Trachsel as Opening Day Starter??

[dakotabird]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-osgamer0315,0,3634433.story?track=rss


Trachsel, a strong candidate to be the Opening Day starter, allowed five runs and six hits in four innings. He walked two, struck out three, hit a batter and threw a wild pitch. The Orioles lost to the Marlins, 7-6.

You mean Trachsel is the best we have????:eek:

[Crazysilver03]

Well, he is the only veteran starter.

I would rather go with Cabrera. Really, it doesnt matter to me who goes opening day, but I would prefer not Trachsel.

[TinCup]

"Opening day starter" is right up there with "All-star" on my list of overblown, inflated, and over-hyped labels!!

[wildcard]

I can't imagine that anyone is named OD starter but Guthrie. He has pitched the best this spring. He had the best year as a starter last year (except of Bedard). He deserves it.

[Miller192]

"Opening day starter" is right up there with "All-star" on my list of overblown, inflated, and over-hyped labels!!

Well, I'd field a team of 5 opening day starters and 8 all-stars any time.

[TinCup]

Well, I'd field a team of 5 opening day starters and 8 all-stars any time.

Now there is a nice rebuttal!


Perhaps a clarification might help with my original statement...


Opening day starter" is right up there with "All-star" on my list of overblown, inflated, and over-hyped labels for the Orioles of late!!;)

[ChaosLex]

Trachsel could be our Opening Day starter? Is he dying or something? This sounds like the kind of thing the Make-A-Wish Foundation would do. Haha.

[Sports Guy]

For him to even make the roster at this point would be a joke.

Starting him on OD is a slap in the face.

[Crazysilver03]

Trachsel could be our Opening Day starter? Is he dying or something? This sounds like the kind of thing the Make-A-Wish Foundation would do. Haha.

Well have you seen his picture?? Gravity has done him no favors. :D

[TonySoprano]

This was kicked around recently in this topic (http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60280).


At the moment, the Orioles are planning on Steve Trachsel as their Opening Day starter, just to take the heat off their younger pitchers. Which leads us to this question: What's the last team to start a free agent who signed a minor-league contract on Opening Day?Source -ESPN Insider (http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=3286944&type=blogEntry)

[LookitsPuck]

If Guthrie isn't our OD starter, and Trachsel is..I'm going to be extremely pissed at Camden Yards on OD. Pathetic.

To keep the heat off their younger pitchers? That is the worst logic of all time. I'd personally want to punch Trembley in the face if he does this.

[slaphitter]

Guts is winning the job. Keep your fingers crossed for the man who should be the OD starter.

Guthrie is no fluke. The O's are in a good place as far as his contract is concerned.

Advantage Orioles.

[Mad Mark]

Well, if it is Trachsel--win or lose--we're in for a long afternoon.
Hope it's at least warm.

[Boy Howdy]

Personally, I'd give the ball to Daniel Cabrera, but I know that's not a majority opinion here. What's the big deal if Trachsel gets the ball?

Will he look that out-of-place at the bottom of the list of Orioles opening day starting pitchers?

6 opening day starts
Mike Mussina
Jim Palmer

5 opening day starts
Dave McNally

3 opening day starts
Steve Barber
Rodrigo Lopez

2 opening day starts
Mike Boddicker
Mike Flanagan
Dennis Martinez
Milt Pappas
Rick Sutcliffe

1 opening day start
Jeff Ballard
Erik Bedard
Hal Brown
Storm Davis
Pat Dobson
Scott Erickson
Jack Harshman
Pat Hentgen
Billy Hoeft
Connie Johnson
Jimmy Key
Lou Kretlow
Don Larsen
Scott McGregor
Bob Milacki
Tom Phoebus
Sidney Ponson
Dave Schmidt
Steve Stone
Jerry Walker
Bill Wight

[JTrea81]

I agree that Trax being the opening day starter would be a slap in the face to Guthrie who has outpitched him this spring. The Orioles shouldn't forget that Guthrie hung around the team for September with his injury and made sure he was back in the rotation to get some starts in even though he wasn't 100%. I think they owe him for that....

[Boy Howdy]

I agree that Trax being the opening day starter would be a slap in the face to Guthrie who has outpitched him this spring. The Orioles shouldn't forget that Guthrie hung around the team for September with his injury and made sure he was back in the rotation even though he wasn't 100%. I think they owe him for that....

Trachsel won the same number of games as Gutrie last year.

Prior to 2007, he outpaced him 134-0.

I couldn't agree less with the "slap in the face" & "owe him" talk.

[OsandBohs11]

it's not about being a veteran. it would basically mean Traschsel pitching against #1's for the rest of the season. NOT GOOD

[DuffMan]

Trachsel should be the opening day waterboy.

[oldbird]

Yea Trax And Guthrie may have won the same amount of game but trax should of won more being the "VETERAN". Trax is nowhere near our long range plans and will probably be gone by the All Star break. Guthie has come a long way to where he is now. He should of been given the ball but thats DT w/lets go with the vet PATHETIC

[Sports Guy]

Trachsel won the same number of games as Gutrie last year.

Prior to 2007, he outpaced him 134-0.

I couldn't agree less with the "slap in the face" & "owe him" talk.

We don't owe Guthrie anything IMO.

But to hand the OD job to Trax is a complete joke.

He is awful and shouldn't even make the team.

[PaulFolk]

it's not about being a veteran. it would basically mean Traschsel pitching against #1's for the rest of the season. NOT GOOD
This isn't remotely true. After the first week or two of the season, rotations of different teams rarely line up as #1 vs. #1, #2 vs. #2, etc. Because of off days and injuries and skipped starts, the pitching matchups are essentially random.

Case in point: last year, Erik Bedard was the Orioles' #1 starter. After facing Johan Santana on Opening Day, his next two starts were against Darrell Rasner and Brandon Duckworth. Over the course of the season, he also matched up with Jeremy Sowers, Paul Byrd, Tomo Ohka, Micah Bowie, Jason Hirsh, David Wells, and Andy Sonnanstine (twice). Not exactly a collection of aces.

Trachsel has no business starting on Opening Day, but your other concerns are unwarranted.

[BaltBird 24]

He is awful and shouldn't even make the team.

You have a drink or two too many tonight? You know this team would be in total disarray if they didn't have Steve Trachsel to rely on every fifth day. The confidence of knowing you'll have a SP go atleast 4 innings, give up roughly 7 hits, maybe walk 4 batters while striking out 1 is no better way to boost team morale.

[millartime15]

I hate Trax! Well maybe not hate, but I can't stand watching him pitch. He is probably the worst pitcher I have ever seen pitch. Everytime I look at the box score I see like 4 innings with 5 earned runs and 4 walks. He throws 88 mph tops, if that. He supposed to have control and has none at all. For him to even have a roster spot is a complete joke. I would rather take a random guy off the streets and throw him in there to pitch. Im tired of this veteran presence crap. Get over it Trembley or AM or whoever wanted Trax.

[Miller192]

Now there is a nice rebuttal!


Perhaps a clarification might help with my original statement...


Opening day starter" is right up there with "All-star" on my list of overblown, inflated, and over-hyped labels for the Orioles of late!!;)

Fair enough, that makes sense

[Joe'sO's]

Don't know how things project out but if Scott Shields is the OD starter for Tampa then we get Bedard against Seattle matched up against our OD starter then maybe Traschel would be good idea because we'll probably lose those games anyway.

But seriously it should be Guthrie,Loewen,DCab,Olson/Burres and then Traschel to keep the righty/lefty thing going. Don't know if Trembley has said he'll go with the 5 man through the first couple weeks though.

[Intimidator301]

Don't know how things project out but if Scott Shields is the OD starter for Tampa then we get Bedard against Seattle matched up against our OD starter then maybe Traschel would be good idea because we'll probably lose those games anyway.

But seriously it should be Guthrie,Loewen,DCab,Olson/Burres and then Traschel to keep the righty/lefty thing going. Don't know if Trembley has said he'll go with the 5 man through the first couple weeks though.

I assume DT will go with a rotation of..

1. Guthrie
2. Cabrera
3. Loewen
4. Trachsel
5. Burres

If it was me I would go with..

1. Guthrie
2. Cabrera
3. Loewen
4. Albers
5. Olson

And since the O's seem intent on Trachsel being on this team, have he and Burres as the two longmen. But, Trax will be in the rotation, because even after all the young pitching we aquired, DT nor the O's seem the least bit interested in fully commiting to a young rotation.

I mean, what veteran presence does Trax provide?. Is he supposed to show the young guys how to have 5 IP 5 R 8 H 5 BB 1 K outtings? Is the 6 wins Trax might have more important then the experience guys like Albers, Olson, Penn, Liz and the rest get? Everyone plans on us contending by 2010, but the young guys have to take their lumps at the ML level eventually. At some point you have to find out what you have, and you can't see that with them pitching in AA or AAA.

[DrungoHazewood]

Dave Schmidt

I was about to make the point that Dave Schmidt started opening day 1989. Steve Trachsel is a good proxy for Dave Schmidt in 2008. We can only hope that Trachsel is the answer to a trivia question some day, too.

Who started opening day? Had to be Milacki, right? Ballard? Harnisch? No? Oh, Dave Johnson! No? Didn't Jay Tibbs go 5-0, and maybe... No? Mickey Weston? Jose Bautista and his crazy jerry curls? Nope? Ahhhh, that's right, ol' Dave Schmidt, on his last legs, got the call because he was the wily veteran!

[DrungoHazewood]

Trachsel won the same number of games as Gutrie last year.

Prior to 2007, he outpaced him 134-0.

I couldn't agree less with the "slap in the face" & "owe him" talk.

Scott Erickson had him 142-0 before 2007, too. Doesn't mean his carcass should be hauled out and stuck on the mound on March 31st, either.

[NewMarketSean]

If Trachsel is pitching on OD I might just say the season is over and go home and start fretting over my yard.

[RZNJ]

If Trachsel is pitching on OD I might just say the season is over and go home and start fretting over my yard.

What would you say if Guthrie started?

[66-70-83-??]

What would you say if Guthrie started?

Start of a DYNASTY would be my guess.

:p

[Why Not?]

If Trachsel is pitching on OD I might just say the season is over and go home and start fretting over my yard.

Is it really just a matter of time before you do that anyway? :002_scool:

[Mackus]

If Trachsel is pitching on OD I might just say the season is over and go home and start fretting over my yard.While starting Trax on opening day would be a complete joke, its no bigger a joke than thinking that this season isn't already over.

The only silver linings this year will be the developments of individual players, which will happen or not happend completely independantly of whom the OD starter will be.

[RShack]

If Trachsel is pitching on OD I might just say the season is over and go home and start fretting over my yard.
What a surprise: NMS finds a reason to throw in the towel. Who woulda thunk it?

[BaltBird 24]

What a surprise: NMS finds a reason to throw in the towel. Who woulda thunk it?

I wouldn't call it throwing in the towel, but starting Steve Trachsel on OD would be a complete insult to everyone associated with Orioles baseball, including you, me, and joe schmoe down the street.

Steve Trachsel making the final 25 man roster is an insult to anyone who cares enough to break down just how godawful a decision it is.

[Mike B]

it's not about being a veteran. it would basically mean Traschsel pitching against #1's for the rest of the season. NOT GOOD

That is not how it works. After the first couple of times through the rotation the 1-5 does not matter. Remember last year how Guthrie caught the other teams ace a few times in a row. Off days, rain, rotation juggling really make the 1-5 moot toward the end of April.

[Mike B]

Is it really just a matter of time before you do that anyway? :002_scool:

Very premature but good luck with the crab grass.

[DrungoHazewood]

I wouldn't call it throwing in the towel, but starting Steve Trachsel on OD would be a complete insult to everyone associated with Orioles baseball, including you, me, and joe schmoe down the street.

Steve Trachsel making the final 25 man roster is an insult to anyone who cares enough to break down just how godawful a decision it is.

I wonder if there's ever been a team that's had an opening day starter with a weighted mean PECOTA forecast worse than Trachsel's 73 innings of a 6.27? Just glancing at the depth charts it appears that Trachsel has the worst projected ERA of any of the top five starters on any Major League team. The closest compeititor seems to be the Nats' very tentative #4 man John Lannon (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/lannajo01.php), whose projection is for a 6.18.

I know, I know. PECOTA doesn't know how to forecast guys who pitch like Steve Trachsel. For the O's sake I sure hope so.

[Fan4Life]

I didn't notice Roch ever quoting anyone in the organization that Trachsel was an option to open the season... so... is it just his speculation? He should have clarified that comment by asking DT if that performance would hurt his being the OD starter. He didn't...

[ejf1025]

It really doesn't matter if he pitches OD--it is purely ceremonial.

The larger issue, as others have said and Drungo's post tries to quantify, is he should not even be on the team.

[BaltBird 24]

Tremlbey's just trying to instill the recent Oriole Way on the new breed of Baltimore Oriole players. It's pretty clear that he's a veteran guy.

[Fan4Life]

Tremlbey's just trying to instill the recent Oriole Way on the new breed of Baltimore Oriole players. It's pretty clear that he's a veteran guy.

This is the defintion of speculation.

[NewMarketSean]

Apparently you guys can't take a joke. Maybe I should have added an emoticon. Anyway, of course the season wouldn't be over if Trax pitched on OD but it would probably be the worst way to start it. I at least would like someone who stands for something to start the game and while I am not falling over myself to praise Guthrie, he does deserve it and is going to be an Oriole for a few years granted he pitches well. Trax on the other hand is a hired hand and should have nothing to do with the Orioles, now or in the future.

I'll b very mad if I am sitting in the stands on OD watching Trax pitch. I might actually boo him during every pitch.

[DuffMan]

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/roch/blog/2008/03/locked_out.html

According to Roch there is sentiment in the organization that Trachsel should start.

I really can't comprehend this at all. With all of this talk of rebuilding what better way to further that message than starting someone that will be a part of that like Guthrie. Trachsel has no business starting on opening day, unless it's for Norfolk!

[ChrisP]

I might sell my OD LF Reserve tickets if he's the starter.

[Crazysilver03]

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/roch/blog/2008/03/locked_out.html

According to Roch there is sentiment in the organization that Trachsel should start.

I really can't comprehend this at all. With all of this talk of rebuilding what better way to further that message than starting someone that will be a part of that like Guthrie. Trachsel has no business starting on opening day, unless it's for Norfolk!

Well at least we would get to see what our new bullpen can do by the 3rd inning (or 2 hours into the game, which ever comes first).

[NewMarketSean]

Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in!

I thought the O's were past this brainless way of thinking!

[Fan4Life]

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/roch/blog/2008/03/locked_out.html

According to Roch there is sentiment in the organization that Trachsel should start.

I really can't comprehend this at all. With all of this talk of rebuilding what better way to further that message than starting someone that will be a part of that like Guthrie. Trachsel has no business starting on opening day, unless it's for Norfolk!

That's closer to being information as opposed to speculation... why can't he say who the individuals are that think Trachsel should be the OD starter. Doesn't sound like Trembley or AM or he'd just say that. So who's pushing for it? Kranny? Dunn? The bench coach (forget his name)?

[glorydays]

Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in!

I thought the O's were past this brainless way of thinking!

Right on! DT needs to get on OH and start a poll and decide who should be the OD starter based on the results of us real fans!! WE are way smarter than he and AM are!

That would most definitely show US that the O's are past their brainless way of thinking! ;)

[glorydays]

BTW - no matter the stats, our young pitchers have been quoted over and over again this spring how much respect and appreciation they have for Trax. Do you think they will be upset at seeing this man who takes time out to counsel them being the OD starter?

For years we fans have complained over and over again about this club lacking vet leadership. They always had "quiet leaders." Now we have someone who wants to sit down and mentor our young pitchers and we are ready to show him the door!!

So if they choose Guthrie to be the OD starter - does DCAB get upset because he has been around longer? If DCAB starts does Loewen get upset because he pitched better last year in his limited action? and so on and so on...

[davearm]

Folks were lined up around the block to bash Stark or Olney or whomever it was that first reported this over a week ago.

There's going to be a lot of crow to be eaten if Trachsel is indeed the OD starter.

[hoosiers]

I don't really care who starts OD.

I think the idea that Loewen or DCab might put more pressure on themselves than necessary because it is OD has merit.

Guts is a guy who seems mature, healthy and pitched well enough last year to deserve consideration, but it's not a big deal IMO.

It could well be a long year with this group of SPs.

[Fan4Life]

I don't really care who starts OD.

I think the idea that Loewen or DCab might put more pressure on themselves than necessary because it is OD has merit.

Guts is a guy who seems mature, healthy and pitched well enough last year to deserve consideration, but it's not a big deal IMO.

It could well be a long year with this group of SPs.

Suppose Trachsel gets bombed in his first start, do you think being the #2 starter and the O's trying to avoid and 0-2 season start is that much different?

[RShack]

Folks were lined up around the block to bash Stark or Olney or whomever it was that first reported this over a week ago.

There's going to be a lot of crow to be eaten if Trachsel is indeed the OD starter.
I'll certainly be due a big portion. I said there's no way that would actually happen.
Unlike seafood, I prefer my crow fried, not broiled... helps disguise the taste...

ps: I think this is 99% a fan issue. I don't think the P's give 2 hoots, especially given the status of things.

[Fan4Life]

I perssonally think they should start the guy with the best numbers against Tampa... isn't DCab like undefeated against them?

[Boy Howdy]

I think this is 99% a fan issue. I don't think the P's give 2 hoots, especially given the status of things.

I generally agree with you, but some pitchers absolutely recognize and cherish the assignment as an honor. For example, Cabrera said starting last season's home opener was one of the biggest moments of his career.

He hurled 7 2/3 innings to beat the reigning AL champions, and I doubt many of the people acting hysterical because he'll be in 2008's rotation booed him or gave up their tickets that day.

[Boy Howdy]

I perssonally think they should tsrat the guy with the best numbers against Tampa... isn't DCab like undefeated against them?

Yep.

6-0 with a 3.04 ERA in 11 career starts.

[Sports Guy]

I don't really care who starts OD.

I think the idea that Loewen or DCab might put more pressure on themselves than necessary because it is OD has merit.

Guts is a guy who seems mature, healthy and pitched well enough last year to deserve consideration, but it's not a big deal IMO.

It could well be a long year with this group of SPs.

Guys put pressure on themselves all the time.

I don't see how the idea has any merit at all.

The bottom line is Trachsel is a joke and shouldn't even make the team...To have him start, especially with the way he is pitching right now, over guys with seniority, more upside, long term futures here and actually throwing well in ST, is a slap in the face to those guys.

Maybe the young guy would relish the oppurtunity and go out and pitch a gem?

[hoosiers]

The bottom line is Trachsel is a joke and shouldn't even make the team...To have him start, especially with the way he is pitching right now, over guys with seniority, more upside, long term futures here and actually throwing well in ST, is a slap in the face to those guys.

It's not a slap in the face to anyone. Let's not make a mountain out of a mole hill.

It sounds like Trax signed a minor league contract with an understanding that there was a strong likelihood that he would be in the starting rotation. The minor league deal saved us potential 40 man roster issues until the injured guys get moved to the 60 day or something like that.

[NewMarketSean]

Yep.

6-0 with a 3.04 ERA in 11 career starts.

Meanwhile, Trax vs TAM...

0-3
27.1 IP
5.93 ERA
33 H
18 K
14 BB

[Sports Guy]

It's not a slap in the face to anyone. Let's not make a mountain out of a mole hill.

It sounds like Trax signed a minor league contract with an understanding that there was a strong likelihood that he would be in the starting rotation. The minor league deal saved us potential 40 man roster issues until the injured guys get moved to the 60 day or something like that.What does this have to do with anything?

Who cares that he signed a MiL deal or anything like that?

That is totally meaningless in this discussion.

Starting OD is an honor to many pitchers and giving that honor to a guy that may not even be on the team by June is a joke.

[birdsfan4ever]

People are saying our young guys may not be able to handle the pressure of starting on Opening Day. Well what would having Trachsel chosen over them do to their confidence?

[YardBirds13]

I've been out of town for a little bit....Am i missing something here?

Did Guthrie hurt himself??

Why in the hell are we even thinking about Trachsel starting on Opening Day?

What am I missing here?

[hoosiers]

Starting OD is an honor to many pitchers and giving that honor to a guy that may not even be on the team by June is a joke.

You are making a big to-do about nothing.

Besides, the Trax haters should be ecstatic if this became a final decision.

'The earlier he starts pitching, the sooner he will be kicked off the team' should be the mantra of this group.

[YardBirds13]

You are making a big to-do about nothing.

Besides, the Trax haters should be ecstatic if this became a final decision.

'The earlier he starts pitching, the sooner he will be kicked off the team' should be the mantra of this group.

I mean, I know it isn't really that big of a deal who starts on Opening Day, but the thing about Opening Day is it's all about hope.

We know we aren't going to be any good this year, but for one day we can win and be in first place. I'd like to see us put our best pitcher out there. It will be honestly embarrassing as an Orioles fan to tell people "Yea, Trachsel is our OD starter this year."

[RShack]

The bottom line is Trachsel is a joke and shouldn't even make the team...To have him start, especially with the way he is pitching right now, over guys with seniority, more upside, long term futures here and actually throwing well in ST, is a slap in the face to those guys.

Plus, I'm just smarter than all you friggin' morons. If you had any sense at all, you'd just agree with all of my ideas. The fact that you don't just proves that you're pathetic. So, just shut the eff up, and agree with me. As I've explained many times, we should trade everybody except Nick and maybe 1 or 2 pitchers. Everybody else needs to go. Clearly, AM agrees with me. He wants to do just that, I know that for a fact. Nobody's stopping him, but he doesn't actually do it because of, um, well, I forget why. But he wants to.

AM will do it some day. I've already given him lots of trade ideas, like the one about how we should trade for Juan Pierre and LaRoche. The fact that I've never actually called an actual trade doesn't matter. Nobody's right all the time, and 0-for-55,000 just means I'm in a little slump, that's all. So, I'm due to break out soon. And, whenever AM gets around to doing what I say, not only will the whole starting lineup be new guys (except for Nick), but of the prospects we get back, we should flip half of them for younger prospects who are even cheaper. AM wants to do that too, but he's just keeping it a secret. Unlike most of you morons, he gets it: this isn't about playing the game, it's about buying and selling. If you don't get it, it just proves that you're a joke. Plus, I really did win money in Vegas, it's not that I lost my shirt, I just came back in a bad mood for other reasons.

I'm not the world's biggest Trax fan, but jeez...

;-)

[Sports Guy]

You are making a big to-do about nothing.

Besides, the Trax haters should be ecstatic if this became a final decision.

'The earlier he starts pitching, the sooner he will be kicked off the team' should be the mantra of this group.

It is poor logic..That's my issue...I tend to like my team to do smart things, not dumb things.

[hoosiers]

It is poor logic..That's my issue...I tend to like my team to do smart things, not dumb things.

geez, what a slap in the face! ;)

Are you hinting that I advocate my team to do dumb things?

BTW, IMO, the very reasons you are hinting as to why our FO should be starting another pitcher (i.e. because it's an honor, blah, blah, blah) is exactly why our FO is considering going with Trax.

[Sports Guy]

geez, what a slap in the face! ;)

Are you hinting that I advocate my team to do dumb things?

BTW, IMO, the very reasons you are hinting as to why our FO should be starting another pitcher (i.e. because it's an honor, blah, blah, blah) is exactly why our FO is considering going with Trax.

If you think they should start Trax on OD then yes, you are advocating them to do something stupid IMO.

DCab should be the OD starter...His spring starts are in line with OD and he has seniority.

[jiminnj]

All this stuff about Trax is just a smoke screen. Trembley set it up so that a Cabrera would be on schedule to be opening day starter back in Febr. Look at when he has pitched. He has pitched every 5th day since Mar 1. Cabrera pitched March 1st, 6th, 11, and 16th, He will continue on the 5 day cycle and pitch the 21st, 26th and then opening day the 31st. They just don't want to put the pressure on Cabrera yet by naming him the starter. If you look at the schedule the pitchers have been on, Guthrie will go the second game, Loewen the third and Traschel the fourth.

If Trembley is going to change this, it will be real soon (probably this week), so that the pitchers will have some time to adjust to the new cycles.

[hoosiers]

If you think they should start Trax on OD then yes, you are advocating them to do something stupid IMO.

DCab should be the OD starter...His spring starts are in line with OD and he has seniority.

I never posted anywhere in this thread that I think Trax should be the OD starter. Please don't hint that I did.

IMO, the poorest logic in this thread is advocating sending an 18 game loser with a WHIP over 1.5 and an ERA over 5.5 from last year out as our OD start. Let's honor that.:rolleyes:

[Sports Guy]

I never posted anywhere in this thread that I think Trax should be the OD starter. Please don't hint that I did.

IMO, the poorest logic in this thread is advocating sending an 18 game loser with a WHIP over 1.5 and an ERA over 5.5 from last year out as our OD start. Let's honor that.:rolleyes:

That speaks more about the pitching staff we have than DCab himself.

He has been here the longest...He is throwing well this offseason....With what we have, he deserves it over anyone else.

Of course, you wouldn't want him as the OD starter on most teams but for us, it is the most logical choice.

[Hank Scorpio]

Is this really that big of a deal?

Seriously?

[Sports Guy]

Is this really that big of a deal?

Seriously?

Do you know how many things over the course of the last 10 years this team has done and this is the response to it?

No, its not a big deal...at all.

It is just the idea of what it represents and the thought process behind it.

[66-70-83-??]

That speaks more about the pitching staff we have than DCab himself.

He has been here the longest...He is throwing well this offseason....With what we have, he deserves it over anyone else.

Of course, you wouldn't want him as the OD starter on most teams but for us, it is the most logical choice.

None of this current bunch can make a claim that they should be the rightful chosen one as OD SP.

Unless you have a clear cut ace, it usually goes to the "leader" of the group. That is the only scenario where Trax would get the nod, imo.

If anyone is going to get the OD start as a "reward" it would be Guthrie for his performance last season.

Cabrera didn't earn anything for his performance last season. He regressed.

The only highlight was hitting 200 Innings. He led the league in walks and earned runs.

At the end of the day- it really doesn't matter. It is just one game in what is going to be a long season and a 4th or 5th place finish.

[Boy Howdy]

DCab should be the OD starter...His spring starts are in line with OD and he has seniority.

I completely agree with you on this issue SG.

Too many people want to act like Cabrera's 0-6 finish to 2007 is what he's going to look like going forward. Yet, many of these same posters willingly turn a blind eye to the league hitting .300 and slugging .503 against Guthrie after the All-Star break last season when he posted a 5.03 ERA.

For nearly four seasons, Cabrera was a .500 to slightly below .500 pitcher on a team that was way below .500 when someone else got the decision. In other words, he was a relative asset.

With Bedard gone, it makes perfect sense to me to give the ball to the pitcher with the most seniority, the most wins in a Baltimore uniform and the most wins in 2007.

[Hank Scorpio]

Do you know how many things over the course of the last 10 years this team has done and this is the response to it?

No, its not a big deal...at all.

It is just the idea of what it represents and the thought process behind it.

I'm sure Guthrie or Cabrera aren't gonna lose any sleep over it.

I know Trachsel is most likely going to be horrific this year, but this is one season where I can sit back and say, "I do not care who is our Opening Day starter, because it is of absolutely zero consequence."

And I've got money seats for the game. I'll get to see Trax pounded unmercilessly up close.

This is an indirect result of a rebuilding year. We made the deals we made this past winter so we don't have this problem 2 years down the road. Until then, I'll live with it, because MacPhail is finally doing what we have been clamoring for for a long, long time.

I'm not going to sit here and tell you that Trachsel would be my 1st choice at Opening Day starter, but I don't think it makes any difference.

[clapdiddy]

I'm sure Guthrie or Cabrera aren't gonna lose any sleep over it.

I know Trachsel is most likely going to be horrific this year, but this is one season where I can sit back and say, "I do not care who is our Opening Day starter, because it is of absolutely zero consequence."

And I've got money seats for the game. I'll get to see Trax pounded unmercilessly up close.

This is an indirect result of a rebuilding year. We made the deals we made this past winter so we don't have this problem 2 years down the road. Until then, I'll live with it, because MacPhail is finally doing what we have been clamoring for for a long, long time.

I'm not going to sit here and tell you that Trachsel would be my 1st choice at Opening Day starter, but I don't think it makes any difference.
I feel the same way. I just don't see what the big deal is.

I honestly don't WANT him to be the OD starter, but I can live with it knowing what the plan is for this team and where we are (hopefully) going.

[Fan4Life]

Yep.

6-0 with a 3.04 ERA in 11 career starts.

He gets my vote.

[Frobby]

I really don't care who starts Opening Day. However, my choice would be Guthrie, as the returning starter who had the best season in 2007, and as a guy who has pitched well this spring. He's a mature kid and I don't think the pressure of pitching on opening day would bother him much.

Beyond Guthrie, there really is no compelling case to be made for anyone. Trachsel's ERA last year was better than DCab's, and he seems a little less likely to get caught up in the opening day hoopla and put too much pressure on himself. So to me he is the logical second choice even though he could end up as the worst of the 5 starters. If the O's choose him over Guthrie I won't have a fit, though I do think that would be a strange choice.

[backwardsk]

Give the ball to Jamie Walker. That'll throw 'em off.

[nyjimbo]

After the year we started 0-21 I always look forward to winning on opening day, kinda takes the pressure off for the rest of the season.

[glorydays]

Here's a quote (article (http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080317&content_id=2433150&vkey=spt2008news&fext=.jsp&c_id=bal))that may answer your questions why Trax would be chosen over any other SP for OD:


Orioles manager Dave Trembley lauds Trachsel for his work ethic and the example he sets for his younger teammates, but Baltimore really likes him for his predictability. The right-hander has gone out and pitched a lot of competitive innings over his career, and the Orioles are never sure just what they will get out of their young corps of unproven pitchers.

Why choose Trax... because he is the type of player and model that we want our young players to choose to become when they become vets (hopefully with a better record). One way to help them to choose that course is to reward the pitcher who is currently being a model... right?

[Birds08]

We are supposed to be in a new era of stressing youth over below average 35year olds. I thought the team realized this, but I guess I was wrong...

[Hank Scorpio]

Why choose Trax... because he is the type of player and model that we want our young players to choose to become when they become vets (hopefully with a better record). One way to help them to choose that course is to reward the pitcher who is currently being a model... right?

Give me Erik Bedard on a bad day over a "model professional" any day of the week!!!

[BaltBird 24]

Here's a quote (article (http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080317&content_id=2433150&vkey=spt2008news&fext=.jsp&c_id=bal))that may answer your questions why Trax would be chosen over any other SP for OD:



Why choose Trax... because he is the type of player and model that we want our young players to choose to become when they become vets (hopefully with a better record). One way to help them to choose that course is to reward the pitcher who is currently being a model... right?

This is just a complete joke and goes to show why this team is a complete joke. Sure, Trachsel is probably the most predictable option we can throw out there. It's not hard to predict 4 IP, 8 H, 5 ER, 4 BB, 1 K.

[glorydays]

Give me Erik Bedard on a bad day over a "model professional" any day of the week!!!

Hate to break it to you, but we don't have any EB's or anyone like him on our roster. Guess we will have to go with the model professional.

Perhaps when our young talent grows up they will have the talent of EB and the model professionalism of a Trax...

[DuffMan]

Here's a quote (article (http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080317&content_id=2433150&vkey=spt2008news&fext=.jsp&c_id=bal))that may answer your questions why Trax would be chosen over any other SP for OD:



Why choose Trax... because he is the type of player and model that we want our young players to choose to become when they become vets (hopefully with a better record). One way to help them to choose that course is to reward the pitcher who is currently being a model... right?

He's predictable ok. I can predict he will give us 5 innings throw about 110 pitches, give up 5 runs 7 hits 3 walks 2 k's and a partridge in a pair tree.

[DrungoHazewood]

This isn't that big of a deal. Not right now, in year one of the rebuild. In fact, it helps us narrow our frame of reference for the Orioles' decision making processes. The presence of Trachsel in the rotation, no matter what number he is, says that they don't put much weight on the type of analysis that I advocate.

I'm not particularly happy about that, but it shows us that MacPhail and Trembley are definitely old-school, traditionalist managers. The front office isn't that of the A's or the Red Sox.

You go to war with the army you have, not the one you wish you had. Perhaps we should tailor our arguments and suggestions to the way the O's operate, not the way we want them to be.

We know Trachsel is in the rotation - how can the O's minimize the damage? Maybe they should have a rotation system, and make sure the best defense possible is on the field when he pitches. Maybe if Roberts is traded Trachsel should be backed by Fahey at 2B and Hernandez at SS. Maybe the pen can be configured such that the long man gets prepared to come in on the days he pitches.

I don't know, but it's become obvious that Trachsel is here until it's very obvious that he can't cut it anymore.

[glorydays]

This is just a complete joke and goes to show why this team is a complete joke. Sure, Trachsel is probably the most predictable option we can throw out there. It's not hard to predict 4 IP, 8 H, 5 ER, 4 BB, 1 K.

I really don't want to be seen as an advocate for Trax because I wish we have a better option but I have to agree with Trembley on this one.

Last year Trax when 6-8 with a 4.48 ERA with us. He completed 6 innings or more in 18 of his 25 starts. He was not as bad as everyone is making him out to be.

Additionally, he is providing the type of vet leadership that this young team needs. I want Guthrie, DCAB and the rest of them to learn the right way how to prepare and handle a big game - even if it means how to respond the correct way of getting your brains beat out. That is the Oriole way people. That is the organization that Jim Palmer, Brooks and Cal came up in. They learned from positive clubhouse models and took over when they were in the position to excel.

That is the right way of doing it. That is the logical way of doing it. That is the Oriole way and I am glad that it seems to be coming back.

[Who's On 1st]

I agree that the opening day guy really means nothing! But with that said, after what I saw Steve Trachsel do on Sat. .......... I would Bet he doesn't make the cut. He was very badddddddd!

[TommyD4207]

This isn't that big of a deal. Not right now, in year one of the rebuild. In fact, it helps us narrow our frame of reference for the Orioles' decision making processes. The presence of Trachsel in the rotation, no matter what number he is, says that they don't put much weight on the type of analysis that I advocate.

I'm not particularly happy about that, but it shows us that MacPhail and Trembley are definitely old-school, traditionalist managers. The front office isn't that of the A's or the Red Sox.

You go to war with the army you have, not the one you wish you had. Perhaps we should tailor our arguments and suggestions to the way the O's operate, not the way we want them to be.

We know Trachsel is in the rotation - how can the O's minimize the damage? Maybe they should have a rotation system, and make sure the best defense possible is on the field when he pitches. Maybe if Roberts is traded Trachsel should be backed by Fahey at 2B and Hernandez at SS. Maybe the pen can be configured such that the long man gets prepared to come in on the days he pitches.

I don't know, but it's become obvious that Trachsel is here until it's very obvious that he can't cut it anymore.


Sidenote, yes, I know, but I think it's actually a misconception that the Red Sox are a completely sabermetric team like the A's and how the Dodgers were with Depodesta as GM. Now, yes, Epstein does employ sabermetrics and Bill James does get paychecks from the Red Sox, but to say that their principles would agree with a pure sabermetrician Moneyball believer isn't accurate at all.

For example, to start out the 2005 season, the Red Sox gave the rock to none other than David Wells, a pitcher who was turning 42 and which they had just given a 2/18 contract. They did this in spite of having Bronson Arroyo who had just pitched a very fine year indeed for the Red Sox.

Another good example would be back in 2005, again, when the Red Sox needed an extra bat off the bench, who did they call, but 80 year old Jon Olerud who had just come off a season of putting up only a 733 OPS in 425 AB's in MLB. If the Orioles were to do this, there would be bloodshed on here.

Also, there's Jason Varitek, whom the Red Sox gave a 4 year contract, that, even though he's a catcher, would lead him to a season in which he was 36. This board was very hard on Javy (and they turned out to be correct, no doubt) that he would fall apart when he hit his mid 30's. Epstein isn't dumb, I'm sure he knows all about the statistical studies that catchers fall off a cliff as they age. In fact, I'm positive that he does because I remember an interview with Epstein in which they asked him about the general perception that catchers don't age well. Esptein agreed with that and also said that he was signing Varitek because he was "The Captain" and had the exceptional ability to work with pitchers well. This is one of the reasons that I am so for catching intangibles, I don't consider it an "anecdotal afterthought" that's negligible like many on here have said. Who knows, maybe this "veteran catcher" thing might actually have some backing to it. Nahhh, of course not. :rolleyes:

There are other examples, such as back in 2006 when the Red Sox needed a 2B, instead of going with a cheap and young option, they went with the aging Mark Loretta who had just put up a below average year in the field and at the plate.

There's always Jonthan Papelbon, whom Epstein must be naive with, because Papelbon pitched 53 of his 58 innings in the 9th inning, going against the cardinal rule of many on here that "The Closer should not just pitch the 9th inning, but should come in at any time, it's all the same to them, nothing changes." I personally disagree with that and I'm almost positive I remember hearing Epstein say something to that effect, as well.

And Mike Timlin, who pitched just about all of his innings in the 8th inning, except when Papelbon was given the night off, he pitched the 9th inning. This very structured role of one guy gets the 8th inning and the other guy gets the 9th inning is scoffed at around here, but a guy who gets a lot of respect in Epstein runs a team that does this.

And this is also the same Red Sox team that gave JT Snow's rotting corpse 44 AB's in 2006, a move that would definitely trigger some strong emotions from this board.

And there's the bench that everyone insists needs to be filled with hitters. As of right now, the Red Sox bench has Dusty Brown (717 career MiLB OPS), Sean Casey (who was consistently mocked on here as a terrible move for the Orioles), Alex Cora (career 657 OPS hitter), and Coco Crisp (702 and 712 OPS the last 2 years respectively). Well, what do you know? A bench filled with poor hitters and defensive specialists.

As for guys that aren't currently on the 25-man roster that could be on the bench, that includes:

Chris Carter- Who was cut yesterday, 909 career MiLB OPS. If the Orioles sent down Chris Carter in favor of Sean Casey this place would go absolutely ballistic.

George Kottaras- Career MiLB 812 OPS, likely to be cut in favor of the weaker hitting Dusty Brown.

Jonthan Van Every- Who looks like a Jon Knott clone

Jeff Bailey- 29 year old career minor leaguer, career 807 OPS. Never got a shot. Doesn't look like the Sox are interested in giving him one, either. Once again, Sean Casey...

Keith Ginter- 32 year old middle infielder utility infielder, 779 OPS in the IL last year. Would be an upgrade over Alex Cora with the bat.

Joe Thurston- Utility infielder who has a better bat than Alex Cora.

Gil Velazquez- Career 581 OPS hitter. *Cue obligatory has no room in any organization and only a team as dumb as the Orioles would even invite him to spring training and keep him on the team as long as they have.*

Bobby Kielty- Who is probably actually worse than Jay Gibbons.



All and all, if Epstein were made GM of the Orioles, I would not be surprised one bit if Trachsel were named the Opening Day starter.

Carry on...

[TommyD4207]

Edit, double post, mods please delete.

[Moose Milligan]

Sidenote, yes, I know, but I think it's actually a misconception that the Red Sox are a completely sabermetric team like the A's and how the Dodgers were with Depodesta as GM. Now, yes, Epstein does employ sabermetrics and Bill James does get paychecks from the Red Sox, but to say that their principles would agree with a pure sabermetrician Moneyball believer isn't accurate at all.

For example, to start out the 2005 season, the Red Sox gave the rock to none other than David Wells, a pitcher who was turning 42 and which they had just given a 2/18 contract. They did this in spite of having Bronson Arroyo who had just pitched a very fine year indeed for the Red Sox.

Another good example would be back in 2005, again, when the Red Sox needed an extra bat off the bench, who did they call, but 80 year old Jon Olerud who had just come off a season of putting up only a 733 OPS in 425 AB's in MLB. If the Orioles were to do this, there would be bloodshed on here.

Also, there's Jason Varitek, whom the Red Sox gave a 4 year contract, that, even though he's a catcher, would lead him to a season in which he was 36. This board was very hard on Javy (and they turned out to be correct, no doubt) that he would fall apart when he hit his mid 30's. Epstein isn't dumb, I'm sure he knows all about the statistical studies that catchers fall off a cliff as they age. In fact, I'm positive that he does because I remember an interview with Epstein in which they asked him about the general perception that catchers don't age well. Esptein agreed with that and also said that he was signing Varitek because he was "The Captain" and had the exceptional ability to work with pitchers well. This is one of the reasons that I am so for catching intangibles, I don't consider it an "anecdotal afterthought" that's negligible like many on here have said. Who knows, maybe this "veteran catcher" thing might actually have some backing to it. Nahhh, of course not. :rolleyes:

There are other examples, such as back in 2006 when the Red Sox needed a 2B, instead of going with a cheap and young option, they went with the aging Mark Loretta who had just put up a below average year in the field and at the plate.

There's always Jonthan Papelbon, whom Epstein must be naive with, because Papelbon pitched 53 of his 58 innings in the 9th inning, going against the cardinal rule of many on here that "The Closer should not just pitch the 9th inning, but should come in at any time, it's all the same to them, nothing changes." I personally disagree with that and I'm almost positive I remember hearing Epstein say something to that effect, as well.

And Mike Timlin, who pitched just about all of his innings in the 8th inning, except when Papelbon was given the night off, he pitched the 9th inning. This very structured role of one guy gets the 8th inning and the other guy gets the 9th inning is scoffed at around here, but a guy who gets a lot of respect in Epstein runs a team that does this.

And this is also the same Red Sox team that gave JT Snow's rotting corpse 44 AB's in 2006, a move that would definitely trigger some strong emotions from this board.

And there's the bench that everyone insists needs to be filled with hitters. As of right now, the Red Sox bench has Dusty Brown (717 career MiLB OPS), Sean Casey (who was consistently mocked on here as a terrible move for the Orioles), Alex Cora (career 657 OPS hitter), and Coco Crisp (702 and 712 OPS the last 2 years respectively). Well, what do you know? A bench filled with poor hitters and defensive specialists.

As for guys that aren't currently on the 25-man roster that could be on the bench, that includes:

Chris Carter- Who was cut yesterday, 909 career MiLB OPS. If the Orioles sent down Chris Carter in favor of Sean Casey this place would go absolutely ballistic.

George Kottaras- Career MiLB 812 OPS, likely to be cut in favor of the weaker hitting Dusty Brown.

Jonthan Van Every- Who looks like a Jon Knott clone

Jeff Bailey- 29 year old career minor leaguer, career 807 OPS. Never got a shot. Doesn't look like the Sox are interested in giving him one, either. Once again, Sean Casey...

Keith Ginter- 32 year old middle infielder utility infielder, 779 OPS in the IL last year. Would be an upgrade over Alex Cora with the bat.

Joe Thurston- Utility infielder who has a better bat than Alex Cora.

Gil Velazquez- Career 581 OPS hitter. *Cue obligatory has no room in any organization and only a team as dumb as the Orioles would even invite him to spring training and keep him on the team as long as they have.*

Bobby Kielty- Who is probably actually worse than Jay Gibbons.



All and all, if Epstein were made GM of the Orioles, I would not be surprised one bit if Trachsel were named the Opening Day starter.

Carry on...


You should post more, TommyD...the place could use some more fresh air.

[vatech1994]

One of the many things that amuses me on this board is how often really intelligent posters take everything they see/read at face value rather than looking for underlying reasons/motives for things.

The Orioles are starting Trachsel on opening day and giving him lip service to raise his visibility? They must think he is their best pitcher and be completely inept at doing the most basic types of analysis. It can't be that they have their reasons to thrust him to the forefront right now and those reasons have nothing to do with his pitching ability.

The Orioles thought so much of Trachsel that they traded him last year in August when the wheels were threatening to come off the cart. The Orioles thought so much of Trachsel that they signed him to a minor league contract.

Good lord people, some of us need to come back off the ledges and use our intelligence a bit more.

[DrungoHazewood]

Sidenote, yes, I know, but I think it's actually a misconception that the Red Sox are a completely sabermetric team like the A's and how the Dodgers were with Depodesta as GM. Now, yes, Epstein does employ sabermetrics and Bill James does get paychecks from the Red Sox, but to say that their principles would agree with a pure sabermetrician Moneyball believer isn't accurate at all.

For example, to start out the 2005 season, the Red Sox gave the rock to none other than David Wells, a pitcher who was turning 42 and which they had just given a 2/18 contract. They did this in spite of having Bronson Arroyo who had just pitched a very fine year indeed for the Red Sox.

Another good example would be back in 2005, again, when the Red Sox needed an extra bat off the bench, who did they call, but 80 year old Jon Olerud who had just come off a season of putting up only a 733 OPS in 425 AB's in MLB. If the Orioles were to do this, there would be bloodshed on here.

Also, there's Jason Varitek, whom the Red Sox gave a 4 year contract, that, even though he's a catcher, would lead him to a season in which he was 36. This board was very hard on Javy (and they turned out to be correct, no doubt) that he would fall apart when he hit his mid 30's. Epstein isn't dumb, I'm sure he knows all about the statistical studies that catchers fall off a cliff as they age. In fact, I'm positive that he does because I remember an interview with Epstein in which they asked him about the general perception that catchers don't age well. Esptein agreed with that and also said that he was signing Varitek because he was "The Captain" and had the exceptional ability to work with pitchers well. This is one of the reasons that I am so for catching intangibles, I don't consider it an "anecdotal afterthought" that's negligible like many on here have said. Who knows, maybe this "veteran catcher" thing might actually have some backing to it. Nahhh, of course not. :rolleyes:

There are other examples, such as back in 2006 when the Red Sox needed a 2B, instead of going with a cheap and young option, they went with the aging Mark Loretta who had just put up a below average year in the field and at the plate.

There's always Jonthan Papelbon, whom Epstein must be naive with, because Papelbon pitched 53 of his 58 innings in the 9th inning, going against the cardinal rule of many on here that "The Closer should not just pitch the 9th inning, but should come in at any time, it's all the same to them, nothing changes." I personally disagree with that and I'm almost positive I remember hearing Epstein say something to that effect, as well.

And Mike Timlin, who pitched just about all of his innings in the 8th inning, except when Papelbon was given the night off, he pitched the 9th inning. This very structured role of one guy gets the 8th inning and the other guy gets the 9th inning is scoffed at around here, but a guy who gets a lot of respect in Epstein runs a team that does this.

And this is also the same Red Sox team that gave JT Snow's rotting corpse 44 AB's in 2006, a move that would definitely trigger some strong emotions from this board.

And there's the bench that everyone insists needs to be filled with hitters. As of right now, the Red Sox bench has Dusty Brown (717 career MiLB OPS), Sean Casey (who was consistently mocked on here as a terrible move for the Orioles), Alex Cora (career 657 OPS hitter), and Coco Crisp (702 and 712 OPS the last 2 years respectively). Well, what do you know? A bench filled with poor hitters and defensive specialists.

As for guys that aren't currently on the 25-man roster that could be on the bench, that includes:

Chris Carter- Who was cut yesterday, 909 career MiLB OPS. If the Orioles sent down Chris Carter in favor of Sean Casey this place would go absolutely ballistic.

George Kottaras- Career MiLB 812 OPS, likely to be cut in favor of the weaker hitting Dusty Brown.

Jonthan Van Every- Who looks like a Jon Knott clone

Jeff Bailey- 29 year old career minor leaguer, career 807 OPS. Never got a shot. Doesn't look like the Sox are interested in giving him one, either. Once again, Sean Casey...

Keith Ginter- 32 year old middle infielder utility infielder, 779 OPS in the IL last year. Would be an upgrade over Alex Cora with the bat.

Joe Thurston- Utility infielder who has a better bat than Alex Cora.

Gil Velazquez- Career 581 OPS hitter. *Cue obligatory has no room in any organization and only a team as dumb as the Orioles would even invite him to spring training and keep him on the team as long as they have.*

Bobby Kielty- Who is probably actually worse than Jay Gibbons.



All and all, if Epstein were made GM of the Orioles, I would not be surprised one bit if Trachsel were named the Opening Day starter.

Carry on...

I don't think you quite grasp either sabermetrics or Moneyball. One is about using objectivity and performance measurements to better understand baseball. They other is about exploiting market inefficiencies. How do any of your examples show that the Red Sox ignore metrics and market inefficiencies?

[TommyD4207]

I don't think you quite grasp either sabermetrics or Moneyball. One is about using objectivity and performance measurements to better understand baseball. They other is about exploiting market inefficiencies. How do any of your examples show that the Red Sox ignore metrics and market inefficiencies?

Ugh, I've used sabermetrics on more than a few occasions on here. I know what they are without too much trouble. Don't worry.

And exploiting market inefficiencies, by yours and everyone else's definitions, is using inexperienced guys and loading up your bench with hitters, which is underappreciated, supposedly, and can be done without a great deal of trouble. The Orioles are condemned for not doing it, like they were in your post and you gave the Red Sox praise, calling them a better franchise.

You saying that we don't have a FO like the Red Sox for this example while the examples I gave lead me to believe that if Theo Epstein were dropped in this situation, Trachsel would be the Opening Starter. I'd bet a very, very large sum of money on that.

[NewMarketSean]

Guthrie is 29. He is not a 22 year old rookie. He pitched 175 innings last year which included games against the Red Sox, Yankees and Indians... all good teams. If he is not ready to start an opening day game against the Devil Rays, then I don't know if I want him on the team.

Now I know this is just the way the O's are thinking, that they want to protect their younger pitchers... at least thats what some people think... but I still don't agree with it.

The O's have a duty to give the fans their best effort on OD. That is not Trachsel, it is Guthrie.

[vatech1994]

Guthrie is 29. He is not a 22 year old rookie. He pitched 175 innings last year which included games against the Red Sox, Yankees and Indians... all good teams. If he is not ready to start an opening day game against the Devil Rays, then I don't know if I want him on the team.

Now I know this is just the way the O's are thinking, that they want to protect their younger pitchers... at least thats what some people think... but I still don't agree with it.

The O's have a duty to give the fans their best effort on OD. That is not Trachsel, it is Guthrie.

I understand your point and I agree it has merit, but I disagree with your conclusion. I do think the Orioles have a duty to give the fans their best effort on OD, but I don't think they have a duty to play their absolute best players on OD. The Orioles have a duty to play their players in such a way as to maximize wins in a given set of games. Now, what those set of games are is a bit up to debate, but my view would be the games between 2009-2011s should be the games "targeted" for maximum wins.

Regarding Guthrie's ability to overcome a disasterous OD start (or series of them) due to his age, I again agree to a point, but think you're looking at the wrong metric. I wouldn't use his age. I would use his experience. Guthrie is a special case because of his Mormon mission. I tend to agree that Guthries isn't the type to get overwhelmed if he has a bad series of games. However, I read several articles last year that implied he had struggled with the Indians due to exactly that sort of situation. He had a couple bad outings, started worrying about his "place" on the team, the pressure compounded, he struggled more, lather, rinse, repeat

It appeared pretty clear to me last year that Liz and Olson both freaked a bit when they got up here. There were comments from a couple sources indicating that they lost their mechanics, aggressiveness in the zone, and confidence to some degree. I don't think it is a crazy thought to believe that a young player will have trouble succeeding if they aren't confident. Further, I don't believe it is a crazy thought to believe that a player only gets so many chances to "prove" themselves when they don't have a ML track record and each player knows that which increases the pressure.

Keep in mind that the guys we're talking about aren't "rich" yet. They are still in the stage where they are pitching to get rich. They are right on the threshold of being able to set up themselves and their family for life. There is a lot of pressure on a new player. Different guys handle it different ways.

[NewMarketSean]

I understand your point and I agree it has merit, but I disagree with your conclusion. I do think the Orioles have a duty to give the fans their best effort on OD, but I don't think they have a duty to play their absolute best players on OD. The Orioles have a duty to play their players in such a way as to maximize wins in a given set of games. Now, what those set of games are is a bit up to debate, but my view would be the games between 2009-2011s should be the games "targeted" for maximum wins.

Regarding Guthrie's ability to overcome a disasterous OD start (or series of them) due to his age, I again agree to a point, but think you're looking at the wrong metric. I wouldn't use his age. I would use his experience. Guthrie is a special case because of his Mormon mission. I tend to agree that Guthries isn't the type to get overwhelmed if he has a bad series of games. However, I read several articles last year that implied he had struggled with the Indians due to exactly that sort of situation. He had a couple bad outings, started worrying about his "place" on the team, the pressure compounded, he struggled more, lather, rinse, repeat

It appeared pretty clear to me last year that Liz and Olson both freaked a bit when they got up here. There were comments from a couple sources indicating that they lost their mechanics, aggressiveness in the zone, and confidence to some degree. I don't think it is a crazy thought to believe that a young player will have trouble succeeding if they aren't confident. Further, I don't believe it is a crazy thought to believe that a player only gets so many chances to "prove" themselves when they don't have a ML track record and each player knows that which increases the pressure.

Keep in mind that the guys we're talking about aren't "rich" yet. They are still in the stage where they are pitching to get rich. They are right on the threshold of being able to set up themselves and their family for life. There is a lot of pressure on a new player. Different guys handle it different ways.

I think this sets up a dangerous precedent. Who says when these guys are "ready" for the crunch time? What if Loewen is the best pitcher on the team come July and we have a BIG series against the Red Sox, where we are in a position to close the gap between them and us. Do you take Loewen out of his spot and use Trax or some other more "experienced" pitcher in that situation because more is at stake?

This sets up a fuzzy set of standards that throw stats out of the window and go on hunches and feelings.

I know, that in the big picture, that starting Trax on OD means very little. I am making it into a big issue because I will be there, and I dont want to see Trax get bombed, which I think will happen. I want to win. I want the O's to reward their younger players with opportunities, not by coddling them.

[DrungoHazewood]

And exploiting market inefficiencies, by yours and everyone else's definitions, is using inexperienced guys and loading up your bench with hitters, which is underappreciated, supposedly, and can be done without a great deal of trouble. The Orioles are condemned for not doing it, like they were in your post and you gave the Red Sox praise, calling them a better franchise.

That may have sort of, kind of been the case in 2001. But what the market values and undervalues changes all the time. The A's moved from an OBP-centric approach to an emphasis on defense before the ink on Moneyball was dry. The worst thing a team can do is have a static approach to teambuilding that won't adapt as the market changes.

It does remain true that players who are labeled "AAAA" can often be valuable role players on good teams and can be acquired for almost nothing while being paid the league minimum. Collecting talented but limited players and using them in situations where they can succeed is always a good idea. But that talent certainly doesn't have to be focused on hitting or power or OBP.

[TommyD4207]

That may have sort of, kind of been the case in 2001. But what the market values and undervalues changes all the time. The A's moved from an OBP-centric approach to an emphasis on defense before the ink on Moneyball was dry. The worst thing a team can do is have a static approach to teambuilding that won't adapt as the market changes.

It does remain true that players who are labeled "AAAA" can often be valuable role players on good teams and can be acquired for almost nothing while being paid the league minimum. Collecting talented but limited players and using them in situations where they can succeed is always a good idea. But that talent certainly doesn't have to be focused on hitting or power or OBP.

You're missing the point. The point is that if the Red Sox FO were suddenly put in charge of the Orioles, Trax would likely be the OD starter. There are many ways you could use the Red Sox FO as a model FO as to why the Orioles should do stuff differently. This is not one of them.

[Lucky Jim]

That may have sort of, kind of been the case in 2001. But what the market values and undervalues changes all the time. The A's moved from an OBP-centric approach to an emphasis on defense before the ink on Moneyball was dry. The worst thing a team can do is have a static approach to teambuilding that won't adapt as the market changes.

It does remain true that players who are labeled "AAAA" can often be valuable role players on good teams and can be acquired for almost nothing while being paid the league minimum. Collecting talented but limited players and using them in situations where they can succeed is always a good idea. But that talent certainly doesn't have to be focused on hitting or power or OBP.

Rather than saying TommyD doesn't understand SABRstuff, could you explain what kind of moves the Red Sox have made that show they're exploiting market inefficiencies (Youkilis is an example, circa 2001, I guess).

What else? I think Tommy's point was only to show how the Red Sox frequently make moves that parallel the moves the O's make (which we bemoan). Nothing more, nothing less.

I mean, and this is just a for instance, if they were truly objective they'd have unloaded Lowell this offseason before his BABIP regresses (from last year's .342) to the norm and he begins to show his age, no? I mean, his ISO dropped well below .200 last year (.170). I think it's likely we'll see further power decline, as well as a lower BA and OBP. Basically, Lowell's their Melvin Mora.

[TommyD4207]

Rather than saying TommyD doesn't understand SABRstuff, could you explain what kind of moves the Red Sox have made that show they're exploiting market inefficiencies (I mean, Youkilis is an example, circa 2001, I guess).

What else? I mean, I think Tommy's point was only to show how the Red Sox frequently make moves that parallel the moves the O's make (which we bemoan). Nothing more, nothing less.

I mean, and this is just a for instance, if they were truly objective they'd have unloaded Lowell this offseason before his BABIP regresses (from last year's .342) to the norm and he begins to show his age, no? I mean, his ISO dropped well below .200 last year (.170). I think it's likely we'll see further power decline, as well as a lower BA and OBP. Basically, Lowell's their Melvin Mora.

THANK YOU!!!

[glorydays]

I think this sets up a dangerous precedent. Who says when these guys are "ready" for the crunch time? What if Loewen is the best pitcher on the team come July and we have a BIG series against the Red Sox, where we are in a position to close the gap between them and us. Do you take Loewen out of his spot and use Trax or some other more "experienced" pitcher in that situation because more is at stake?

This sets up a fuzzy set of standards that throw stats out of the window and go on hunches and feelings.

I know, that in the big picture, that starting Trax on OD means very little. I am making it into a big issue because I will be there, and I dont want to see Trax get bombed, which I think will happen. I want to win. I want the O's to reward their younger players with opportunities, not by coddling them.

In 1992 the O's had a young starting rotation of Ben McDonald. Mike Mussina, Aurthor Rhodes and Jose Mesa. They were getting ready to moved into Camden Yards and 1 - didn't want to put any unnecessary pressure on any of their young pitchers and 2 - wanted a vet presence in the clubhouse.

So what did they do? Go and sign a washed up 36 year old pitcher named Rick Sutcliffe. Now before you go on a rant about "how can compare Rick Sutcliffe to Trax!" here are Sutcliffe's combined numbers the 2 previous seasons:

6-7 4.80 ERA and 1.508 WHIP

Although he only pitched here for 2 mildly successful years - he is remembered more for the opening day win and his clubhouse leadership. I am sure Mike Mussina would have nothing but great things to say about the influence that RS had on him when he was a young pitcher.

[66-70-83-??]

Rather than saying TommyD doesn't understand SABRstuff, could you explain what kind of moves the Red Sox have made that show they're exploiting market inefficiencies (I mean, Youkilis is an example, circa 2001, I guess).

What else? I mean, I think Tommy's point was only to show how the Red Sox frequently make moves that parallel the moves the O's make (which we bemoan). Nothing more, nothing less.

I mean, and this is just a for instance, if they were truly objective they'd have unloaded Lowell this offseason before his BABIP regresses (from last year's .342) to the norm and he begins to show his age, no? I mean, his ISO dropped well below .200 last year (.170). I think it's likely we'll see further power decline, as well as a lower BA and OBP. Basically, Lowell's their Melvin Mora.

In my opinion, in some SABR cirlces (BP, FJM crowds for ex), it appears there is a double-standard.

The template seems to state: ignore bad moves by the "in crowd" (Beane, Epstein for ex) and praise all the other moves.

But, for the old school types (ie AM, Flanny), it is the opposite- ignore good moves and blast all the other transactions.

Theo might be the most overrated GM. I wonder how he would do on Beane's budget, rather than one very close to Cashmans. ;)

[DrungoHazewood]

Rather than saying TommyD doesn't understand SABRstuff, could you explain what kind of moves the Red Sox have made that show they're exploiting market inefficiencies (I mean, Youkilis is an example, circa 2001, I guess).

What else? I mean, I think Tommy's point was only to show how the Red Sox frequently make moves that parallel the moves the O's make (which we bemoan). Nothing more, nothing less.

I mean, and this is just a for instance, if they were truly objective they'd have unloaded Lowell this offseason before his BABIP regresses (from last year's .342) to the norm and he begins to show his age, no? I mean, his ISO dropped well below .200 last year (.170). I think it's likely we'll see further power decline, as well as a lower BA and OBP. Basically, Lowell's their Melvin Mora.

In 2003 they signed Kevin Millar after claiming him on waivers in what the Marlins thought was a formality in the process of selling him to Japan.

They ignored Mark Bellhorn's gargantuan K rate and got a .373 OBP out of him.

They signed David Oritz after he'd been non-tendered by the Twins and made him an everyday player.

They traded Bronson Arroyo after a year where his K rate fell to an unacceptable level (yes, it rebounded in the NL) but his W/L record was still good.

They signed David Wells despite the fact he was 42 and overweight, and got above-average performance for $4M.

They've gotten five good years out of Mike "the choking closer" Timlin.

Instead of paying $millions for a tried and tested closer, they made one out of Jonathan Papelbon.

They let Johnny Damon go to the rival Yanks and collected the draft picks because his performance didn't merit the price of resigning him. They've also done the sign-and-let-go-for-picks thing with other players, like Mark Loretta.

They've taken full advantage of baseball's salary structure by investing in scouting, drafting, and analysis and developing many of their own players who they cheaply control for many years.

Yes, they also have many instances of acting like the Yankees, too. But such is life when you have 50% more revenues than most of the teams in the majors.

[LookitsPuck]

How anyone can make a case to have Trachsel instead of Guthrie as their OD starter is completely beyond me. As a matter of fact, I'd like someone to come up with 1 GOOD reason for Trachsel to be pitching OD?

[DrungoHazewood]

In my opinion, in some SABR cirlces (BP, FJM crowds for ex), it appears there is a double-standard.

The template seems to state: ignore bad moves by the "in crowd" (Beane, Epstein for ex) and praise all the other moves.

But, for the old school types (ie AM, Flanny), it is the opposite- ignore good moves and blast all the other transactions.

Theo might be the most overrated GM. I wonder how he would do on Beane's budget, rather than one very close to Cashmans. ;)

And I think exactly the same thing that goes on with the anti-Moneyball crowd. They just assume that Theo would tank if he had a $75M budget, while explaining away the failures of someone like Flanagan by blaming them on the restrictions he was operating under. Even if many of his bad moves had nothing at all to do with money.

[DrungoHazewood]

How anyone can make a case to have Trachsel instead of Guthrie as their OD starter is completely beyond me. As a matter of fact, I'd like someone to come up with 1 GOOD reason for Trachsel to be pitching OD?

Old = emotionally solid. Young = emotionally fragile.

[LookitsPuck]

In 2003 they signed Kevin Millar after claiming him on waivers in what the Marlins thought was a formality in the process of selling him to Japan.

They ignored Mark Bellhorn's gargantuan K rate and got a .373 OBP out of him.

They signed David Oritz after he'd been non-tendered by the Twins and made him an everyday player.

They traded Bronson Arroyo after a year where his K rate fell to an unacceptable level (yes, it rebounded in the NL) but his W/L record was still good.

They signed David Wells despite the fact he was 42 and overweight, and got above-average performance for $4M.

They've gotten five good years out of Mike "the choking closer" Timlin.

Instead of paying $millions for a tried and tested closer, they made one out of Jonathan Papelbon.

They let Johnny Damon go to the rival Yanks and collected the draft picks because his performance didn't merit the price of resigning him. They've also done the sign-and-let-go-for-picks thing with other players, like Mark Loretta.

They've taken full advantage of baseball's salary structure by investing in scouting, drafting, and analysis and developing many of their own players who they cheaply control for many years.

Yes, they also have many instances of acting like the Yankees, too. But such is life when you have 50% more revenues than most of the teams in the majors.

Furthermore, they let Pedro Martinez be overpaid by the Mets to have an ailing shoulder and only pitch 28 innings last year, and 132 innings the year prior. They also have/had a lineup pretty rich in OBP monsters, as opposed to the Orioles being rich in...I have no idea..striking out on pitches out of the zone? Tejada, Payton, Patterson, Huff....

[DrungoHazewood]

In 1992 the O's had a young starting rotation of Ben McDonald. Mike Mussina, Aurthor Rhodes and Jose Mesa. They were getting ready to moved into Camden Yards and 1 - didn't want to put any unnecessary pressure on any of their young pitchers and 2 - wanted a vet presence in the clubhouse.

So what did they do? Go and sign a washed up 36 year old pitcher named Rick Sutcliffe. Now before you go on a rant about "how can compare Rick Sutcliffe to Trax!" here are Sutcliffe's combined numbers the 2 previous seasons:

6-7 4.80 ERA and 1.508 WHIP

Although he only pitched here for 2 mildly successful years - he is remembered more for the opening day win and his clubhouse leadership. I am sure Mike Mussina would have nothing but great things to say about the influence that RS had on him when he was a young pitcher.

I think Sutcliffe is a good parallel for Trachsel. The problem is Sutcliffe's 1993 is the parallel for Trachsel's 2008.

[LookitsPuck]

Old = emotionally solid. Young = emotionally fragile.

Are you serious?

I said a good reason, not some intangible idea. Not trying to knock you, but do you really believe Guthrie is emotionally fragile? Or are you trying to conjure up some sort of last ditch idea by the Orioles to do something absolutely mind bottling before the season starts?

He's almost 29. And I'm extremely against this idea of "veterans" being emotionally solid. Sure, there's something to it when you haven't pitched an inning of MLB, but this is most certainly not the case.

[NewMarketSean]

He was being sarcastic.

[LookitsPuck]

Whew. Thank goodness.

[Intimidator301]

Old = emotionally solid. Young = emotionally fragile.

If that's the O's reasoning for starting Trachsel, I'd rather give the ball OD to Jim Palmer.

[glorydays]

I think Sutcliffe is a good parallel for Trachsel. The problem is Sutcliffe's 1993 is the parallel for Trachsel's 2008.

Which is the reason why Sutcliffe was gone by 1994 and Trax will likely be gone by 2009.

[DrungoHazewood]

Are you serious?

I said a good reason, not some intangible idea. Not trying to knock you, but do you really believe Guthrie is emotionally fragile? Or are you trying to conjure up some sort of last ditch idea by the Orioles to do something absolutely mind bottling before the season starts?

He's almost 29. And I'm extremely against this idea of "veterans" being emotionally solid. Sure, there's something to it when you haven't pitched an inning of MLB, but this is most certainly not the case.

I wasn't being sarcastic so much as trying to echo the sentiments of those who think it's a good idea to have a long-time veteran starting opening day, without regard to his chances of success.

Ok, yea, I was probably a little sarcastic.

[DrungoHazewood]

Which is the reason why Sutcliffe was gone by 1994 and Trax will likely be gone by 2009.

What did Sutcliffe bring to the Orioles in 1993? He was dead last among all MLB qualifiers in ERA. All he did was fill up 166 innings. And I suppose someone will argue he was the 2nd-string pitching coach.


1993 ERA Trailers
1 Rick Sutcliffe 5.75
2 Bob Walk 5.68
3 Jaime Navarro 5.33
4 Bob Welch 5.29
5 Tim Pugh 5.26
6 Mike Moore 5.22
7 Melido Perez 5.19
8 Scott Erickson 5.19
9 Ron Darling 5.16
10 Tim Leary 5.05

[Lucky Jim]

In 2003 they signed Kevin Millar after claiming him on waivers in what the Marlins thought was a formality in the process of selling him to Japan.

They ignored Mark Bellhorn's gargantuan K rate and got a .373 OBP out of him.

They signed David Oritz after he'd been non-tendered by the Twins and made him an everyday player.

They traded Bronson Arroyo after a year where his K rate fell to an unacceptable level (yes, it rebounded in the NL) but his W/L record was still good.

They signed David Wells despite the fact he was 42 and overweight, and got above-average performance for $4M.

They've gotten five good years out of Mike "the choking closer" Timlin.

Instead of paying $millions for a tried and tested closer, they made one out of Jonathan Papelbon.

They let Johnny Damon go to the rival Yanks and collected the draft picks because his performance didn't merit the price of resigning him. They've also done the sign-and-let-go-for-picks thing with other players, like Mark Loretta.

They've taken full advantage of baseball's salary structure by investing in scouting, drafting, and analysis and developing many of their own players who they cheaply control for many years.

Yes, they also have many instances of acting like the Yankees, too. But such is life when you have 50% more revenues than most of the teams in the majors.

Thanks. That's much clearer (I certainly have no encyclopedic knowledge of the Sox personnel decisions.)

I think the big ones are certainly the pick-up of Ortiz and the conversion of Papelbon. Really heady moves. The smaller ones - like Loretta - are often undervalued because the value at the local level is small, but when applied on a broader one, pretty substantial.

A couple of points: while investing money in drafting and scouting is wise, I have trouble seeing it as a revolutionary (or even doctrinal) approach. It's common sense. This is true of some other things you point out, too: not signing Damon (a 32 year old CF who can't throw and who showed declining OPS and power - ISO below .150) and the Millar pick-up were just transactionally savvy. This isn't a criticism. Just sort-of an acknowledgment that Moneyball is as much a revolution as the Republican Revolution of 1994 - by which I mean, it's only applying basic economic principles to institutional organization. And economics is rarely revolutionary.

But there are some signs that this approach is currently less pure than you let on: they resigned Timlin to a one-year $3million contract when he's coming off a year where his K/9 dipped below 5 and his BABIP was an artificially low .238. Granted, it's a one-year contract. And the Lowell resigning is simply not smart. A huge drop-off could be right around the bend.


At first I couldn't figure out you derive - through sabermetrics or anything else - Mark Bellhorn's production, seeing as he put up a .646 OPS the year before, with a SLG of .293. Then I saw his MiL numbers, and the .900+ OPS that he put up in spare time the three years prior. That's impressive discounting of his ML struggles and a wise valuing of his MiL numbers.

I'd like to add that I was at first skeptical of the Wells signing - thinking they'd gotten lucky with a guy who K'd less than 5 per 9 the year before, but if you look at his command rates, they're phenomenal. Interesting. Still a bit lucky, I think. But not so much as I first imagined.

I'll just hope that the Timlin and Lowell contracts are signs of future irrationality.

What do you think of the trade for Beckett/Lowell?

[glorydays]

How anyone can make a case to have Trachsel instead of Guthrie as their OD starter is completely beyond me. As a matter of fact, I'd like someone to come up with 1 GOOD reason for Trachsel to be pitching OD?

Here's the problem... for every one reason you can find for Trax not being the starter - you can find another reason why any of the other starters shouldn't get the start either. That is the current state of our starting rotation.

I would guess that we would have this same arguement if DCAB, Guthrie or anyone else were being seriously considered as the front runner for the OD start.

If anyone is upset enough with Trax starting to give up their Opening Day tickets... I will be in town from Kentucky and would be glad to take them off your hands!

[DrungoHazewood]

Here's the problem... for every one reason you can find for Trax not being the starter - you can find another reason why any of the other starters shouldn't get the start either. That is the current state of our starting rotation.

I would guess that we would have this same arguement if DCAB, Guthrie or anyone else were being seriously considered as the front runner for the OD start.

I'd think that when you're in a situation like that you give the ball to the guy most likely to succeed. Not the guy who's least likely to come unhinged if he gives up six runs.

[Lucky Jim]

Furthermore, they let Pedro Martinez be overpaid by the Mets to have an ailing shoulder and only pitch 28 innings last year, and 132 innings the year prior. They also have/had a lineup pretty rich in OBP monsters, as opposed to the Orioles being rich in...I have no idea..striking out on pitches out of the zone? Tejada, Payton, Patterson, Huff....

I agree 100% with this last sentiment. I've been preaching power & patience forever on here. Though I don't blame Crowley (as many do); I think those are skills to be drafted and developed before the ML level.

As for Drungo's comment about the anti-Moneyball crowd, I think he's right. Both sides exaggerate or blind themselves to the flaws/merits of the other side.

[glorydays]

What did Sutcliffe bring to the Orioles in 1993? He was dead last among all MLB qualifiers in ERA. All he did was fill up 166 innings. And I suppose someone will argue he was the 2nd-string pitching coach.


1993 ERA Trailers
1 Rick Sutcliffe 5.75
2 Bob Walk 5.68
3 Jaime Navarro 5.33
4 Bob Welch 5.29
5 Tim Pugh 5.26
6 Mike Moore 5.22
7 Melido Perez 5.19
8 Scott Erickson 5.19
9 Ron Darling 5.16
10 Tim Leary 5.05

So what? Do you think the O's had that information during the 1993 spring training?

[glorydays]

I'd think that when you're in a situation like that you give the ball to the guy most likely to succeed. Not the guy who's least likely to come unhinged if he gives up six runs.

Are you speaking of the Guthrie of the first half of last season or the Guthrie of the 2nd half of the season (and his previous MLB experience).

[TommyD4207]

If you're looking at examples from 2003, you could probably single out 10 or so things that the Orioles have done that are similar along these lines. In any case...



In 2003 they signed Kevin Millar after claiming him on waivers in what the Marlins thought was a formality in the process of selling him to Japan.

The Red Sox broke an unwritten rule in that they blocked a deal to Japan with a waiver claim. Epstein did this when he was only months into his job, and has not done it since.



They ignored Mark Bellhorn's gargantuan K rate and got a .373 OBP out of him.

Fueled largely by a 368 BABIP, don't you think?

I don't think they predicted a 368 BABIP. I don't think anyone could possibly predict a BABIP that absurdly high.

Bad example, IMO.



They signed David Oritz after he'd been non-tendered by the Twins and made him an everyday player.


They gave a guy who had just had two years of over 700 AB's in which his OBP was 324 and 339 respectively an everyday job, a decision which this board would bemoan. He also had done very poorly hitting LHP.

Ortiz describes himself of having an awakening of sorts between his time in Minnesota and Boston. I have heard of him talking about increasing his work ethic. Increasing of work ethic and a change of scenery is something that is valued more by the "old school" guys, as well.

Bad example, IMO.



They traded Bronson Arroyo after a year where his K rate fell to an unacceptable level (yes, it rebounded in the NL) but his W/L record was still good.

They traded Bronson Arroyo because they had 6 Starting Pitchers.

They traded for Wily Mo Pena. A low OBP guy with crappy defense.

The trade didn't work out for them.

I don't see how this is a good example.


They signed David Wells despite the fact he was 42 and overweight, and got above-average performance for $4M.

They gave an aging pitcher who had just pitched well in an extreme pitcher's park in the NL behind a very good defense (4 HUGE No-No's on this board) a 2 year contract. I think there would be blood on this board if the Orioles made such a move.

And no, they gave him $8M and over the two years he was there, they got below average production cumulative.




They've gotten five good years out of Mike "the choking closer" Timlin.

The common thought is that the closing role is no different than anything else and that you can use a "fallen closer" in the 9th inning is a market inneffieciency.

Doing the very stereotypical move of taking a guy who wasn't good in the closing role and making him a mid-reliever/set-up like he's been for the rest of his career is hardly remarkable. The Orioles did this in 2006 with LaTroy Hawkins. There are trillions of other examples.

Of all the batters Timlin's faced in his years with the Red Sox, only 20% of the batters he's faced have been in the 9th inning.

The Red Sox have typically put him in the 9th inning only to rest Papelbon or Foulke or when the game is out of hand.

They just so happen to have gotten a guy that's shown longetivity. "Overvaluing" the closer role (something I would disagree with) is something that would once again not be agreed upon with the people of this board.


Instead of paying $millions for a tried and tested closer, they made one out of Jonathan Papelbon.

The Red Sox paid $18.75 M to Keith Foulke who WAS a tried and tested closer.

They only gave the job to Jonathan Papelbon, their best prospect at the time, when Foulke's arm fell off.


They let Johnny Damon go to the rival Yanks and collected the draft picks because his performance didn't merit the price of resigning him. They've also done the sign-and-let-go-for-picks thing with other players, like Mark Loretta.

They offered the aging Johnny Damon a 4 year, $40 M contract to remain in Boston. That would not be approved on this board. Just because they didn't go all the way to $52 M doesn't mean they had the "right" thought process going.

In spite of playing 155 games, Mark Loretta only had a 2.0 WARP1 all of 2006. Just because the Red Sox weren't willing to give him any more money because he sucked isn't a reason to pat them on the back for happening to get compensatory picks.

[Lucky Jim]

If you're looking at examples from 2003, you could probably single out 10 or so things that the Orioles have done that are similar along these lines. In any case...

The Red Sox broke an unwritten rule in that they blocked a deal to Japan with a waiver claim. Epstein did this when he was only months into his job, and has not done it since.

Fueled largely by a 368 BABIP, don't you think?

I don't think they predicted a 368 BABIP. I don't think anyone could possibly predict a BABIP that absurdly high.

Bad example, IMO.

They gave a guy who had just had two years of over 700 AB's in which his OBP was 324 and 339 respectively an everyday job, a decision which this board would bemoan. He also had done very poorly hitting LHP.

Ortiz describes himself of having an awakening of sorts between his time in Minnesota and Boston. I have heard of him talking about increasing his work ethic. Increasing of work ethic and a change of scenery is something that is valued more by the "old school" guys, as well.

Bad example, IMO.

They traded Bronson Arroyo because they had 6 Starting Pitchers.

They traded for Wily Mo Pena. A low OBP guy with crappy defense.

The trade didn't work out for them.

I don't see how this is a good example.

They gave an aging pitcher who had just pitched well in an extreme pitcher's park in the NL behind a very good defense (4 HUGE No-No's on this board) a 2 year contract. I think there would be blood on this board if the Orioles made such a move.

And no, they gave him $8M and over the two years he was there, they got below average production cumulative.

The common thought is that the closing role is no different than anything else and that you can use a "fallen closer" in the 9th inning is a market inneffieciency.

Doing the very stereotypical move of taking a guy who wasn't good in the closing role and making him a mid-reliever/set-up like he's been for the rest of his career is hardly remarkable. The Orioles did this in 2006 with LaTroy Hawkins. There are trillions of other examples.

Of all the batters Timlin's faced in his years with the Red Sox, only 20% of the batters he's faced have been in the 9th inning.

The Red Sox have typically put him in the 9th inning only to rest Papelbon or Foulke or when the game is out of hand.

They just so happen to have gotten a guy that's shown longetivity. "Overvaluing" the closer role (something I would disagree with) is something that would once again not be agreed upon with the people of this board.

The Red Sox paid $18.75 M to Keith Foulke who WAS a tried and tested closer.

They only gave the job to Jonathan Papelbon, their best prospect at the time, when Foulke's arm fell off.

They offered the aging Johnny Damon a 4 year, $40 M contract to remain in Boston. That would not be approved on this board. Just because they didn't go all the way to $52 M doesn't mean they had the "right" thought process going.

In spite of playing 155 games, Mark Loretta only had a 2.0 WARP1 all of 2006. Just because the Red Sox weren't willing to give him any more money because he sucked isn't a reason to pat them on the back for happening to get compensatory picks.

Obviously, his OBP wasn't fueled by BABIP. Also, I think you're underselling the Wells deal - he gave them slightly better than league-average production over nearly 200 innings. That's a pretty good $4 million (compare the Benson, for instance.) Finally, the Damon example is difficult to determine, one way or the other. Obviously they had to offer something (I'd think) to someone who'd been an integral part of the WS "event." That they offered enough not to offend but not enough to sign might be a sign of aforementioned savviness.

I'm not sure how the waiver issue is so problematic, either. Teams block on the waiver wire all the time. Perhaps this hasn't happened since because we don't trade guys to Japan all that often? Or do you mean no one's claimed someone off the waiver since Millar?

As for Ortiz, at least one of his prior two years with the Twins was skewed by a low BA derived from an abnormally low BABIP. His ISO was terrific. They may have hoped Pena would be the same kind story. They were wrong.

[DrungoHazewood]

If you're looking at examples from 2003, you could probably single out 10 or so things that the Orioles have done that are similar along these lines. In any case...(lots of stuff)

I'm not sure how this got turned into a debate over the merits of Theo Epstein.

I just want the Orioles to make good decisions, and I happen to think the Red Sox have generally made better decisions than the O's over the last while. I don't think that's particularly controversial.

[Lucky Jim]

I'm not sure how this got turned into a debate over the merits of Theo Epstein.

I just want the Orioles to make good decisions, and I happen to think the Red Sox have generally made better decisions than the O's over the last while. I don't think that's particularly controversial.

No. And you provided some interesting examples. Thanks.

The O's have made some poor decisions, to be sure. The real point of contention is just how much we care about those marginal decisions like Trachsel.

Obviously, a maket-approach to the season wouldn't care if Trachsel started opening day or not. If he's in the rotation, he's in the rotation.

The bigger question is, what would be the long-term gain of a marginal improvment over Trachsel - like Fogg. And what would be the cost.

I'm not sure any of us have successfully pinned it down.

[DrungoHazewood]

What do you think of the trade for Beckett/Lowell?

Defensible at the time, and it's actually worked out fairly well for them, but I don't think in the ways they imagined. Or maybe I'm wrong, maybe they saw some flaw or anomaly in Lowell's performance that they expected to rebound, while playing along with the idea that he was done and they'd just be willing to eat salary to get Beckett.

[Lucky Jim]

Defensible at the time, and it's actually worked out fairly well for them, but I don't think in the ways they imagined. Or maybe I'm wrong, maybe they saw some flaw or anomaly in Lowell's performance that they expected to rebound, while playing along with the idea that he was done and they'd just be willing to eat salary to get Beckett.

Yeah, my take, too. But they got exceptionally lucky with Lowell's exceptionally lucky 2007.

Certainly mitigates the loss of Ramirez.

[Sports Guy]

Yeah, my take, too. But they got exceptionally lucky with Lowell's exceptionally lucky 2007.

Certainly mitigates the loss of Ramirez.

Lowell had one awful year and the Marlins couldn't wait to dump him.

The Red Sox overpaid to keep Lowell in Boston but he still should give them an 800ish OPS(give or take) and GG defense for a few years.

[TommyD4207]

Obviously, his OBP wasn't fueled by BABIP.

Why not? When nearly 37% of what you hit is dropping in for a hit, that definitely helps your OBP.

The following year he walked just about the same amount (per capita) but his BABIP came back down to earth to a normal level and his OPS and OBP fell off the map.

Why in the world is his OBP not fueled by his absurdly high BABIP?!





Also, I think you're underselling the Wells deal - he gave them slightly better than league-average production over nearly 200 innings. That's a pretty good $4 million (compare the Benson, for instance.)

The following year when they paid him $4M he stunk. He gave them 101 ERA+ production his first year and then 95 the next year.



Finally, the Damon example is difficult to determine, one way or the other. Obviously they had to offer something (I'd think) to someone who'd been an integral part of the WS "event." That they offered enough not to offend but not enough to sign might be a sign of aforementioned savviness.

That's possible, I suppose. I wouldn't assume it, though.


I'm not sure how the waiver issue is so problematic, either. Teams block on the waiver wire all the time. Perhaps this hasn't happened since because we don't trade guys to Japan all that often? Or do you mean no one's claimed someone off the waiver since Millar?

It's an issue of whether to do it with players moving to Japan. I remember there being an uproar of sorts over Millar getting claimed by Boston.

[Lucky Jim]

Lowell had one awful year and the Marlins couldn't wait to dump him.

The Red Sox overpaid to keep Lowell in Boston but he still should give them an 800ish OPS(give or take) and GG defense for a few years.

We'll see. He'll be 34 this year. Even outside of 2005, his ISO has diminished each year. And his .342 BABIP last year is far higher than normal for him, and inflated his OBP.

I'm not sure what he'll give them, but I wouldn't have re-signed him if there were alternatives. I'm not assuming there were.

[TommyD4207]

We'll see. He'll be 34 this year. Even outside of 2005, his ISO has diminished each year. And his .342 BABIP last year is far higher than normal for him, and inflated his OBP.

I'm not sure what he'll give them, but I wouldn't have re-signed him if there were alternatives. I'm not assuming there were.

How come Lowell's OPS is helped by his 342 BABIP but Loretta's even higher BABIP didn't help his OBP?!!?!

[Lucky Jim]

Why not? When nearly 37% of what you hit is dropping in for a hit, that definitely helps your OBP.

The following year he walked just about the same amount (per capita) but his BABIP came back down to earth to a normal level and his OPS and OBP fell off the map.

Why in the world is his OBP not fueled by his absurdly high BABIP?!


Nope, you're right. I didn't think it through. Multi-tasking is a liability.

How many players have been sold to Japan since Millar? Were they of Millar's quality? If not, the fact that it hasn't happened since might not be all that relevant.

As for Wells, he gave them slightly (slightly) above average production in his first year and slightly below in his second. But his second year was only 8 starts. I mean...8 starts? Basically, they got league-average production from him.

As for the Damon issue: you don't have to assume it. All you need to do is acknowledge that they didn't re-sign him. Which was a good call.

[TommyD4207]

No. And you provided some interesting examples. Thanks.

To recap, these examples include:

1. Breaking an unwritten rule about claiming players that have been sold to Japan. One that is simply not really done.

2. Getting a 373 OBP out of a guy who got outrageously lucky.

3. Signing a guy who just happened to have an awakening and his stats exploded. Epstein got lucky there, statistically-speaking. If his scouts said otherwise, that's different. That's not saber though.

4. Trading a solid pitcher for a low OBP, crappy fielding OF.

5. Signing a very old SP that gave them essentially average production.

6. Doing a very sterotypical move in taking a fallen closer and making him a mid-relief pitcher/set-up man.

7. Paying millions and millions to a closer and making the closer role in giving your highest touted prospect the job.

8. Offering an aging CFer 4/$40.

[TommyD4207]

Nope, you're right. I didn't think it through. Multi-tasking is a liability.

Just checking, you're a smart poster, I figured you were busy.


How many players have been sold to Japan since Millar? Were they of Millar's quality? If not, the fact that it hasn't happened since might not be all that relevant.


That, I'd have to do some more research on. I just remember that the move was completely unfounded.


As for Wells, he gave them slightly (slightly) above average production in his first year and slightly below in his second. But his second year was only 8 starts. I mean...8 starts? Basically, they got league-average production from him.

Fine, but getting league average production for $8M and a distraction in the clubhouse that was David Wells is hardly what I would consider a good move.


As for the Damon issue: you don't have to assume it. All you need to do is acknowledge that they didn't re-sign him. Which was a good call.

If the Orioles offered Trachsel Carlos Lee's contract but the Royals offered him A-Rod's and he signed with the Royals, would you say the Orioles made a good move? Hyperbole, I know, but the point stands.

[Lucky Jim]

To recap, these examples include:

1. Breaking an unwritten rule about claiming players that have been sold to Japan. One that is simply not really done.

2. Getting a 373 OBP out of a guy who got outrageously lucky.

3. Signing a guy who just happened to have an awakening and his stats exploded. Epstein got lucky there, statistically-speaking. If his scouts said otherwise, that's different. That's not saber though.

4. Trading a solid pitcher for a low OBP, crappy fielding OF.

5. Signing a very old SP that gave them essentially average production.

6. Doing a very sterotypical move in taking a fallen closer and making him a mid-relief pitcher/set-up man.

7. Paying millions and millions to a closer and making the closer role in giving your highest touted prospect the job.

8. Offering an aging CFer 4/$40.

Look, I agree, they've made some bad moves. But Bellhorn having a lucky year doesn't mean that they didn't make a good move bringing him in. He was at a discount due to his abysmal prior year, but had shown pop and discipline for the Cubs the year before. Not a bad move at all. And they did ignore the K-rates.

Ortiz was a good grab - because they got him for essentially nothing, no? Even if they projected him to be Wily Mo Pena, his power was enough to warrant that contract. It was a good move, no matter how you look at it.

Moving Arroyo wasn't a mistake, though moving him for Pena may have been. That said, all I asked Drungo for were example of how the Sox used statistics/inefficiencies to make decisions. Obviously, they had an idea about Arroyo (a good one, as he's been a bit lucky in the NL) and an idea about Pena (a bad one).

[Lucky Jim]

Just checking, you're a smart poster, I figured you were busy.

That, I'd have to do some more research on. I just remember that the move was completely unfounded.

Fine, but getting league average production for $8M and a distraction in the clubhouse that was David Wells is hardly what I would consider a good move.

If the Orioles offered Trachsel Carlos Lee's contract but the Royals offered him A-Rod's and he signed with the Royals, would you say the Orioles made a good move? Hyperbole, I know, but the point stands.

Frankly, the bolded part is irrelevant, I think. My point was only the team had a finite value that they placed on Damon, in part influenced (likely) by his contribution to a historic team. But they didn't let sentimentality get in the way - and they didn't end up overspending.

As for the Wells-thing, I don't know how much stock to put into the "distraction" thing. Once we get into intangibles, the discussion gets murky.

I agree with a lot of your points. Many moves were made that would result in the skewering of the Orioles FO. But, and this is an important consideration, the choices a team makes when they're on the verge of success can be very very different than those on a loser. Overpaying for marginal improvment if that improvement puts you in the playoffs is understandable. I'm not saying that's what the Sox have done. Just that we need to be sure we acknowledge that.

[TommyD4207]

Look, I agree, they've made some bad moves. But Bellhorn having a lucky year doesn't mean that they didn't make a good move bringing him in. He was at a discount due to his abysmal prior year, but had shown pop and discipline for the Cubs the year before. Not a bad move at all. And they did ignore the K-rates.

A lot of the pop that Bellhorn showed was, once again, a product of being lucky. He had a 21% HR/FB ratio. That means that for every 5 fly balls he hit, one of them was out of the park. For his career, he has 12.9%, which is actually coincidentally what he had in Boston in 2004.


Ortiz was a good grab - because they got him for essentially nothing, no? Even if they projected him to be Wily Mo Pena, his power was enough to warrant that contract. It was a good move, no matter how you look at it.

Ortiz was a good grab, no questions asked. They still got more lucky than they should have, statistically-wise. Whether they saw something in his game that they refined via coaching, that's different and seperate from statistical analysis being done in order to see his value as a superstar.

It was an OK move, giving him an everyday job probably would've gotten the Orioles hammered on here, however.





Moving Arroyo wasn't a mistake, though moving him for Pena may have been. That said, all I asked Drungo for were example of how the Sox used statistics/inefficiencies to make decisions. Obviously, they had an idea about Arroyo (a good one, as he's been a bit lucky in the NL) and an idea about Pena (a bad one).


Arroyo has been lucky, but bare in mind, he's also been pitching in an absolute bandbox in Cincinatti. I also don't think the reason they traded Arroyo was because of his K rate, considering they had very recently given him an extension, Pena became an offer that they were very excited about. Pena, with his low OBP makes stat-heads cringe. He makes me cringe.

[TommyD4207]

Frankly, the bolded part is irrelevant, I think. My point was only the team had a finite value that they placed on Damon, in part influenced (likely) by his contribution to a historic team. But they didn't let sentimentality get in the way - and they didn't end up overspending.

MY point is that they made an offer, a still overpriced one that would not have worked out well for them. In my opinion, they weren't necessarily genius in letting him walk.


As for the Wells-thing, I don't know how much stock to put into the "distraction" thing. Once we get into intangibles, the discussion gets murky.

Fine, let's not hone in on one thing though.


I agree with a lot of your points. Many moves were made that would result in the skewering of the Orioles FO. But, and this is an important consideration, the choices a team makes when they're on the verge of success can be very very different than those on a loser. Overpaying for marginal improvment if that improvement puts you in the playoffs is understandable. I'm not saying that's what the Sox have done. Just that we need to be sure we acknowledge that.

If the ball bounces another way, the Orioles might have been doing a lot better. To say that the Red Sox have a FO that mirrors Drungo's philosophies is a bit irresponsible and to insinuate that they wouldn't make Steve Trachsel their Opening Day starter is also short-sighted.

[DrungoHazewood]

If the ball bounces another way, the Orioles might have been doing a lot better. To say that the Red Sox have a FO that mirrors Drungo's philosophies is a bit irresponsible and to insinuate that they wouldn't make Steve Trachsel their Opening Day starter is also short-sighted.

I'm fairly confident in saying that Theo Epstein would never have signed Steve Trachsel in the first place.

[TommyD4207]

I'm fairly confident in saying that Theo Epstein would never have signed Steve Trachsel in the first place.

*sigh*

*shakes head and walks away*

[LookitsPuck]

*sigh*

*shakes head and walks away*

Are you comparing Trachsel to that of David Wells?

[vatech1994]

I wasn't being sarcastic so much as trying to echo the sentiments of those who think it's a good idea to have a long-time veteran starting opening day, without regard to his chances of success.

Ok, yea, I was probably a little sarcastic.

I don't think anyone has characterized as a "good" idea. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm simply not going to lose my mind criticizing what if effectively one game in a rebuilding season.

To be quite honest, I don't believe we have a pitcher on our staff who is likely to compete favorably with another team's #1 pitcher. I'd much rather "throw" game one and line up our best pitcher (whoever that is) in game two rather than lose 4-1 or 5-2 in game one. It probably isn't that simple and I'm not trying to make it that simple, but the position that most of us who are "defending" the logic have taken isn't as mindnumbingly simplistic and stupid as you're making it out to be either.

[LookitsPuck]

I guess I look at OD in the traditional sense, and I'm not a traditional person. Your best starter should be out there, and Trachsel is NOT our best starter.

[TommyD4207]

Are you comparing Trachsel to that of David Wells?

What in this thread could possibly have lead you to that conclusion?

[RShack]

*sigh*

*shakes head and walks away*
You did a great job, your core point was correct, and you backed it up quite well.
The only flaw was expecting others to acknowledge these things.
Satisfaction comes from within, Grasshopper ;-)

[Herbie]

You did a great job, your core point was correct, and you backed it up quite well.
The only flaw was expecting others to acknowledge these things.
Satisfaction comes from within, Grasshopper ;-)

What core point? That all teams make mistakes? True enough.
The O's make more, also true.
I agree 100% that Epstein would never have signed Traschel in the first place - so to try to argue he'd start him opening day is pointless.

The Red Sox and Orioles are in such vastly different places that the moves they make have to viewed in context. The Red Sox are in the hunt every year and therefore have something to gain from filling holes with players who provide a level of certainty. The O's (though they didn't seem to know it till recently) are so far out of contending that they should be more open to taking risks - they've very little to lose.

Going with Trax on opening day or any other is a safe, risk averse play. A bad play for a bad team.

Bill James once said about Enos Cabell, choose your leaders carfully. Make sure they will lead you where you want to go. Having a bad pitcher as your example is asking for trouble. Do we really want the other pitchers nibbling and throwing junk like Trax? I hope not! Even accepting that Trax has a skill and not just luck getting him by it is a skill that appears to be unique to him. So what is he teaching exactly? How to show up on time?

[TommyD4207]

What core point? That all teams make mistakes? True enough.
The O's make more, also true.
I agree 100% that Epstein would never have signed Traschel in the first place - so to try to argue he'd start him opening day is pointless.

The Red Sox and Orioles are in such vastly different places that the moves they make have to viewed in context. The Red Sox are in the hunt every year and therefore have something to gain from filling holes with players who provide a level of certainty. The O's (though they didn't seem to know it till recently) are so far out of contending that they should be more open to taking risks - they've very little to lose.

Going with Trax on opening day or any other is a safe, risk averse play. A bad play for a bad team.

Bill James once said about Enos Cabell, choose your leaders carfully. Make sure they will lead you where you want to go. Having a bad pitcher as your example is asking for trouble. Do we really want the other pitchers nibbling and throwing junk like Trax? I hope not! Even accepting that Trax has a skill and not just luck getting him by it is a skill that appears to be unique to him. So what is he teaching exactly? How to show up on time?

This whole point has been if Theo Epstein was dropped into the place Andy MacPhail was. Anything that Jim Duquette/Jim Beattie has done is irrelevant in my point. As I've said, if Epstein were dropped in this situation, I think he probably would have played his cards fairly similar.

[Herbie]

This whole point has been if Theo Epstein was dropped into the place Andy MacPhail was. Anything that Jim Duquette/Jim Beattie has done is irrelevant in my point. As I've said, if Epstein were dropped in this situation, I think he probably would have played his cards fairly similar.

I understand, I guess I just disagree. I just can't imagine any situation where Epstein would sign Traschel.

[DrungoHazewood]

What core point? That all teams make mistakes? True enough.
The O's make more, also true.
I agree 100% that Epstein would never have signed Traschel in the first place - so to try to argue he'd start him opening day is pointless.

The Red Sox and Orioles are in such vastly different places that the moves they make have to viewed in context. The Red Sox are in the hunt every year and therefore have something to gain from filling holes with players who provide a level of certainty. The O's (though they didn't seem to know it till recently) are so far out of contending that they should be more open to taking risks - they've very little to lose.

Going with Trax on opening day or any other is a safe, risk averse play. A bad play for a bad team.

Bill James once said about Enos Cabell, choose your leaders carfully. Make sure they will lead you where you want to go. Having a bad pitcher as your example is asking for trouble. Do we really want the other pitchers nibbling and throwing junk like Trax? I hope not! Even accepting that Trax has a skill and not just luck getting him by it is a skill that appears to be unique to him. So what is he teaching exactly? How to show up on time?

Apparently we're being asked to figure out what Theo would do if he'd been dropped into the O's job after Trachsel was signed.

My take on that is that Theo would have Trachsel buried in the pen, like Joel Pineiro last year. And if he failed there he would have been sent packing for a PTBNL. Like Joel Pineiro last year.

[Frobby]

Apparently we're being asked to figure out what Theo would do if he'd been dropped into the O's job after Trachsel was signed.

My take on that is that Theo would have Trachsel buried in the pen, like Joel Pineiro last year. And if he failed there he would have been sent packing for a PTBNL. Like Joel Pineiro last year.

Was Piniero signed before Epstein re-upped? In any event, its nice that the Red Sox can afford to spend $4 mm on a pitcher whose previous two seasons resulted in ERAs of 5.62 and 6.36 and whose ERA had gotten substantially worse for 5 seasons in a row, and then bury that pitcher in the bullpen. And its nice that they have a rotation that stayed healthy enough to make 142 starts, throw 880 innings to an ERA of 4.24. That makes a decision about what to do with Pineiro once you have him relatively easy.

The O's have one returning starter who pitched more than 50 innings and had an ERA better than Trachsel's. Every rotation candidate they have combined doesn't make as much as Josh Beckett. They don't have a single guy who makes as much as Piniero made last year.

The choices Andy MacPhail has simply are not the same as the choices Theo Epstein has right now. Would Theo make different choices if he were the O's GM? Maybe, even probably, but I'm not sure they'd turn out better.

[Maverick2143]

What core point? That all teams make mistakes? True enough.
The O's make more, also true.
I agree 100% that Epstein would never have signed Traschel in the first place - so to try to argue he'd start him opening day is pointless.

The Red Sox and Orioles are in such vastly different places that the moves they make have to viewed in context. The Red Sox are in the hunt every year and therefore have something to gain from filling holes with players who provide a level of certainty. The O's (though they didn't seem to know it till recently) are so far out of contending that they should be more open to taking risks - they've very little to lose.

Going with Trax on opening day or any other is a safe, risk averse play. A bad play for a bad team.

Bill James once said about Enos Cabell, choose your leaders carfully. Make sure they will lead you where you want to go. Having a bad pitcher as your example is asking for trouble. Do we really want the other pitchers nibbling and throwing junk like Trax? I hope not! Even accepting that Trax has a skill and not just luck getting him by it is a skill that appears to be unique to him. So what is he teaching exactly? How to show up on time?

I wouldn't go that far. The guy has been in the Majors for 14 years and has a career ERA of 4.32. I'd say his career has been built on a little more than luck and he has alot more knowledge to share than you are giving him credit for.

That said I hope Penn, Liz, Olson force the issue and he is gone by June 1st.

[66-70-83-??]

I understand, I guess I just disagree. I just can't imagine any situation where Epstein would sign Traschel.

If Theo was the GM in Baltimore, like Flanny/Duq etc- he would have been working from a different script.

Like the previous GM's, he would have had a lame team, lame farm system, and a whole lot of baggage inherited largely due to the actions of his micro-managing, meddling owner. One consequence of that is other GM's and agents not bothering to return phone calls to a GM with limited decision making authority.

As the O's GM, Theo wouldn't have the pick of the litter of the FA class. He would have to settle often for his 3rd, 4th, or 5th pick and probably overpay to boot!

The player transactions don't happen in a vacuum. It takes two to tango. And agents/players/GM carry around their preconcieved notions (right or wrong) about other teams FO.

In Boston, though, Theo inherited a very good team and the 2nd highest budget in MLB to work with.

It is hard to play "what if". But, it is safe to say Theo would have had a much different environment in Baltimore and much different results.

[Herbie]

If Theo was the GM in Baltimore, like Flanny/Duq etc- he would have been working from a different script.

Like the previous GM's, he would have had a lame team, lame farm system, and a whole lot of baggage inherited largely due to the actions of his micro-managing, meddling owner. One consequence of that is other GM's and agents not bothering to return phone calls to a GM with limited decision making authority.

As the O's GM, Theo wouldn't have the pick of the litter of the FA class. He would have to settle often for his 3rd, 4th, or 5th pick and probably overpay to boot!

The player transactions don't happen in a vacuum. It takes two to tango. And agents/players/GM carry around their preconcieved notions (right or wrong) about other teams FO.

In Boston, though, Theo inherited a very good team and the 2nd highest budget in MLB to work with.

It is hard to play "what if". But, it is safe to say Theo would have had a much different environment in Baltimore and much different results.

I agree 100%. No way anyone wins 2 world series with the mess the O's have been.
I'm not even trying to say that Theo would do better than McPhail as the guy in charge of the O's. I'm just saying that Theo seems more open to risks and new ideas and - in my opinion - would never sign the current version of Steve Traschel.

[Herbie]

Was Piniero signed before Epstein re-upped? In any event, its nice that the Red Sox can afford to spend $4 mm on a pitcher whose previous two seasons resulted in ERAs of 5.62 and 6.36 and whose ERA had gotten substantially worse for 5 seasons in a row, and then bury that pitcher in the bullpen. And its nice that they have a rotation that stayed healthy enough to make 142 starts, throw 880 innings to an ERA of 4.24. That makes a decision about what to do with Pineiro once you have him relatively easy.

The O's have one returning starter who pitched more than 50 innings and had an ERA better than Trachsel's. Every rotation candidate they have combined doesn't make as much as Josh Beckett. They don't have a single guy who makes as much as Piniero made last year.

The choices Andy MacPhail has simply are not the same as the choices Theo Epstein has right now. Would Theo make different choices if he were the O's GM? Maybe, even probably, but I'm not sure they'd turn out better.

I think Piniero was signed for the bullpen all along - because the scouts thought he could be turned into a closer. Once Papelbon was headed back to that role Piniero was not needed.
It's true that the O's don't have the luxury of trying experiments for $4 million and then casting them aside when they don't work. What that says to me is that they need to be smarter and be willing to roll the dice, take some calculated risks. In bringing in Trax and the probable make-up of the roster they seem to be going safe. As a fan I want more - I want hope. Trax gives me none.

[JTrea81]

Having a bad pitcher as your example is asking for trouble. Do we really want the other pitchers nibbling and throwing junk like Trax? I hope not! Even accepting that Trax has a skill and not just luck getting him by it is a skill that appears to be unique to him. So what is he teaching exactly? How to show up on time?


"One of the other things I really like is his competitiveness and his work ethic," said Perlozzo. "If the guys watch him prepare for a ballgame, they'd learn something from him. He's very well prepared, very intense, very into the game. He doesn't have what you'd call great stuff, but he studies everybody and knows how to pitch, and that should be something they should all learn something from."
...

"One of the things is his preparation," said Guthrie. "To see him watching the games closely when he's not pitching, he really goes through the lineup, figures out how he wants to attack it. It's almost like that's helped me. I don't have to do as much as him because I follow him. I'm almost able to take advantage of his preparation by watching the way he pitches the day before me. You respect that."

http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070613&content_id=2023677&vkey=mlbpa_news&fext=.jsp

In other words, Trax can act like another pitching coach and teach strategy on how to get guys out...

[TommyD4207]

What core point? That all teams make mistakes? True enough.



Honestly, is that all you've gotten out of what I've said?

[Herbie]

http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070613&content_id=2023677&vkey=mlbpa_news&fext=.jsp

In other words, Trax can act like another pitching coach and teach strategy on how to get guys out...

I get that. I just think it would have more impact coming from a pitcher who actually can get people out. I don't think Trax is that guy anymore.
What it boils down to is this - they young pitchers, who aren't really that young, will be watching how Trax prepares to go out and get shelled. Hopefully they will learn what not to do and go out and do something else.

[Herbie]

Honestly, is that all you've gotten out of what I've said?

I guess that's the short version. What I think you are saying is that Theo would do some of the same things if he was in McPhails shoes. I don't disagree with that larger point. I do disagree that he would consider Trax for even a second. Am I missing something?

[Maverick2143]

I get that. I just think it would have more impact coming from a pitcher who actually can get people out. I don't think Trax is that guy anymore.
What it boils down to is this - they young pitchers, who aren't really that young, will be watching how Trax prepares to go out and get shelled. Hopefully they will learn what not to do and go out and do something else.

So because he no longer gets results, his preperation methods are flawed and therefore should not be taught? Again, this is a guy (who seems to be well respected) who as carved out a 14+ year career with only medicore at best talent. Guys like that only survive by being smarter than the average bear.

[Herbie]

So because he no longer gets results, his preperation methods are flawed and therefore should not be taught? Again, this is a guy (who seems to be well respected) who as carved out a 14+ year career with only medicore at best talent. Guys like that only survive by being smarter than the average bear.

I'm sure his preperation is great. I'm also sure that what he does on the mound is more important and what other's are more likely to pay attention to. What do they tell the "young pitchers?" Watch what he does before the game and close your eyes when he's on the mound?

Results matter. Choosing a mediocre talent as a leader is a mistake in any organization. The O's don't have a way-back machine so what Trax was 14 years ago is irrelevant. What he is today is back of the roatation filler, who walks too many, nibbles too much and works too slow. That's not the guy to lead anyone to better days.

[TommyD4207]

I guess that's the short version. What I think you are saying is that Theo would do some of the same things if he was in McPhails shoes. I don't disagree with that larger point. I do disagree that he would consider Trax for even a second. Am I missing something?

Guessed wrong, and no, in response to your earlier post, my core point wasn't that all teams make bad moves, either.

[Sports Guy]

Tommy...I read your original post in this thread about some sketchy moves by the Sox and I agree with your point in that post about who they are dropping, likely to keep, etc....

But I must have missed why you think Theo would sign Trax...So, what's the answer?

[TommyD4207]

Tommy...I read your original post in this thread about some sketchy moves by the Sox and I agree with your point in that post about who they are dropping, likely to keep, etc....

But I must have missed why you think Theo would sign Trax...So, what's the answer?

Well, it's not that easy. Basically, what it boils down to is Epstein has shown time and again that he will play to emotions and intangibles as opposed to sabermetrics. Now, don't get me wrong, he definitely employs sabermetrics.

What my point was was that Epstein's baseball ideology (yes, I think I might coining a term right now) is distant to that of Drungo's. It's actually quite similar to mine, which is why he's one of my favorite GM's. Terry Ryan was my favorite GM, now I suppose that "honor" belongs to Epstein. :D

What it comes down to is, Epstein probably wouldn't have signed Trachsel because he and Trachsel don't go back a ways. MacPhail and Trachsel do though. But as Epstein showed the willingness to give older guys a shot, as opposed to young guys such as:

-Jon Olerud
-JT Snow
-David Wells
-Doug Mirabelli
-Jason Varitek (signing him to a contract that would make everyone on here cringe)
-Carlos Baerga
-Rickey Henderson
-Tony Graffanino

And that's just right off the top of my head.

He's also ditched guys like BK Kim and Nomar and replaced them with guys who weren't as good, statistically speaking, but got them the hell out due to their attitude issues. Kim flicking off the Boston crowd and some of his teammates calling him the worst teammate they ever had sealed his fate. Nomar sitting down while everyone else was standing up during a tight game against the Yankees burns in every legit (I know, very few anymore) Red Sox fans' mind.

My point is, if Epstein was in a situation where he wasn't going to win that year and he had a guy like Trachsel he went back with a ways, then yeah, I think that he would sign a guy that would take on a leadership role in the clubhouse. I really do.

[Sports Guy]

Well, it's not that easy. Basically, what it boils down to is Epstein has shown time and again that he will play to emotions and intangibles as opposed to sabermetrics. Now, don't get me wrong, he definitely employs sabermetrics.

What my point was was that Epstein's baseball ideology (yes, I think I might coining a term right now) is distant to that of Drungo's. It's actually quite similar to mine, which is why he's one of my favorite GM's. Terry Ryan was my favorite GM, now I suppose that "honor" belongs to Epstein. :D

What it comes down to is, Epstein probably wouldn't have signed Trachsel because he and Trachsel don't go back a ways. MacPhail and Trachsel do though. But as Epstein showed the willingness to give older guys a shot, as opposed to young guys such as:

-Jon Olerud
-JT Snow
-David Wells
-Doug Mirabelli
-Jason Varitek (signing him to a contract that would make everyone on here cringe)
-Carlos Baerga
-Rickey Henderson
-Tony Graffanino

And that's just right off the top of my head.

He's also ditched guys like BK Kim and Nomar and replaced them with guys who weren't as good, statistically speaking, but got them the hell out due to their attitude issues. Kim flicking off the Boston crowd and some of his teammates calling him the worst teammate they ever had sealed his fate. Nomar sitting down while everyone else was standing up during a tight game against the Yankees burns in every legit (I know, very few anymore) Red Sox fans' mind.

My point is, if Epstein was in a situation where he wasn't going to win that year and he had a guy like Trachsel he went back with a ways, then yeah, I think that he would sign a guy that would take on a leadership role in the clubhouse. I really do.Ok, so really you have no basis to think Theo would sign Trax himself?

But haven't you gotten mad when people said he wouldn't sign him?

Where is your proof that he would actually get Trax done?

[Herbie]

Well, it's not that easy. Basically, what it boils down to is Epstein has shown time and again that he will play to emotions and intangibles as opposed to sabermetrics. Now, don't get me wrong, he definitely employs sabermetrics.

What my point was was that Epstein's baseball ideology (yes, I think I might coining a term right now) is distant to that of Drungo's. It's actually quite similar to mine, which is why he's one of my favorite GM's. Terry Ryan was my favorite GM, now I suppose that "honor" belongs to Epstein. :D

What it comes down to is, Epstein probably wouldn't have signed Trachsel because he and Trachsel don't go back a ways. MacPhail and Trachsel do though. But as Epstein showed the willingness to give older guys a shot, as opposed to young guys such as:

-Jon Olerud
-JT Snow
-David Wells
-Doug Mirabelli
-Jason Varitek (signing him to a contract that would make everyone on here cringe)
-Carlos Baerga
-Rickey Henderson
-Tony Graffanino

And that's just right off the top of my head.

He's also ditched guys like BK Kim and Nomar and replaced them with guys who weren't as good, statistically speaking, but got them the hell out due to their attitude issues. Kim flicking off the Boston crowd and some of his teammates calling him the worst teammate they ever had sealed his fate. Nomar sitting down while everyone else was standing up during a tight game against the Yankees burns in every legit (I know, very few anymore) Red Sox fans' mind.

My point is, if Epstein was in a situation where he wasn't going to win that year and he had a guy like Trachsel he went back with a ways, then yeah, I think that he would sign a guy that would take on a leadership role in the clubhouse. I really do.

I can see that and see where you are coming from. I have a pretty strong anti-Trax bias so that certainly colors my thinking.

I guess I just think of signing Trax as an old school move and Theo as new school so it's hard to see them together. No matter what shared history Theo has with somebody I don't believe he would sign a pitcher who walks more than he strikes out.

The older guys Theo brought in I think still fit into the saber mold - inexpensive (in red sox world) solutions to a specific problem or to fill a certain need. I don't think a number based evaluation has a bias against older players, just an understanding of the risks involved and weighing those risks against the cost/benefit.

Varitek's contract was a little nuts but was probably done more for the marketing department than anything else.

Where the O's are today I would like to see a front office that is bold and out there trying new things, rolling the dice and willing to crash and burn a little along the way. Theo strikes me as that kind of thinker whereas Trembley/McPhail are a little too safe for me. Probably all in my head - and probably just me really not wanting Trax on the team.

[TommyD4207]

Ok, so really you have no basis to think Theo would sign Trax himself?

But haven't you gotten mad when people said he wouldn't sign him?

Where is your proof that he would actually get Trax done?

My basis is that Theo has shown a soft side towards veterans when it was insinuated otherwise by Drungo. He has shown a willingness to put in players that have veteran leadership, as has been implied otherwise by many members of this board. Based off of that, I have opined that I think that if Epstein was in a situation where he surefire wasn't going to win (a situation he's never been in before, really) and that if he had a personal attachment to Trachsel and that many members of the team did as well, that he would have no problem giving him a minor league contract.

It is my opinion. This is you naturally acting like your opinion carries more weight because it's your opinion.

[TommyD4207]

I can see that and see where you are coming from. I have a pretty strong anti-Trax bias so that certainly colors my thinking.

I guess I just think of signing Trax as an old school move and Theo as new school so it's hard to see them together. No matter what shared history Theo has with somebody I don't believe he would sign a pitcher who walks more than he strikes out.

The older guys Theo brought in I think still fit into the saber mold - inexpensive (in red sox world) solutions to a specific problem or to fill a certain need. I don't think a number based evaluation has a bias against older players, just an understanding of the risks involved and weighing those risks against the cost/benefit.

Varitek's contract was a little nuts but was probably done more for the marketing department than anything else.

Where the O's are today I would like to see a front office that is bold and out there trying new things, rolling the dice and willing to crash and burn a little along the way. Theo strikes me as that kind of thinker whereas Trembley/McPhail are a little too safe for me. Probably all in my head - and probably just me really not wanting Trax on the team.

I guess I can see where you're coming from as well. If you tried to tell me that JR House would be signed by Epstein, then you'd probably get me reacting similar to the way you are right now. :D

I don't have time to do the calculations on the numbers of some of those guys, but I have a hard time believing that some of those guys had any value statistically speaking. Trading Nomar for a bunch of one year stopgaps that probably didn't even add up to the output that Nomar would give was a move done for chemistry, and has been stated as such on multiple occasions. I strongly disagree that Varitek was done for marketing, as if they were really interested in that, guys like Pedro and Johnny Damon would've been re-upped, guys that are possibly more popular amongst the FANS. Varitek, however, is most popular amongst his teammates, Captain he is, and I think the Red Sox overpaid for him knowing that. In fact, I distinctly remember hearing to that affect directly from Theo's mouth.

There's no distinct facts to prove either way. The only facts are that Theo has shown attachment/bias to veterans in the past. It's hard to gauge what his approach would be with a team like this. I would place a large sum of money that he'd bring in Trachsel if there was a strong opinion from the clubhouse/coaching staff, as it appears there was, however.

I definitely appreciate your open-mindedness and courtesy, however. It is a pleasure discussing this with you, as it was with Lucky Jim.

[RShack]

Ok, so really you have no basis to think Theo would sign Trax himself?

But haven't you gotten mad when people said he wouldn't sign him?

Where is your proof that he would actually get Trax done?
He has a very good basis for what he said, and he has repeated it a couple different times. All you need to do is read his posts.

As for having "proof", that's silly. You can't have proof about what a guy might do in a situation he's not in. The best you can do is infer based on his track record. Which is exactly what Tommy did.

[TommyD4207]

He has a very good basis for what he said, and he has repeated it a couple different times. All you need to do is read his posts.

As for having "proof", that's silly. You can't have proof about what a guy might do in a situation he's not in. The best you can do is infer based on his track record. Which is exactly what Tommy did.

Thanks man, that's exactly what I'm trying to say. I guess I couldn't quite say it that way, though. ;)

[Moose Milligan]

He has a very good basis for what he said, and he has repeated it a couple different times. All you need to do is read his posts.

As for having "proof", that's silly. You can't have proof about what a guy might do in a situation he's not in. The best you can do is infer based on his track record. Which is exactly what Tommy did.

Yeah...quoted for truth.

TommyD has done an excellent job of backing up his thoughts with examples of veteran players that the OH would go into a collective coronary about if the O's were to sign one.

Wasn't John Olerud retired when the Sox got him?

Theo's take seems to be a steady mix of veteran leadership and sabermetrics. And now that he has youngsters like Ellsbury and Bucholz, he's incorporating them, too.

[RShack]

I can see that and see where you are coming from. I have a pretty strong anti-Trax bias so that certainly colors my thinking.

I guess I just think of signing Trax as an old school move and Theo as new school so it's hard to see them together.
Well, this whole thing boils down to what you mean by "new school".

If by "new school", you mean looking the combination of (1) stats, (2) all the other other things that matter when judging a player, and (3) all the things that matter when constructing a team, and then making a judgment call case-by-case, then Theo is very much "new school". However, if by "new school" you mean just looking at #1 and either downplaying or completely ignoring both #2 and #3, then he's definitely not. Tommy was simply doing a very good job of demonstrating that Theo's version of "new school" doesn't mean what some people seem to think it does.

AFAIK, it's mainly fans on message boards who just go by #1 and largely blow off the other two factors. The actual job is way too hard for that, and most-or-all good GM's don't work that way. (Some people would claim that Billy Beane does, but I'm not so sure about that.) Trusting in stats is one thing, but using them to blow off the other things is something quite different. It gives fans an overly-simplified basis for their personal decisions, but baseball is way too complicated for that to work.

[DrungoHazewood]

Well, this whole thing boils down to what you mean by "new school".

If by "new school", you mean looking the combination of (1) stats, (2) all the other other things that matter when judging a player, and (3) all the things that matter when constructing a team, and then making a judgment call case-by-case, then Theo is very much "new school". However, if by "new school" you mean just looking at #1 and either downplaying or completely ignoring both #2 and #3, then he's definitely not. Tommy was simply doing a very good job of demonstrating that Theo's version of "new school" doesn't mean what some people seem to think it does.

AFAIK, it's mainly fans on message boards who just go by #1 and largely blow off the other two factors. The actual job is way too hard for that, and most-or-all good GM's don't work that way. (Some people would claim that Billy Beane does, but I'm not so sure about that.) Trusting in stats is one thing, but using them to blow off the other things is something quite different. It gives fans an overly-simplified basis for their personal decisions, but baseball is way too complicated for that to work.

IMO, pretty much the whole baseball world has moved on to the "beer and tacos" approach to the stats vs. other stuff debate. It's not an either/or choice, and almost no one who's taken seriously says it is.

[Herbie]

Well, this whole thing boils down to what you mean by "new school".

If by "new school", you mean looking the combination of (1) stats, (2) all the other other things that matter when judging a player, and (3) all the things that matter when constructing a team, and then making a judgment call case-by-case, then Theo is very much "new school". However, if by "new school" you mean just looking at #1 and either downplaying or completely ignoring both #2 and #3, then he's definitely not. Tommy was simply doing a very good job of demonstrating that Theo's version of "new school" doesn't mean what some people seem to think it does.

AFAIK, it's mainly fans on message boards who just go by #1 and largely blow off the other two factors. The actual job is way too hard for that, and most-or-all good GM's don't work that way. (Some people would claim that Billy Beane does, but I'm not so sure about that.) Trusting in stats is one thing, but using them to blow off the other things is something quite different. It gives fans an overly-simplified basis for their personal decisions, but baseball is way too complicated for that to work.

Baseball probably is more complicated than I think and is almost certainly less complicated than you think.
New school in the way I'm using it means a willingness to try new things and incorporate new ideas into team construction. Maybe what I really mean in new blended with open-minded.

As far 1 vs. 2 vs 3 is concerned to me it's a question of emphasis. I think McPhail/Trembley put too much emphasis on 2 & 3 and not enough on 1. It's a $200 million business - not such a bad idea to have a quantifiable basis for decisions. When they get to the point of intangibles being the difference between making the playoffs or going home then they should have the luxury of worrying about it. Until they get the base talent level up several notches committing resources to specialty relievers and veteran leaders is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic or taking orphans to ice cream when they've had no dinner.

Their whole approach to me is stuck in the past and has a very narrow focus. They are emphasizing the defense/fundementals thing to the exclusion of other factors. Resources should be allocated and players selected based on their whole skill set not on whether they fit with the philosophy - I think Theo does that. To me it's illogical in the extreme that a player can have a glove good enough to cover a suspect bat but can't have a bat good enough to cover a suspect glove. Somehow this seems to be their thinking - LH is good enough to be an Oriole but House and maybe Patterson are not?

In the end a team should be built to get to the playoffs any which way you can. Theo gets that - there are no style points. Trembley/McPhail don't seem, to me, to be so open in their thinking.