Jump to content

Frobby

Plus Member
  • Content Count

    54,736
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    440

Everything posted by Frobby

  1. Two reasons a two-year deal doesn't bother me: 1. Our best SS prospect in the minors is at least 2 years away, but may well be ready in 2 years (so I really don't want to be tying someone up for multiple years next offseason). 2. We already are looking at replacing Huff, Roberts and Mora next offseason, if not before. That's enough instability for one offseason.
  2. In his interview with Melewski, AM definitely seemed to indicate he'd have further discussions with Boras about Tex. He didn't think things would move that quickly, though.
  3. Hitters: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/fantasy/article/the-statistical-impact-of-switching-leagues-for-hitters/ Pitchers: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/fantasy/article/the-statistical-impact-of-switching-leagues-for-pitchers/ The author concludes that a pitcher switching from the AL to the NL would expect a drop in ERA of 0.41. Sounds about right to me.
  4. Then explain to me how Tampa just won the AL East. Do you not think they are positioned to compete for the next several years at least? Explain to me why, if Tampa can do it, any other team couldn't?
  5. I look at it this way: the Yankees will be paying CC $23 mm per year to try to win as many games as Mussina won for them last year for $11 mm. But seriously, does this hurt us? Yes, and when they sign a very strong no. 2 like Burnett or Lowe that's going to hurt us too. The only silver lining here is they are probably out of the Tex hunt. I look at it this way: there are many teams that have economic advantages over us, but there's only one team that can ALWAYS afford to spend more money on the player they most want than we can, and that's the Yankees. The Red Sox and Angels have big advantages over the Orioles, but if the O's decide that Tex is the once-a-decade free agent they can't miss out on, they can afford to compete with the Sox and Angels that one time. Back to the Yankees -- they are addressing their pitching, but they may not realize the extent to which their vaunted offense is beginning to crumble. Look at their runs in the "A-Rod era": 2004 897 runs 2005 886 runs 2006 930 runs 2007 968 runs 2008 789 runs Posada will be 37 this year; Jeter, Damon, and Matsui will be 35. Even A-Rod is 33 and may begin to slow down. Giambi and Abreu are gone and it's unclear who will replace them. So, even if the Yankees fix their pitching, they just aren't the team they were a few years ago.
  6. Well, I agree with SG that the amount of money we kicked in affects how well I like this trade. I'm still not clear whether it's $1.5 mm, $2 mm of $3 mm. The less it is, the better the trade was. That said, the key thing was to get Ramon out of here. Contrary to what wildcard said here, there is no way it would have been good to keep Ramon here until July. That would have created a very messy situation if we decided to bring Wieters up (and personally, I want him up sooner rather than later). And what would we have gotten in exchange? We already know - the equivalent of Adam Stern. I'd much rather get someone in here who undertands that his main job is to be Crash Davis and mentor the new stud on the block. That would never have been Ramon. Of course I'd never pay a guy like Freel $4 mm on his own, but that (plus what we kicked in) is the cost of ridding ourselves of a $9 mm obligation. Freel's useful, Turner could be starting at 2B in a year or could take over the utility job if BRob stays, and Waring is at least interesting.
  7. We aren't taking on $7 mm, we are saving $2 mm (less whatever we pay some other back-up C). We'll have a decent utility guy for the year who will bring hustle and energy to the team, and when the year is over, we'll still have two prospects, one of whom could be a solution at 2B if we lose Roberts (and there was really no answer to this within the organization before). Most importantly, we avoid a troublesome situation when Wieters is brought up, in contrast to the situation when Ramon was brought in while we still had Javy. So, I definitely say it's a good trade. SG, you have this way of suggesting that you could have done better, but I seriously doubt that. I think MacPhail shopped Ramon quite hard. Remember there are guys like Pudge and Varitek still out there for a team willing to pay a few bucks, who wouldn't cost the acquiring team anything in terms of talent. I commend MacPhail for resolving this situation early on and sending a strong signal where this team is heading in 2009.
  8. Well, I would have liked getting Heisey better, as was rumored earlier. However, Turner looks like a plausible candidate to replace BRob a year from now should he leave in free agency, and Waring seems to have some positives to go along with his negatives. Since he figures to play in Frederick, where do we put him, with Rowell already stationed at 3B?
  9. Yeah, that was a ridiculous thing to say. But if we don't get Burnett, I hope his price goes right through the roof.
  10. Great point -- stunning in it's perceptiveness I might say! It makes me feel better about whoever we might get in this deal.
  11. Hey, any team can win games when they have guys playing all nine positions. We're going to be so good we can win while only fielding seven players at a time!
  12. Absolutely -- 27 SBs, 2 CS last year. To me this guy looks like Matt Angle with a bit more power. Sickels rates him a C+ which would put him ahead of Angle and a few of our prospects in Sickels' top 20.
  13. Per John Sickels: We're cornering the market on 4th outfielders, it appears.
  14. So if he makes a bad play, I can scream "Christ!" without being struck by lightning? Sweet! Edit -- It's Chris. I guess I should have known that.
  15. Or at least, before we hear about the PTBNL in the Bradford deal.
  16. Sometimes, life's not fair. Is it fair that George Kell had to work in the offseason to make ends meet, while today some mediocre player who never made the all-star team has $25 million in his pocket? Is it fair that my son can't get into the same college I got into even though his grades are better and his board scores are comparable? That's life.
  17. I think you have to consider the position the Cubs are in. They are in "win now" mode, and just don't have time for on the job training. Pie is out of options so they can't bounce him to the minors if he struggles. He's much better off in a place like Baltimore that can afford to give him 400+ AB even if he yields only a 700-ish OPS like Jones did last year. This whole deal is about "win now" vs. "win later."
  18. This discussion brings up a more general point -- is the Hall of Fame too selective, or not selective enough? Personally, I'd prefer that it be a bit stricter, and the fact that some undeserving player was voted into the Hall in 1955 is not a good reason to induct an equivalent player now. And I could certainly make an argument that there shouldn't be a veteran's committee. Of course it's hard to say where the line should be drawn exactly, which is what makes it fun.
  19. Without speculating on whether this actually happens, if MacPhail pulls off Olson for Pie, Marquis and $4 mm, then his naysayers need to SHUT UP!
  20. Right. Olson was 24 last year, and he's had 33 major league starts, equivalent to a full season. Pie really has not had the chances Olson has had. If we trade for him, he needs to get ample playing time to show what he's got.
  21. I think I'd vote for Brandon Snyder and David Hernandez. Snyder I think is particularly underrated by the national pundits. Just look what he's done the last 13 months: Hawaii ------.378/.398/.544 Frederick --- .316/.358/.490 Arizona -----.349/.431/.667 When you consider that he was still pretty young for each of these leagues, to me he's reestablished himself as one of the better hitting prospects in the game. As to Hernandez, it seems like people focus on his shortcomings without giving enough credit for what he does well. I mean, all the guy has done is strike out batters wherever he pitches: 9.58 K/9 in Delmarva, 10.40 K/9 in Frederick, 10.60 K/9 in Bowie. People focus on the fact that his BB rate went way up last year, without crediting the fact that his BAA went way down, and he did a far better job pitching with men on base. I recognize that he'll need to improve some things if he wants to remain a starter, but it seems to me he has a great future as a reliever if he has to be moved to the pen. Who do you think deserves more attention from the national media who cover the minors?
  22. Frobby

    Brandon Snyder

    Not a bad comp. I see two major differences. First, Conine had a brief cup of coffee at age 24 and only played 37 major league games total before age 27. I think there's a chance Snyder gets a September call-up next year at age 22, and if not, I certainly hope to see him at some point the following year at age 23, and on the team for good by age 24. Second, I think Snyder can do better than Conine's career ISO of .158. Conine had 4 seasons with 30+ doubles, but I think Snyder will do that routinely and in fact top 40 doubles pretty regularly.
  23. You know why I like him? Because he throws strikes, works fast and doesn't walk guys. I'm looking at some of his games last year: 8 IP 96 pitches 8 IP 96 pitches 7 IP 93 pitches 9 IP 98 pitches 7 IP 94 pitches I love games like those. Not to say he didn't have his clunkers, but he's pretty pitch-efficient.
  24. There is no guarantee all four of those guys are ready to be major league starters by opening day 2010, and even if they are, you want them to force the issue, not just be handed a slot because we have no alternatives. It would be sweet if they all were ready, I'll admit.
×
×
  • Create New...