's Twitter feed fill up with our friends' comments asking him the equivalent of whether he had lost a bet.
If I'm a writer, and I don't think that Player X belongs in the Hall of Fame, but I'm social- and alternative- media savvy, and I see that basically everybody else does think that Player X belongs in the Hall of Fame, there are three options:
1) Cave, vote them in, write about it.
2) Not vote for them, write about it, and get my credibility shredded in a variety of ways.
3) Do what I want, but not tell anyone how I voted.
The only way that a writer can exercise his vote and come out on the other side with their credibility (and personal sense of morality) intact is Option #3, which is obviously the least transparent, but also the most attractive option for the writer - just not for us.
Bagwell has become the lightning rod for the sane/insane Hall of Fame Voter. Vote for Bagwell, and you're a Good Writer. Don't vote for Bagwell, and you're Incapable of Complex Thought - at worst, you're Joe McCarthy. Most of the time, if the writer provides a reason for why they don't think Bagwell is a Hall of Famer (that doesn't include the "There's no proof, but I think he took steroids" argument), they may be off the hook from criticism and general hand-wringing. But look at the reaction to Barry Bloom's column, and that's not necessarily the case.
In the present chapter of the information era, if you write it, someone's going to find it. Back in June, I called Fort Worth Star-Telegram columnist Gil LeBreton a non-sensical idiot. He found it, commented, and I caved like a little bitch. It did not feel good. So no, I do not expect Jeff Bagwell to get elected, despite his receiving 76% of the ballots we've found, because there are hundreds of writers who don't think Jeff Bagwell is a Hall of Famer, and it's just not worth it for them to try to explain why.
We're keeping a tally of the ballots that are published, and how they apply to our very own Jeff Bagwell. At present, Bagwell is appearing on just over 76% of the ballots that we've been able to dig up (thanks, Google) - which would be a 35% jump should that hold up. But I do not expect it to hold up.
One of the things that fans want from writers is transparency. Coaches polls in college football, congressional votes, we want to know why everyone thinks what they think - and it works out great, as long as they agree with our lines of thinking.
The week between Christmas and New Year used to be a slam-dunk, "This-is-how-I-voted" cherry pick column. But I'm seeing less of them this year, and I think that's because if a writer didn't vote for Bagwell, they're going to get called out on it.
Hardball Talk has been linking to various ballots over the course of the past couple of weeks, and is either praising Ken Davidoff's sanity, or questioning Barry Bloom's.
(To be fair, Barry Bloom's ballot is fairly ridiculous - voting for Steve Garvey, and not Bagwell). Hell, I've called a prominent Hartford journalist "lazy", because he wants to wait on voting for Bagwell.
There's simply no motivation for the baseball writers to be transparent, because if they have an opinion that runs contrary to what is accepted as "general knowledge," they're going to catch hell - from the comments section of their site, from Twitter, and from blogs. It was quite entertaining to see Barry Bloom's Twitter feed fill up with our friends' comments asking him the equivalent of whether he had lost a bet.
If I'm a writer, and I don't think that Player X belongs in the Hall of Fame, but I'm social- and alternative- media savvy, and I see that basically everybody else does think that Player X belongs in the Hall of Fame, there are three options:
1) Cave, vote them in, write about it.
2) Not vote for them, write about it, and get my credibility shredded in a variety of ways.
3) Do what I want, but not tell anyone how I voted.
The only way that a writer can exercise his vote and come out on the other side with their credibility (and personal sense of morality) intact is Option #3, which is obviously the least transparent, but also the most attractive option for the writer - just not for us.
Bagwell has become the lightning rod for the sane/insane Hall of Fame Voter. Vote for Bagwell, and you're a Good Writer. Don't vote for Bagwell, and you're Incapable of Complex Thought - at worst, you're Joe McCarthy. Most of the time, if the writer provides a reason for why they don't think Bagwell is a Hall of Famer (that doesn't include the "There's no proof, but I think he took steroids" argument), they may be off the hook from criticism and general hand-wringing. But look at the reaction to Barry Bloom's column, and that's not necessarily the case.
In the present chapter of the information era, if you write it, someone's going to find it. Back in June, I called Fort Worth Star-Telegram columnist Gil LeBreton a non-sensical idiot. He found it, commented, and I caved like a little bitch. It did not feel good. So no, I do not expect Jeff Bagwell to get elected, despite his receiving 76% of the ballots we've found, because there are hundreds of writers who don't think Jeff Bagwell is a Hall of Famer, and it's just not worth it for them to try to explain why.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Moving David Carpenter from catcher to pitcher was Luhnow's idea
One of the closer candidates who will be getting some attention in Spring Training is David Carpenter, whom the Astros received in a trade for Pedro Feliz (pause for laughing). As I'm sure you recall, David Carpenter (whom we interviewed in October 2010) started out as a catcher, but was moved to pitcher in 2008, where he is obviously enjoying more success. It was all Jeff Luhnow's idea:
Carpenter:
They saw an opportunity for me to be a pitcher. Luhnow was really the one that pushed the idea and really had everybody going towards that.”
Carpenter, to AC in 2010:
Part of the reason was Yadi Molina had signed a big contract and none of the catchers below him were going to be moving anytime soon. They felt that it would be a good career move. The Cardinals had success with a friend of mine, Jason Motte, converting him from a catcher to a pitcher and we shared similar characteristics.
Carpenter:
They saw an opportunity for me to be a pitcher. Luhnow was really the one that pushed the idea and really had everybody going towards that.”
Carpenter, to AC in 2010:
Part of the reason was Yadi Molina had signed a big contract and none of the catchers below him were going to be moving anytime soon. They felt that it would be a good career move. The Cardinals had success with a friend of mine, Jason Motte, converting him from a catcher to a pitcher and we shared similar characteristics.
The Astros might move Spring Training facilities
Soon, there might not even be a reason to go to Kissimmee, as Jim Crane is on record as having interest in moving the Astros' Spring Training facilities to Martin County, Florida, on the Atlantic coast.
Stuart, Florida, near Crane's golf club, is two hours southeast of Kissimmee, close to Port St. Lucie, West Palm Beach, and two hours north of Miami.
Stuart, Florida, near Crane's golf club, is two hours southeast of Kissimmee, close to Port St. Lucie, West Palm Beach, and two hours north of Miami.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
The middle infielder situation gets a little less cloudy
So Anderson Hernandez has signed a minor-league deal with the Pirates.
Who does this affect? Not Jed Lowrie or Jose Altuve, your presumed 2012 middle infielders, but it creates a free spot at 2B at OKC. This could be a place for Brian Bixler, but it also could be a place for Brandon Wikoff, or Jose Carlos Thompson - both of whom spent time at Corpus in 2011.
Who does this affect? Not Jed Lowrie or Jose Altuve, your presumed 2012 middle infielders, but it creates a free spot at 2B at OKC. This could be a place for Brian Bixler, but it also could be a place for Brandon Wikoff, or Jose Carlos Thompson - both of whom spent time at Corpus in 2011.
The Astros might cut Quintero to sign Pudge
Oh Jon Heyman, how you titillate us. Heyman tweeted:
Heard houston might not keep quintero. #pudge a possibility.
Well, wouldn't that be interesting, and I have no idea what to make of this. We're talking about backup catchers here, right? Because at some point Castro will be healthy (ideally). But Quintero and the Astros avoided arbitration with a $1m+ deal, which isn't necessarily guaranteed. Will Pudge sign for that amount? Will he be better at nurturing young Jason Castro? Does it even matter, at all?
Heard houston might not keep quintero. #pudge a possibility.
Well, wouldn't that be interesting, and I have no idea what to make of this. We're talking about backup catchers here, right? Because at some point Castro will be healthy (ideally). But Quintero and the Astros avoided arbitration with a $1m+ deal, which isn't necessarily guaranteed. Will Pudge sign for that amount? Will he be better at nurturing young Jason Castro? Does it even matter, at all?
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Red Sox still in contact with Astros about Wandy
Comcast SportsNet New England's Sean McAdam says that the Red Sox are still in contact with the Astros about Wandy Rodriguez.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Would you re-sign Roy?
So apparently Roy Oswalt has been convinced that a multi-year deal isn't a great idea right now, and he would be open to a one-year deal. The question is: Would he make sense for the Astros?
Answer (for me, anyway): Yes. But only if it's on the condition that Wandy or Myers is traded. Why? Let's examine, shall we?
Yeah. Oswalt gets hurt. He has a back like my grandmother, and he'll be 34 in 2012. On the surface, he doesn't exactly fit what the Astros are trying to do. But if his goal is to re-establish value, then he really only needs to put together a solid half-season in Houston.
Let's say - as a pre-condition - that the Astros trade Wandy and/or Myers. Trading one would net $6-7 million in 2012 (because the recipient certainly won't be paying for the whole player) and prospects, depending on the one who is traded. If the Astros offer $10 million to Roy on a one-year contract (even with pitching only 139IP in 2011, FanGraphs listed his value at $11m), he can set himself up for a longer deal in 2012 and beyond if he pitches well enough to get traded at the deadline, ideally bringing back more prospects (or one good one).
By doing so, the Astros would be on the hook for about $6m of that $10m, which trading Wandy/Myers would off-set.
And if Roy is looking for the next contract, it makes sense to return to the scene where he enjoyed quite a lot of success. At Minute Maid Park, Roy has a career 2.92 ERA/1.12 WHIP. His 4.05 K:BB ratio is the second-highest rate among stadiums where he has made more than ten starts.
Maybe Roy isn't interested in coming back to Houston. Maybe Houston burned its bridge in 2010. But maybe the Astros could use the oft-whispered Veteran Presence on the rotation should a trade happen to allow it. There is likely nothing to it. But it is December 20. And we can't keep writing about how much we love Jeff Luhnow, or Jeff Bagwell's Hall of Fame chances, forever. We need that space in January.
Answer (for me, anyway): Yes. But only if it's on the condition that Wandy or Myers is traded. Why? Let's examine, shall we?
Yeah. Oswalt gets hurt. He has a back like my grandmother, and he'll be 34 in 2012. On the surface, he doesn't exactly fit what the Astros are trying to do. But if his goal is to re-establish value, then he really only needs to put together a solid half-season in Houston.
Let's say - as a pre-condition - that the Astros trade Wandy and/or Myers. Trading one would net $6-7 million in 2012 (because the recipient certainly won't be paying for the whole player) and prospects, depending on the one who is traded. If the Astros offer $10 million to Roy on a one-year contract (even with pitching only 139IP in 2011, FanGraphs listed his value at $11m), he can set himself up for a longer deal in 2012 and beyond if he pitches well enough to get traded at the deadline, ideally bringing back more prospects (or one good one).
By doing so, the Astros would be on the hook for about $6m of that $10m, which trading Wandy/Myers would off-set.
And if Roy is looking for the next contract, it makes sense to return to the scene where he enjoyed quite a lot of success. At Minute Maid Park, Roy has a career 2.92 ERA/1.12 WHIP. His 4.05 K:BB ratio is the second-highest rate among stadiums where he has made more than ten starts.
Maybe Roy isn't interested in coming back to Houston. Maybe Houston burned its bridge in 2010. But maybe the Astros could use the oft-whispered Veteran Presence on the rotation should a trade happen to allow it. There is likely nothing to it. But it is December 20. And we can't keep writing about how much we love Jeff Luhnow, or Jeff Bagwell's Hall of Fame chances, forever. We need that space in January.
Monday, December 19, 2011
The most unbelievable believable thing you'll read all night
Richard Justice a hot little rumor:
Hearing former Astros GM Ed Wade will end up back with Phillies as a scout
There are simply too many jokes that I can't pick just one.
Update: You know, the joke actually makes itself. No need for another one.
Hearing former Astros GM Ed Wade will end up back with Phillies as a scout
There are simply too many jokes that I can't pick just one.
Update: You know, the joke actually makes itself. No need for another one.
Looking back at the 2011 ZIPS projections
So earlier today, Dan Szymborski posted the 2012 Astros ZIPS projections which, as clack says at TCB:
ZIPS is one of the more respected systems for projecting player performance. I won't say it's the best system, because that is hard to determine. But the godawful Astros' projections of the last couple of years have identified some problem areas for the roster that would materialize during the year.
Let's see what ZIPS projected for 2011 vs. what really happened (selected players):
I'm not committed enough to look at the pitchers, but we can break this down: ZIPS-projected ERA+ and actual ERA+:
Wandy: (ZIPS) 109, (Actual) 109
Myers: 101, 85
Happ: 94, 71
Norris: 91, 100
Lyles: 84, 71
So take from this what you will. No projection system is perfect, as it can't figure in playing time. But ZIPS is historically pretty good.
ZIPS is one of the more respected systems for projecting player performance. I won't say it's the best system, because that is hard to determine. But the godawful Astros' projections of the last couple of years have identified some problem areas for the roster that would materialize during the year.
Let's see what ZIPS projected for 2011 vs. what really happened (selected players):
| Name | Set | BA/OBP/SLG | OPS+ | K:BB |
| Pence | ZIPS | .277/.326/.463 | 111 | 113:44 |
| Pence | 2011 | .314/.370/.502 | 138 | 124:56 |
| Lee | ZIPS | .275/.319/.459 | 108 | 50:35 |
| Lee | 2011 | .275/.342/.446 | 117 | 60:59 |
| Wallace | ZIPS | .261/.324/.414 | 98 | 129:34 |
| Wallace | 2011 | .259/.334/.369 | 96 | 91:36 |
| Barmes | ZIPS | .245/.299/.385 | 84 | 87:28 |
| Barmes | 2011 | .244/.312/.386 | 93 | 88:38 |
| Martinez | ZIPS | .272/.323/.395 | 93 | 115:37 |
| Martinez | 2011 | .274/.319/.423 | 104 | 48:13 |
| Sanchez | ZIPS | .258/.306/.331 | 72 | 80:31 |
| Sanchez | 2011 | .240/.305/.285 | 65 | 44:27 |
I'm not committed enough to look at the pitchers, but we can break this down: ZIPS-projected ERA+ and actual ERA+:
Wandy: (ZIPS) 109, (Actual) 109
Myers: 101, 85
Happ: 94, 71
Norris: 91, 100
Lyles: 84, 71
So take from this what you will. No projection system is perfect, as it can't figure in playing time. But ZIPS is historically pretty good.
These ZIPS projections are rated NC-17
Dan Szymborski has your ZIPS projections for the Astros. And hey, Jim Crane, I hope you got a prenup with Luhnow.
The long reckoning expected by observers for an organization that had a GM in Ed Wade that simultaneously ignored the major leagues, the minors leagues, and any kind of thrift, finally came to pass, with no late season mirage of adequacy to convinced the team to double-down on failure.
Browse for yourself, but here are some highlights:
Some interesting projections:
Carlos Lee: .273/.323/.441
J.D. Martinez: .281/.335/.414
Jed Lowrie: .249/.316/.414
Jordan Schafer: .224/.291/.320
Oh, it's not pretty
The long reckoning expected by observers for an organization that had a GM in Ed Wade that simultaneously ignored the major leagues, the minors leagues, and any kind of thrift, finally came to pass, with no late season mirage of adequacy to convinced the team to double-down on failure.
Browse for yourself, but here are some highlights:
Some interesting projections:
Carlos Lee: .273/.323/.441
J.D. Martinez: .281/.335/.414
Jed Lowrie: .249/.316/.414
Jordan Schafer: .224/.291/.320
Oh, it's not pretty
Brian Bixler clears waivers
In order to make room for the incoming Lowrie/Weiland, Brian Bixler was designated for assignment. He cleared waivers, and has accepted his outright assignment to Triple-A OKC, and will be at Spring Training as a non-roster invitee.
The Astros need a Double-A manager
The Astros will be looking for a new manager at Corpus after moving previous manager Tom Lawless (who had previously been at Lancaster) to Roving Instructor.
This may be the first of what could be a number of changes related to player development.
This may be the first of what could be a number of changes related to player development.
New ownership creates challenge for minor-league affiliates
With a captip to Citizen Andrew, we find this article, from the Troy (NY) Record, in which the ValleyCats are just waiting and seeing what will happen under the Crane/Postolos/Luhnow regime...
ValleyCats GM Rick Murphy:
“I just can’t imagine a guy spending $615 million on a business, especially a (ball)club that had the worst record in both leagues and not want to turn that around or make changes...I would think that the performance on the field is going warrant a close examination of what’s going on (with) baseball (player) development. So, from there, I would anticipate, that from the scouting, player personnel, right on through, will be scrutinized."
It's noted within the article that the Astros have PDC (Professional Development Contracts) with the ValleyCats through the 2012 season, and could be making a change in 2013. This makes no sense, unless the ValleyCats want out. But I can't imagine that the Astros want to part ways with Tri-City, since attendance is solid; and I can't imagine that the ValleyCats wouldn't want to see what the Luhnow regime has in store for them - it has to be better than what they've put up with over the past few years.
Also up for negotation at the end of the 2012 season are the PDCs for Oklahoma City, Lancaster, and Lexington.
ValleyCats GM Rick Murphy:
“I just can’t imagine a guy spending $615 million on a business, especially a (ball)club that had the worst record in both leagues and not want to turn that around or make changes...I would think that the performance on the field is going warrant a close examination of what’s going on (with) baseball (player) development. So, from there, I would anticipate, that from the scouting, player personnel, right on through, will be scrutinized."
It's noted within the article that the Astros have PDC (Professional Development Contracts) with the ValleyCats through the 2012 season, and could be making a change in 2013. This makes no sense, unless the ValleyCats want out. But I can't imagine that the Astros want to part ways with Tri-City, since attendance is solid; and I can't imagine that the ValleyCats wouldn't want to see what the Luhnow regime has in store for them - it has to be better than what they've put up with over the past few years.
Also up for negotation at the end of the 2012 season are the PDCs for Oklahoma City, Lancaster, and Lexington.
Hardball Times makes the case for Bagwell
The Hardball Times' Chris Jaffe makes the HOF case for our very own Jeff Bagwell, who really doesn't need a case made for his HOF credentials, would it not be for the asinine, irresponsible "journalists" who are out hunting for witches with rubber ducks and fudge rounds.
Money quote:
The 19th-century guys played too far back in a much weaker overall league. Mize was a lot like Bagwell—power, average, walks—but had an even shorter career. Bagwell had fewer homers than McCovey, but more extra-base hits, more times on base and fewer outs. In his New Historical Abstract, Bill James ranks Bagwell the third-best first baseman ever, first among all NL ones.
Personally, I might take McCovey over him due to the difference in eras (McCovey played in the pitcher-happy 1960s), but if there’s a credible case that Bagwell is the best at his position in the history of his league, that’s an argument for induction. His best challenge to the title is the guy who emerged later on, Albert Pujols.
Money quote:
The 19th-century guys played too far back in a much weaker overall league. Mize was a lot like Bagwell—power, average, walks—but had an even shorter career. Bagwell had fewer homers than McCovey, but more extra-base hits, more times on base and fewer outs. In his New Historical Abstract, Bill James ranks Bagwell the third-best first baseman ever, first among all NL ones.
Personally, I might take McCovey over him due to the difference in eras (McCovey played in the pitcher-happy 1960s), but if there’s a credible case that Bagwell is the best at his position in the history of his league, that’s an argument for induction. His best challenge to the title is the guy who emerged later on, Albert Pujols.
Chat at astros.com with Jeff Luhnow
This is so incomprehensible from a historic standpoint (at least as far as the Astros are concerned). At 6pm (Central) tonight (Monday), there will be a live chat with Astros GM Jeff Luhnow.
Log on and chat live with Luhnow about his strategy to rebuild the team and his immediate goals for the 2012 season.
And speaking of Jeff Luhnow, here's a great article from the New York Times' Tyler Kepner on Luhnow.
Log on and chat live with Luhnow about his strategy to rebuild the team and his immediate goals for the 2012 season.
And speaking of Jeff Luhnow, here's a great article from the New York Times' Tyler Kepner on Luhnow.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Jason Michaels is no longer our problem
The gentleman who took so many ABs away from Brian Bogusevic, the gentleman Brad Mills trusted off the bench above all others - Jason Michaels - has signed a minor-league deal with the Washington Nationals.
What might have been
What if there were no trades, rule 5 picks, or free agency? Ever wondered what the Astros would look like if no player transactions were allowed? Well you're in luck, because CBSSports.com's blog Eye on Baseball is in the middle of a series that is putting together current lineups for each team as though each player stayed with the organization that first signed them. Their conclusion? The Astros would still only be a 75 win team in 2011, even with their best homegrown current player at every position. Given our horrible drafts in the earlier part of the decade, I'd say that's about right.
Melancon's mixed emotions
Brian McTaggart describes a tortured Mark Melancon:
Mark Melancon was eating a vacation lunch on a Cancun beach with his uncle on Wednesday when his wife walked up to him with a concerned look on her face. Melancon immediately thought the worst, thinking something was wrong with the couple's baby daughter, Brooklyn Marie.
"I hadn't seen a face like that from her since Brooklyn's been around," he said. "I just figured something was wrong and she needed help. She was full of emotions and then she told me the news, and I was just thankful Brooklyn was OK."
The Boston Globe's Peter Abraham talked to a very excited Mark Melancon:
Mark Melancon was on a beach in Cancun on Wednesday when he looked up and saw his wife, Mary Catherine, running his way.
“There was no reason in the world she would be running that fast and she had this expression on her face that was full of emotion,’’ Melancon said last night. “I was worried for a second that something was wrong. Then she started screaming, ‘You just got traded! It’s the Red Sox!'"
-
To McTaggart:
"I wish I could have won a little bit more, but every organization goes through those periods. I was looking forward to helping rebuild the team and create something very positive, but obviously I'm moving on and it's going to be a new and exciting adventure for me and my family."
To Abraham:
“I loved playing for the Yankees and getting a chance to pitch in the AL East. I’m glad to be going back to that division. Competition like that is good for you. I want to be on a contender with that kind of history and a front office that is solely there to win. It was amazing to me how different it was with the Astros. Houston was wonderful for my career and I enjoyed it. But now I’m in the kind of place I really want to be. Boston is the kind of team where you can create a lot of great memories."
Ahhh, the beauty of perspective...
Mark Melancon was eating a vacation lunch on a Cancun beach with his uncle on Wednesday when his wife walked up to him with a concerned look on her face. Melancon immediately thought the worst, thinking something was wrong with the couple's baby daughter, Brooklyn Marie.
"I hadn't seen a face like that from her since Brooklyn's been around," he said. "I just figured something was wrong and she needed help. She was full of emotions and then she told me the news, and I was just thankful Brooklyn was OK."
The Boston Globe's Peter Abraham talked to a very excited Mark Melancon:
Mark Melancon was on a beach in Cancun on Wednesday when he looked up and saw his wife, Mary Catherine, running his way.
“There was no reason in the world she would be running that fast and she had this expression on her face that was full of emotion,’’ Melancon said last night. “I was worried for a second that something was wrong. Then she started screaming, ‘You just got traded! It’s the Red Sox!'"
-
To McTaggart:
"I wish I could have won a little bit more, but every organization goes through those periods. I was looking forward to helping rebuild the team and create something very positive, but obviously I'm moving on and it's going to be a new and exciting adventure for me and my family."
To Abraham:
“I loved playing for the Yankees and getting a chance to pitch in the AL East. I’m glad to be going back to that division. Competition like that is good for you. I want to be on a contender with that kind of history and a front office that is solely there to win. It was amazing to me how different it was with the Astros. Houston was wonderful for my career and I enjoyed it. But now I’m in the kind of place I really want to be. Boston is the kind of team where you can create a lot of great memories."
Ahhh, the beauty of perspective...
Paul Clemens expects to be in Houston by the end of 2012
In an interview with Patch.com, Paul Clemens has some high hopes for 2012:
“I feel this year I will definitely get my shot at some point during the year. Things have been going great for me the past few years. When I get a shot I will be ready...
...“My fastball tops at about 97. I throw a circle change and a curve. I have worked some on a two-seam fastball but I have real life on my four-seam fastball. The two-seam is not something that I need. I hope to compete for a job at the big league level. That is my goal.”
“I feel this year I will definitely get my shot at some point during the year. Things have been going great for me the past few years. When I get a shot I will be ready...
...“My fastball tops at about 97. I throw a circle change and a curve. I have worked some on a two-seam fastball but I have real life on my four-seam fastball. The two-seam is not something that I need. I hope to compete for a job at the big league level. That is my goal.”
Travis Smink moves into coaching
Travis Smink, 31st Round selection in the 2009 draft, has moved on from professional baseball, and will be the new head coach for Carlisle (PA) High School.
In three seasons with the Astros (two with Greeneville, one with Tri-City), Smink posted a 4.57 ERA/1.37 WHIP, with 75K:19BB in 104.1IP.
In three seasons with the Astros (two with Greeneville, one with Tri-City), Smink posted a 4.57 ERA/1.37 WHIP, with 75K:19BB in 104.1IP.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
The J.R. Towles era has come to a swift end
The Minneapolis Star-Tribune's Joe Christensen tweeted that the Twins have signed J.R. Towles to a minor-league deal with an invitation to Spring Training.
Ahhh, Justin Richard. The promise you had! The ways you would tease us! You're now a Twin. No longer will we confuse your appearance with Chase Budinger.
Over five seasons - three of those stints totaling fewer than 53 plate appearances - Towles hit .187/.267/.315. But man, on September 20, 2007, we thought we saw Johnny Bench. Do you not remember that game? It was a meaningless one, although anytime the Astros beat the Cardinals 18-1 it can hardly be described as "meaningless."
It was Towles' sixth career major-league appearance. He started it off with a two-run double to left in the top of the 2nd. And a two-run single to left in the top of the 4th. And then an RBI ground-rule double to right in the top of the 6th. And was hit by a pitch in the 7th. And drew an RBI walk in the 8th. And then topped it off with a two-run homer in the top of the 9th.
The result? Six plate appearances: a walk, an HBP, four hits (two doubles, a homer, a single), eight RBIs.
But what was to come was not pretty. If you take out that one game, from 2008-11 Towles hit .168/.251/.289, bouncing back and forth between Houston and Triple-A/Double-A, where in parts of four seasons, he hit a maddening .286/.389/.443. But his days were effectively done when, on May 5, 2010 Greg Lucas brought the thunder about Towles, following his demotion all the way to Corpus. He wrote:
J.R. Towles is no longer an Astro because pitchers don’t like working with him. It has not been a secret within the Astro clubhouse that at least two starters—one with significant prominence—have had problems communicating with J.R. Everything from pace of the game, to targets offered, to being on the same page contributed to the split.
So fare thee well, J.R. Towles. If anyone has ever needed a change of scenery, it's you.
Ahhh, Justin Richard. The promise you had! The ways you would tease us! You're now a Twin. No longer will we confuse your appearance with Chase Budinger.
Over five seasons - three of those stints totaling fewer than 53 plate appearances - Towles hit .187/.267/.315. But man, on September 20, 2007, we thought we saw Johnny Bench. Do you not remember that game? It was a meaningless one, although anytime the Astros beat the Cardinals 18-1 it can hardly be described as "meaningless."
It was Towles' sixth career major-league appearance. He started it off with a two-run double to left in the top of the 2nd. And a two-run single to left in the top of the 4th. And then an RBI ground-rule double to right in the top of the 6th. And was hit by a pitch in the 7th. And drew an RBI walk in the 8th. And then topped it off with a two-run homer in the top of the 9th.
The result? Six plate appearances: a walk, an HBP, four hits (two doubles, a homer, a single), eight RBIs.
But what was to come was not pretty. If you take out that one game, from 2008-11 Towles hit .168/.251/.289, bouncing back and forth between Houston and Triple-A/Double-A, where in parts of four seasons, he hit a maddening .286/.389/.443. But his days were effectively done when, on May 5, 2010 Greg Lucas brought the thunder about Towles, following his demotion all the way to Corpus. He wrote:
J.R. Towles is no longer an Astro because pitchers don’t like working with him. It has not been a secret within the Astro clubhouse that at least two starters—one with significant prominence—have had problems communicating with J.R. Everything from pace of the game, to targets offered, to being on the same page contributed to the split.
So fare thee well, J.R. Towles. If anyone has ever needed a change of scenery, it's you.
The Common Man hands out the Bagwell Punishment
Hardball Talk linked to this today, but it's definitely worth a re-link: Nine sportswriters accused of plagiarizing their thoughts on Bagwell.
The task facing Luhnow
ESPN's Christina Kahrl has a good recap of what's facing new Astros GM Jeff Luhnow.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Stavinoha released
Zach Levine is reporting that recent minor league signee Nick Stavinoha has been granted a release to pursue opportunities in Japan. Not an unusual move, but a little more surprising given that he joined the Cardinals organization while new GM Jeff Luhnow was with St. Louis.
Jeff Bagwell: 1993 to 1994
This whole Hall of Fame/Jeff Bagwell stuff has me all riled up. I'm sure that the writers who actually give enough of a crap to check out Bagwell's Baseball-Reference page looked at his jump from 1993 to 1994 as enough "proof" to suspect something was going on with Bagwell's body. Let's examine, shall we?
In 142 games (609 PAs) in 1993, Bagwell posted the following:
.320/.388/.516, with 20 homers, (61 XBH), 73K:62BB
In 1994, Bagwell played 110 games (strike-shortened season), with 479 PAs, posting:
.368/.451/.750, 39 homers (73 XBH), 65K:65BB
That's a significant jump - 19 more home runs in 130 fewer PAS. If we use, you know, a calculator, we know that Bagwell hit homers in 1993 at a rate of one every 30.45 plate appearances. In 1994, it was one every 12.28 plate appearances. What changed?
In 1993, Bagwell hit .330/.409/.509 in the Astrodome and .310/.365/.522 on the road, with a difference of only seven plate appearances between the two splits. Ten of his homers were at home, ten were on the road. Seven of those homers came in May, when he busted out for a .412/.467/.676 slash line, with 13K:14BB. Three of those homers came in one series against the Reds (May 6-8) where they left the Astrodome with a 12-17 record. All three came against the Reds' relievers.
Still, Bagwell played his last game of the season on September 12, 1993 when a Ben Rivera pitch ended up breaking his hand, causing Bagwell to miss the final 20 games of the season. If you figure that Bagwell missed about 86 plate appearances, it translates into approximately three more HRs. It's not a lot, but going from 23 to 39 homers is a little different than 20 to 39.
Bagwell was also either hitting in front of Eric Anthony or Ken Caminiti in 1993. Anthony hit 4th in 86 games in 1993, and posted a .272/.346/.453 line in the cleanup spot. Caminiti - when hitting 4th - hit .237/.309/.289. Anthony was good, Caminiti was not.
In 1994, Bagwell killed lefties (he killed everybody, in general), hitting .457/.544/1.095, with 18 of his 39 homers coming in 125 PAs vs. LHP (as opposed to a .318/.408/.592 line, with 10 homers in 213 PAs. So that's a homer every 6.9 PAs against a lefty in 1994, and one every 21.3 PAs in 1993.
But here's something else: From Opening Day to June 13, Bagwell hit 4th in the lineup, behind Craig Biggio, and he posted a .327/.406/.636 line with 17 homers, one every 12.9 PAs. Impressive, but not legendary. However, starting with the June 14, 1994 game, Terry Collins moved Bagwell back to the #3 spot, When Bagwell hit 3rd, he hit .417/.505/.889, with 19 doubles, 22 homers, 28K:32BB (11 intentional), with a .398 BABIP. That's one HR every 9.9 PAs.
On July 5, Biggio took over the leadoff spot, where Bagwell - now two spots behind Biggio, one behind Steve Finley, and in front of Ken Caminiti - hit .407/.507/.850 with a homer every 10.9 PAs, and an extra-base hit every 5.92 PAs.
In 1994, Craig Biggio also, after 5 1/2 good seasons, hit .300 for the first time - hitting .318/.411/.483, and posting his first .800+ OPS season. As the lead-off hitter, Biggio hit .347/.446/.533 in 1994.
From Opening Day - July 2, 1994, the Astros were 44-36 (.550), and hit 265/.333/.427. After Biggio was moved to the lead-off spot and the order got all shifted around, the Astros as a team hit .305/.378/.485, and went 22-13 (.629) until the strike happened.
So it's my opinion that Bagwell - after almost 2,000 plate appearances - was putting together a great year in 1994 until the lineup was shifted to maximize the lineup, and then it became a monster year. Ken Caminiti is a key player in this, as he hit .283/.352/.495 in 1994, becoming an All-Star for the first time, and providing protection for Bagwell.
Of course you're thinking, "But Caminiti admitted using steroids!" And you're right. However, he said he didn't start using until 1996, when he was in San Diego, to recover from a shoulder injury. If you think Bagwell juiced because he was buddies with Caminiti, Bagwell's MVP season pre-dates Caminiti's introduction to the magical world of injectible super-hero strength by two seasons, and Caminiti wasn't in Houston when he says he started juicing. And if you don't believe Caminiti, then there's no logic or rhyme/reason to persuade you.
Does this absolve Jeff Bagwell? I'm sure it won't mean a single solitary to anyone who doesn't want to look much more closely at the Hall of Fame than the internal "Do I think this guy is a Hall of Famer?" question. But it matters to me.
In 142 games (609 PAs) in 1993, Bagwell posted the following:
.320/.388/.516, with 20 homers, (61 XBH), 73K:62BB
In 1994, Bagwell played 110 games (strike-shortened season), with 479 PAs, posting:
.368/.451/.750, 39 homers (73 XBH), 65K:65BB
That's a significant jump - 19 more home runs in 130 fewer PAS. If we use, you know, a calculator, we know that Bagwell hit homers in 1993 at a rate of one every 30.45 plate appearances. In 1994, it was one every 12.28 plate appearances. What changed?
In 1993, Bagwell hit .330/.409/.509 in the Astrodome and .310/.365/.522 on the road, with a difference of only seven plate appearances between the two splits. Ten of his homers were at home, ten were on the road. Seven of those homers came in May, when he busted out for a .412/.467/.676 slash line, with 13K:14BB. Three of those homers came in one series against the Reds (May 6-8) where they left the Astrodome with a 12-17 record. All three came against the Reds' relievers.
Still, Bagwell played his last game of the season on September 12, 1993 when a Ben Rivera pitch ended up breaking his hand, causing Bagwell to miss the final 20 games of the season. If you figure that Bagwell missed about 86 plate appearances, it translates into approximately three more HRs. It's not a lot, but going from 23 to 39 homers is a little different than 20 to 39.
Bagwell was also either hitting in front of Eric Anthony or Ken Caminiti in 1993. Anthony hit 4th in 86 games in 1993, and posted a .272/.346/.453 line in the cleanup spot. Caminiti - when hitting 4th - hit .237/.309/.289. Anthony was good, Caminiti was not.
In 1994, Bagwell killed lefties (he killed everybody, in general), hitting .457/.544/1.095, with 18 of his 39 homers coming in 125 PAs vs. LHP (as opposed to a .318/.408/.592 line, with 10 homers in 213 PAs. So that's a homer every 6.9 PAs against a lefty in 1994, and one every 21.3 PAs in 1993.
But here's something else: From Opening Day to June 13, Bagwell hit 4th in the lineup, behind Craig Biggio, and he posted a .327/.406/.636 line with 17 homers, one every 12.9 PAs. Impressive, but not legendary. However, starting with the June 14, 1994 game, Terry Collins moved Bagwell back to the #3 spot, When Bagwell hit 3rd, he hit .417/.505/.889, with 19 doubles, 22 homers, 28K:32BB (11 intentional), with a .398 BABIP. That's one HR every 9.9 PAs.
On July 5, Biggio took over the leadoff spot, where Bagwell - now two spots behind Biggio, one behind Steve Finley, and in front of Ken Caminiti - hit .407/.507/.850 with a homer every 10.9 PAs, and an extra-base hit every 5.92 PAs.
In 1994, Craig Biggio also, after 5 1/2 good seasons, hit .300 for the first time - hitting .318/.411/.483, and posting his first .800+ OPS season. As the lead-off hitter, Biggio hit .347/.446/.533 in 1994.
From Opening Day - July 2, 1994, the Astros were 44-36 (.550), and hit 265/.333/.427. After Biggio was moved to the lead-off spot and the order got all shifted around, the Astros as a team hit .305/.378/.485, and went 22-13 (.629) until the strike happened.
So it's my opinion that Bagwell - after almost 2,000 plate appearances - was putting together a great year in 1994 until the lineup was shifted to maximize the lineup, and then it became a monster year. Ken Caminiti is a key player in this, as he hit .283/.352/.495 in 1994, becoming an All-Star for the first time, and providing protection for Bagwell.
Of course you're thinking, "But Caminiti admitted using steroids!" And you're right. However, he said he didn't start using until 1996, when he was in San Diego, to recover from a shoulder injury. If you think Bagwell juiced because he was buddies with Caminiti, Bagwell's MVP season pre-dates Caminiti's introduction to the magical world of injectible super-hero strength by two seasons, and Caminiti wasn't in Houston when he says he started juicing. And if you don't believe Caminiti, then there's no logic or rhyme/reason to persuade you.
Does this absolve Jeff Bagwell? I'm sure it won't mean a single solitary to anyone who doesn't want to look much more closely at the Hall of Fame than the internal "Do I think this guy is a Hall of Famer?" question. But it matters to me.
Luhnow, on today's trade
Jeff Luhnow talked to Mark Berman about the Melancon trade today:
"Obviously we're giving up a lot in Melancon, but I feel like we're getting value back in getting a guy that can play shortstop with a good (bat), a switch-hitter, as well as a pitcher who is capable of being in the rotation next year."
"Obviously we're giving up a lot in Melancon, but I feel like we're getting value back in getting a guy that can play shortstop with a good (bat), a switch-hitter, as well as a pitcher who is capable of being in the rotation next year."
Brian Bixler removed from 40-man roster
Hope you enjoyed that spot on the 40-man, Brian Bixler. Because you have been outrighted to make room for Jed Lowrie and/or Kyle Weiland.
More respect for Astros farm system
J.P Schwartz over at TopProspectAlert.com just put out his farm system rankings with links to his top 15 prospects for each organization, and the Astros are solidly average, coming in at #15!
Reactions to Melancon/Lowrie-Weiland trade
Here are some quick reactions to the trade today (from respected tweeters, woofers):
McTaggart:
the Astros are unlikely to contend next year, so having a lights-out closer isn’t tantamount. Expect the club to get a good look next year at several arms they believe could close in the future. The bottom line is the Astros traded one young player and two more in return. The rebuildling continues.
Keith Law (Insider-only):
Jeff Luhnow's first move as general manager of the Houston Astros isn't a huge one, but it's a great deal for them and shows just how badly the club was mismanaged under Ed Wade over the last few years.
Baseball America:
First on new Astros general manager Jeff Luhnow's to-do list: acquire viable options to play shortstop and catcher, the two most demanding positions on the field. His search continues for a catcher to cover for the injured Jason Castro, but odds are he found his shortstop in a trade with the Red Sox.
FanGraphs:
A healthy Lowrie will make this look like a steal for Houston three years down the road, but we haven’t seen a healthy Lowrie all too often. It’s entirely possible that Weiland will outproduce Melancon next season by himself, but contenders often have to overpay a bit to deal with their pressing needs.
Sky Kalkman:
Well crap, it appears I'm going to have to give @jluhnlow the Friedman treatment and fanboy all his moves no matter what.
Jay Jaffe:
Those of you clucking about Jed Lowrie's durability, are you really going to hold a 4-month bout of mono against him?
Eno Sarris:
Weiland for Melancon would have been fair. Adding Lowrie was a mistake.
BrewersBar:
Melancon was all it took to get Jed Lowrie? Jeez.
Marc Normandin:
This is a trade where both sides did well. I know we all hate trades without clear winners.
Jon Heyman:
melancon nice pickup for #redsox. cant be their closer, tho. they still need someone for the 9th.
Buster Olney:
Like the Astros-Red Sox trade for both sides; Melancon gives BOS possible high-end reliever, and Lowrie could do some damage for HOU.
Keith Olbermann:
Red Sox rip Astros off
McTaggart:
the Astros are unlikely to contend next year, so having a lights-out closer isn’t tantamount. Expect the club to get a good look next year at several arms they believe could close in the future. The bottom line is the Astros traded one young player and two more in return. The rebuildling continues.
Keith Law (Insider-only):
Jeff Luhnow's first move as general manager of the Houston Astros isn't a huge one, but it's a great deal for them and shows just how badly the club was mismanaged under Ed Wade over the last few years.
Baseball America:
First on new Astros general manager Jeff Luhnow's to-do list: acquire viable options to play shortstop and catcher, the two most demanding positions on the field. His search continues for a catcher to cover for the injured Jason Castro, but odds are he found his shortstop in a trade with the Red Sox.
FanGraphs:
A healthy Lowrie will make this look like a steal for Houston three years down the road, but we haven’t seen a healthy Lowrie all too often. It’s entirely possible that Weiland will outproduce Melancon next season by himself, but contenders often have to overpay a bit to deal with their pressing needs.
Sky Kalkman:
Well crap, it appears I'm going to have to give @jluhnlow the Friedman treatment and fanboy all his moves no matter what.
Jay Jaffe:
Those of you clucking about Jed Lowrie's durability, are you really going to hold a 4-month bout of mono against him?
Eno Sarris:
Weiland for Melancon would have been fair. Adding Lowrie was a mistake.
BrewersBar:
Melancon was all it took to get Jed Lowrie? Jeez.
Marc Normandin:
This is a trade where both sides did well. I know we all hate trades without clear winners.
Jon Heyman:
melancon nice pickup for #redsox. cant be their closer, tho. they still need someone for the 9th.
Buster Olney:
Like the Astros-Red Sox trade for both sides; Melancon gives BOS possible high-end reliever, and Lowrie could do some damage for HOU.
Keith Olbermann:
Red Sox rip Astros off
Astros trade Mark Melancon, get a shortstop
Have a seat, Angel Sanchez. The Astros have a new shortstop, Jed Lowrie.
Jeff Luhnow has apparently pulled the trigger on a trade with the Red Sox sending 2011 closer Mark Melancon to Boston for Jed Lowrie and Kyle Weiland.
Jed Lowrie answers the question of "Who in the hell is going to play shortstop?" A definite upgrade over Angel Sanchez, Lowrie has hit .252/.324/.408 in parts of four seasons with the Red Sox. His breakout year was in an injury-shortened 2010, when he hit .287/.381/.526 in 55 games, with 25K:25BB.
In 88 games for Boston in 2011, he regressed, hitting .252/.303/.382. Fire Brand of the American League has a review of Lowrie's 2011, with this money-quote:
Certainly, if you think this is a good buy-low situation, then now is a good time to get in. Depending on who you talk to, in 2011 Lowrie is everything from a 4-win shortstop to an injury-riddled super-utility. If I were dealing for him, I would bet the latter.
I didn't watch the Red Sox in 2011, because they play in an inferior league, but I feel like Lowrie's promise is an upgrade over Angel Sanchez' existing skill set.
Kyle Weiland is a 25-year old 6'4" 195lb RHP from Albuquerque, and was the Red Sox' 3rd Round pick in 2008. He appared in seven games (five starts) for the Red Sox in 2011, pretty much getting beat up (7.66 ERA/1.66 WHIP), but in 90 minor-league appareances (85 starts), has a 3.51 ERA/1.22 WHIP, with a 2.49 K:BB ratio. In Triple-A in 2011, Weiland threw 128.1IP, allowing 108H/51ER, 126K:55BB.
Sox Prospects says:
90-95 MPH fastball that comes in two-seam and four-seam varieties. Two-seamer has excellent late life and arm-side run. Attacks the zone with solid-average command of his fastball. Doesn't make a lot of mistakes with it and uses both sides of the plate, but can leave it up on occasions. 78-81 MPH curveball has made strides since signing.
WEEI's Alex Speier has this excellent article on Weiland, where Red Sox pitcher Andrew Miller says:
“From what I understand, they always thought, ‘He was a closer in college and maybe he’ll be a reliever again.’ But what I’ve seen from him as a starter, he’s certainly got the ability and stuff to do it. It’s good that he’s getting the opportunity. He’s earned it – especially this year. At a certain point, if he’s able to have success in Triple-A as a starter, he’s able to hold his velocity, maybe you think, ‘Oh, maybe he’s a starter.’
The Astros of course are (reportedly) losing Mark Melancon, the 26-year old closer acquired from the Yankees in the 2010 Berkman trade, and 20 saves. With Brandon Lyon and his millions expected to be back (and healthy-ish), Melancon was expendable, and the 2012 Astros need a shortstop more than they needed Melancon. Jed Lowrie is under team control until 2015 (Arbitration-eligible this off-season), and Weiland is under team control until 2018.
Who does this affect most on the current roster? Brandon Lyon gets his job back (presumably). Jimmy Paredes stays at 3rd, and Jonathan Villar now has the luxury of having time to develop. It also may pave the way for a Wandy/Myers trade, as the Astros have Weiland waiting in the wings for the rotation.
Jeff Luhnow has apparently pulled the trigger on a trade with the Red Sox sending 2011 closer Mark Melancon to Boston for Jed Lowrie and Kyle Weiland.
Jed Lowrie answers the question of "Who in the hell is going to play shortstop?" A definite upgrade over Angel Sanchez, Lowrie has hit .252/.324/.408 in parts of four seasons with the Red Sox. His breakout year was in an injury-shortened 2010, when he hit .287/.381/.526 in 55 games, with 25K:25BB.
In 88 games for Boston in 2011, he regressed, hitting .252/.303/.382. Fire Brand of the American League has a review of Lowrie's 2011, with this money-quote:
Certainly, if you think this is a good buy-low situation, then now is a good time to get in. Depending on who you talk to, in 2011 Lowrie is everything from a 4-win shortstop to an injury-riddled super-utility. If I were dealing for him, I would bet the latter.
I didn't watch the Red Sox in 2011, because they play in an inferior league, but I feel like Lowrie's promise is an upgrade over Angel Sanchez' existing skill set.
Kyle Weiland is a 25-year old 6'4" 195lb RHP from Albuquerque, and was the Red Sox' 3rd Round pick in 2008. He appared in seven games (five starts) for the Red Sox in 2011, pretty much getting beat up (7.66 ERA/1.66 WHIP), but in 90 minor-league appareances (85 starts), has a 3.51 ERA/1.22 WHIP, with a 2.49 K:BB ratio. In Triple-A in 2011, Weiland threw 128.1IP, allowing 108H/51ER, 126K:55BB.
Sox Prospects says:
90-95 MPH fastball that comes in two-seam and four-seam varieties. Two-seamer has excellent late life and arm-side run. Attacks the zone with solid-average command of his fastball. Doesn't make a lot of mistakes with it and uses both sides of the plate, but can leave it up on occasions. 78-81 MPH curveball has made strides since signing.
WEEI's Alex Speier has this excellent article on Weiland, where Red Sox pitcher Andrew Miller says:
“From what I understand, they always thought, ‘He was a closer in college and maybe he’ll be a reliever again.’ But what I’ve seen from him as a starter, he’s certainly got the ability and stuff to do it. It’s good that he’s getting the opportunity. He’s earned it – especially this year. At a certain point, if he’s able to have success in Triple-A as a starter, he’s able to hold his velocity, maybe you think, ‘Oh, maybe he’s a starter.’
The Astros of course are (reportedly) losing Mark Melancon, the 26-year old closer acquired from the Yankees in the 2010 Berkman trade, and 20 saves. With Brandon Lyon and his millions expected to be back (and healthy-ish), Melancon was expendable, and the 2012 Astros need a shortstop more than they needed Melancon. Jed Lowrie is under team control until 2015 (Arbitration-eligible this off-season), and Weiland is under team control until 2018.
Who does this affect most on the current roster? Brandon Lyon gets his job back (presumably). Jimmy Paredes stays at 3rd, and Jonathan Villar now has the luxury of having time to develop. It also may pave the way for a Wandy/Myers trade, as the Astros have Weiland waiting in the wings for the rotation.
Et Tu, Brutus?
The Hartford Courant - Jeff Bagwell's home newspaper - has a columnist named Jeff Jacobs, who apparently is a voting member of the BBWAA and wonders if the chore is "worth the hassle."
About Our Boy Jeff Bagwell:
Based on numbers alone, Bagwell deserves to be in the Hall of Fame...
...We have seen tens of players like Bagwell blow up from a skinny 20 to a cartoon 35. We have seen tens of players like Bagwell break down physically in their late 30s. I will never vote for Rafael Palmeiro or Mark McGwire, not in 15 lifetimes, but I also don't want to be part of any witch hunt. I only want to play the percentages...
...I have wanted to wait a few years to see if anything surfaced. To watch ESPN, Yahoo!, New York Daily News, the Texas media — someone with the resources and vigor — put Bagwell in its headlights and see if he emerges clean. I have no intentions of making him wait forever. I will wait another year or two.
To recap:
*By the standards of baseball, Jeff Bagwell is a Hall of Famer.
*But Bagwell played with Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGwire.
*So this writer will wait until someone with enough time, money, and desire decides to put Bagwell on trial for PED use (something of which Bagwell was never officially linked).
*If no one does so, and soon, he'll just go ahead and vote for him.
This has to be one of the laziest arguments I've ever heard in not voting for a player. "By the numbers," Bagwell is a Hall of Famer. By the character clause, too, actually, Jeff Bagwell is a Hall of Famer, because he has never been linked to the use of PEDs. There have been whispers, even flat-out, undeveloped accusations, about Bagwell. But a whisper isn't admissible in a court of law. Which is exactly what the Hall of Fame is not.
Jonah Keri sums it up:
We believe ourselves to be experts, able to pinpoint when a player supposedly started using, exactly how much benefit he gained, and how we should thus evaluate his numbers. With players like Jeff Bagwell, the pseudo-analysis goes a step further, with hordes of writers declining to vote Bagwell into the Hall of Fame because he had big muscles, and some other players of his era were caught using, so … well … you know.
Jeff Jacobs is a prime example of why this Michael Rosenberg column is spot on:
It was probably always wrong for the media to determine the news with its award votes, but now it is ridiculous. We're not just creating news; we're creating controversies. Why should we be the judge and jury for every ballplayer? It is one thing for columnists (like me) to express opinions about what Braun did, did not do, or should have done. It's quite another for us to officially validate or void a player's achievements.
The purpose of becoming a sportswriter or columnist is to have an opinion. What Jacobs has done is to shy away from that role, let others do the work, and then pass judgment on other journalists' - the ones with "resources and vigor" - work.
About Our Boy Jeff Bagwell:
Based on numbers alone, Bagwell deserves to be in the Hall of Fame...
...We have seen tens of players like Bagwell blow up from a skinny 20 to a cartoon 35. We have seen tens of players like Bagwell break down physically in their late 30s. I will never vote for Rafael Palmeiro or Mark McGwire, not in 15 lifetimes, but I also don't want to be part of any witch hunt. I only want to play the percentages...
...I have wanted to wait a few years to see if anything surfaced. To watch ESPN, Yahoo!, New York Daily News, the Texas media — someone with the resources and vigor — put Bagwell in its headlights and see if he emerges clean. I have no intentions of making him wait forever. I will wait another year or two.
To recap:
*By the standards of baseball, Jeff Bagwell is a Hall of Famer.
*But Bagwell played with Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGwire.
*So this writer will wait until someone with enough time, money, and desire decides to put Bagwell on trial for PED use (something of which Bagwell was never officially linked).
*If no one does so, and soon, he'll just go ahead and vote for him.
This has to be one of the laziest arguments I've ever heard in not voting for a player. "By the numbers," Bagwell is a Hall of Famer. By the character clause, too, actually, Jeff Bagwell is a Hall of Famer, because he has never been linked to the use of PEDs. There have been whispers, even flat-out, undeveloped accusations, about Bagwell. But a whisper isn't admissible in a court of law. Which is exactly what the Hall of Fame is not.
Jonah Keri sums it up:
We believe ourselves to be experts, able to pinpoint when a player supposedly started using, exactly how much benefit he gained, and how we should thus evaluate his numbers. With players like Jeff Bagwell, the pseudo-analysis goes a step further, with hordes of writers declining to vote Bagwell into the Hall of Fame because he had big muscles, and some other players of his era were caught using, so … well … you know.
Jeff Jacobs is a prime example of why this Michael Rosenberg column is spot on:
It was probably always wrong for the media to determine the news with its award votes, but now it is ridiculous. We're not just creating news; we're creating controversies. Why should we be the judge and jury for every ballplayer? It is one thing for columnists (like me) to express opinions about what Braun did, did not do, or should have done. It's quite another for us to officially validate or void a player's achievements.
The purpose of becoming a sportswriter or columnist is to have an opinion. What Jacobs has done is to shy away from that role, let others do the work, and then pass judgment on other journalists' - the ones with "resources and vigor" - work.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
The Indians are not in on Willingham, still want an OF/1B
Hey, so Ken Rosenthal says that the Indians, who have been linked to any and all short-term deals involving right-handed outfielders who can play first base, are not in on Josh Willingham.
Carlos Lee is as inevitable as a tazing at your work Christmas party.
Carlos Lee is as inevitable as a tazing at your work Christmas party.
J.A. Happ tendered contract
J.A. Happ was offered arbitration, and will return in 2012.
This makes sense, given how cheap he is. Before you get all crazy, let's look at Happ's June/July:
1-9 record. 51.2IP, 71H/44ER, 46K:29BB, 8 homers allowed, .332/.408/.565, .389 BABIP, 7.66 ERA/1.94 WHIP.
Then Aug/Sept:
3-4 record. 41IP, 29H/16ER, 36K:23BB, 4 homers allowed, .201/.310/.333, .238 BABIP, 3.51 ERA/1.27 WHIP.
This makes sense, given how cheap he is. Before you get all crazy, let's look at Happ's June/July:
1-9 record. 51.2IP, 71H/44ER, 46K:29BB, 8 homers allowed, .332/.408/.565, .389 BABIP, 7.66 ERA/1.94 WHIP.
Then Aug/Sept:
3-4 record. 41IP, 29H/16ER, 36K:23BB, 4 homers allowed, .201/.310/.333, .238 BABIP, 3.51 ERA/1.27 WHIP.
They call him Mr. Glass
Jason Castro is out for three months following surgery to remove the sesamoid bone in his left food.
Jon Heyman (I know) already says that the Astros and Pudge - yes, that Pudge, could be a fit. Although I really hope not.
Regardless, the timetable for Castro's return should put him back right around the middle of Spring Training. Get ready for Quintero Time (who signed a 1-year deal worth $1m + bonuses).
Jon Heyman (I know) already says that the Astros and Pudge - yes, that Pudge, could be a fit. Although I really hope not.
Regardless, the timetable for Castro's return should put him back right around the middle of Spring Training. Get ready for Quintero Time (who signed a 1-year deal worth $1m + bonuses).
Monday, December 12, 2011
FanGraphs: Wandy-to-Boston makes sense
In a post that looked remarkably similar to one I was working on to be published tonight, I will humbly withdraw my post and just link to this FanGraphs post saying that Boston makes a whole lot of sense for both sides.
Money quote:
The Astros are unlikely to be ready for serious competition by the time Rodriguez’s contract is up, and if they are able to net a couple of prospects in need of some more seasoning without eating too much of his contract, that’s a big win for them.
Money quote:
The Astros are unlikely to be ready for serious competition by the time Rodriguez’s contract is up, and if they are able to net a couple of prospects in need of some more seasoning without eating too much of his contract, that’s a big win for them.
Red Sox interested in Wandy
With a captip to Native Astro, the Boston Herald's Michael Silverman says that Wandy Rodriguez is among the available pitchers interesting the Red Sox, along with the White Sox' Gavin Floyd and John Danks, and the A's Gio Gonzalez.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Saturday update
Here is your early afternoon Saturday update:
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution's David O'Brien says that he thinks Carlos Lee makes sense for the Braves, if the Astros are willing to eat more of his salary.
Peter Gammons tweets that CEO George Postolos has re-energized the entire Astros organization, and he was blown away by Luhnow powerpoint. It's a long,long climb, but it's begun
Jon Heyman says the Astros will have interest in Ryan Theriot, if he's non-tendered by the Cardinals.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution's David O'Brien says that he thinks Carlos Lee makes sense for the Braves, if the Astros are willing to eat more of his salary.
Peter Gammons tweets that CEO George Postolos has re-energized the entire Astros organization, and he was blown away by Luhnow powerpoint. It's a long,long climb, but it's begun
Jon Heyman says the Astros will have interest in Ryan Theriot, if he's non-tendered by the Cardinals.
Friday, December 9, 2011
FanGraphs on Rhiner Cruz
FanGraphs' Mike Newman (aka Scouting the SAL has a piece up on Astros' #1 Rule 5 selection Rhiner Cruz:
No offense to Rhiner Cruz specifically, but I spent the entire 2009 season watching him close for Savannah, the New York Mets full season A affiliate and never felt the need to actually scout him. At the time, Cruz was 22 and lived off a bit of a funky delivery and a fastball which topped out at 92. With a fringy little slurve, it was enough to keep lower level hitters off balanced, but not an arsenal that would translate well at the big league level...
No offense to Rhiner Cruz specifically, but I spent the entire 2009 season watching him close for Savannah, the New York Mets full season A affiliate and never felt the need to actually scout him. At the time, Cruz was 22 and lived off a bit of a funky delivery and a fastball which topped out at 92. With a fringy little slurve, it was enough to keep lower level hitters off balanced, but not an arsenal that would translate well at the big league level...
Luhnow gets a four-year deal
Mark Berman's "Major League sources" say that new GM Jeff Luhnow received a four-year deal from Jim Crane/George Postolos.
Astros a Winter Meetings "loser"
So saith Tom Verducci:
The Angels and Rangers are so far out in front of the Athletics, Mariners and Astros (their AL West rivals beginning in 2013) that those clubs can't delude themselves into pretending to be contenders. The Athletics need the San Jose money more than ever, the Mariners may have to re-assess keeping Felix Hernandez out of any trade talks and the Astros will long for the good old days of the friendly NL Central.
This seems silly.
The Angels and Rangers are so far out in front of the Athletics, Mariners and Astros (their AL West rivals beginning in 2013) that those clubs can't delude themselves into pretending to be contenders. The Athletics need the San Jose money more than ever, the Mariners may have to re-assess keeping Felix Hernandez out of any trade talks and the Astros will long for the good old days of the friendly NL Central.
This seems silly.
Andy Van Hekken will play in Korea
Andy Van Hekken has declined contracts from the Astros and A's to play for the Nexen Heroes in Korea.
Van Hekken:
"I’m working to get back to the major leagues, and I think I’m as close as I’ve ever been. My agent and my wife and I talked about my desire to come back to the majors, that it’s still a goal. There will still be a need a year from now for a left-handed pitcher."
Van Hekken threw 129.2IP for OKC in 2011, allowing 152H/49ER, 111K:47BB, for a 3.40 ERA/1.54 WHIP. He has a career 122-86 record in 14 minor league seasons, with a 3.94 ERA/1.35 WHIP, and a 2.51 K:BB ratio.
I'm honestly sorry to see him go.
Still, it frees up a rotation spot at OKC, so we'll see where the rosters shake out, but it could bode well for Cosart, Oberholtzer, Clemens, etc.
Van Hekken:
"I’m working to get back to the major leagues, and I think I’m as close as I’ve ever been. My agent and my wife and I talked about my desire to come back to the majors, that it’s still a goal. There will still be a need a year from now for a left-handed pitcher."
Van Hekken threw 129.2IP for OKC in 2011, allowing 152H/49ER, 111K:47BB, for a 3.40 ERA/1.54 WHIP. He has a career 122-86 record in 14 minor league seasons, with a 3.94 ERA/1.35 WHIP, and a 2.51 K:BB ratio.
I'm honestly sorry to see him go.
Still, it frees up a rotation spot at OKC, so we'll see where the rosters shake out, but it could bode well for Cosart, Oberholtzer, Clemens, etc.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Might Ryan Theriot interest Houston?
Jon Heyman thinks so, as he may be non-tendered by the Cardinals.
Indians want Astros to take more than half of Carlos Lee's salary
The Indians were approached by the Astros about Carlos Lee, but the issue was money:
The issue in those talks is that the Tribe would need the Astros to assume more than half of Lee's salary. To take on a contract in the range of $7-9 million for 2012, the Indians would have to move salary in another trade.
For God's sake, do it.
Indians GM Chris Antonetti:
"We were able to further some of the discussions and dialogue that we had on both trades and free agents. Hopefully that's led us closer to a deal that will allow us to improve the team."
The issue in those talks is that the Tribe would need the Astros to assume more than half of Lee's salary. To take on a contract in the range of $7-9 million for 2012, the Indians would have to move salary in another trade.
For God's sake, do it.
Indians GM Chris Antonetti:
"We were able to further some of the discussions and dialogue that we had on both trades and free agents. Hopefully that's led us closer to a deal that will allow us to improve the team."
Duarte to Red Sox
Just to get it on the official record, that one guy the Astros had for about 20 minutes, Marco Duarte, was traded to the Red Sox for infielder Marwin Gonzalez.
Gonzalez is a 22-year old 6'1" 186lb switch-hitting infielder who came up in the Cubs' system. In six seasons, he has 1973 PAs, with a .258/.305/.352 line, 272K:116BB.
In 2011, he split time between Double-A Tennessee and Triple-A Iowa, hitting a combined .288/.343/.400, with 48K:33BB (465 PAs).
Red Sox GM Ben Cherington:
"Yeah, we took him on behalf of the Astros. There was a guy in the minor league phase we wanted to take higher and so it was simply we took a guy for them in the major league phase and they took a guy for us in the minor league phase.”
Gonzalez is a 22-year old 6'1" 186lb switch-hitting infielder who came up in the Cubs' system. In six seasons, he has 1973 PAs, with a .258/.305/.352 line, 272K:116BB.
In 2011, he split time between Double-A Tennessee and Triple-A Iowa, hitting a combined .288/.343/.400, with 48K:33BB (465 PAs).
Red Sox GM Ben Cherington:
"Yeah, we took him on behalf of the Astros. There was a guy in the minor league phase we wanted to take higher and so it was simply we took a guy for them in the major league phase and they took a guy for us in the minor league phase.”
A collection of reactions to Jeff Luhnow's hiring
Here is your recap of reactions to the Astros' hiring of Jeff Luhnow (which will be updated):
Riverfront Times:
If there's anyone in baseball who can turn around the moribund Astros in relatively short order, I trust Luhnow as much as just about anyone to find a way. Make no mistake, this is very bad news for the Cardinals. Under Luhnow's stewardship, the Cards have seen their minor league system go from among the worst in all of baseball to a top seven, maybe even top five system despite never having the chance to draft within the top ten.
Jeff Gordon:
Luhnow will make things better . . . because they can’t possibly get worse in Houston. Whether he can build a juggernaut remains to be seen. Either way, the rebuilding process won’t be dull.
Jon Heyman:
hearing good things about new astros gm jeff luhnow. "eminently qualified," 1 person said. was w/ champion cardinals.
Cardinals GM John Mozeliak:
"I'm glad they're moving to the AL West."
Riverfront Times:
If there's anyone in baseball who can turn around the moribund Astros in relatively short order, I trust Luhnow as much as just about anyone to find a way. Make no mistake, this is very bad news for the Cardinals. Under Luhnow's stewardship, the Cards have seen their minor league system go from among the worst in all of baseball to a top seven, maybe even top five system despite never having the chance to draft within the top ten.
Jeff Gordon:
Luhnow will make things better . . . because they can’t possibly get worse in Houston. Whether he can build a juggernaut remains to be seen. Either way, the rebuilding process won’t be dull.
Jon Heyman:
hearing good things about new astros gm jeff luhnow. "eminently qualified," 1 person said. was w/ champion cardinals.
Cardinals GM John Mozeliak:
"I'm glad they're moving to the AL West."
Thoughts on the Astros, and the Angels
If you're like me, you simply could not believe what had taken place. First, the Astros get moved (against their will) to the AL West. One of the reasons I didn't start looking for flamethrowers on eBay was because now, at least, Albert Pujols wouldn't be able to slay the Astros every chance he got.
Then I saw the tweets roll in that the Angels had spent the GDP of 46 countries to sign Albert Pujols. And then C.J. Wilson. And I got mad. I wrote a one-word email to some friends, and I bet you can guess what that one word was.
But then I started to think objectively. A future division rival has just committed $327 million to two players who will not be worth it towards the end of their contracts. Before the realignment mess, I was hoping that the Cardinals would over-commit to Pujols, because it would hamstring their payroll. So the Angels did it, instead.
Will Pujols out-produce his contract? Maybe. Seven of the ten players on Baseball-Reference to Pujols are Hall of Famers. And the other three are Ken Griffey, Juan Gonzalez, and Manny Ramirez; and Griffey is definitely a HOFer. Seriously, just take a second and look at Pujols' B-R page. It's insane.
C.J. Wilson is a different story. C.J. Wilson's similar players through age 30 are Joe Page, Paul Lindblad, Joe Price, Ray Narleski, Grant Jackson, Bob Chipman, Dave Hamilton, Fred Scherman, Don Mossi, and Ricky Horton. Exactly.
I don't know about the Angels' financial flexibility, but with paying Vernon Wells for three more years, and Jared Weaver through 2016, it's unlikely they'll be adding too terribly much in the future (not that they necessarily need to.) But they've just committed to Albert Pujols until 2021, and C.J. Wilson through 2017.
That said, where we should be concerned is through an existing AL West war. If the Rangers answer the Angels' moves by signing Prince Fielder, or...I don't know who's left, but if the Rangers answer with their own high-splash signing, it's not good for the rebuilding Astros. Should this happen, and the Angels/Rangers are looking like the US and Soviet Union in the late 1950s and the Astros are, you know, Bermuda, where the fallout will be terrible if shots are fired, it's a bad position to be in.
Luckily for us, after six hours, Jeff Luhnow looks like a freaking genius.
Then I saw the tweets roll in that the Angels had spent the GDP of 46 countries to sign Albert Pujols. And then C.J. Wilson. And I got mad. I wrote a one-word email to some friends, and I bet you can guess what that one word was.
But then I started to think objectively. A future division rival has just committed $327 million to two players who will not be worth it towards the end of their contracts. Before the realignment mess, I was hoping that the Cardinals would over-commit to Pujols, because it would hamstring their payroll. So the Angels did it, instead.
Will Pujols out-produce his contract? Maybe. Seven of the ten players on Baseball-Reference to Pujols are Hall of Famers. And the other three are Ken Griffey, Juan Gonzalez, and Manny Ramirez; and Griffey is definitely a HOFer. Seriously, just take a second and look at Pujols' B-R page. It's insane.
C.J. Wilson is a different story. C.J. Wilson's similar players through age 30 are Joe Page, Paul Lindblad, Joe Price, Ray Narleski, Grant Jackson, Bob Chipman, Dave Hamilton, Fred Scherman, Don Mossi, and Ricky Horton. Exactly.
I don't know about the Angels' financial flexibility, but with paying Vernon Wells for three more years, and Jared Weaver through 2016, it's unlikely they'll be adding too terribly much in the future (not that they necessarily need to.) But they've just committed to Albert Pujols until 2021, and C.J. Wilson through 2017.
That said, where we should be concerned is through an existing AL West war. If the Rangers answer the Angels' moves by signing Prince Fielder, or...I don't know who's left, but if the Rangers answer with their own high-splash signing, it's not good for the rebuilding Astros. Should this happen, and the Angels/Rangers are looking like the US and Soviet Union in the late 1950s and the Astros are, you know, Bermuda, where the fallout will be terrible if shots are fired, it's a bad position to be in.
Luckily for us, after six hours, Jeff Luhnow looks like a freaking genius.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)