Some stuff

[davearm]

Well finally I know what a troll is. And people think I'm one.

Not trolling. I stand by everything I've said up until that obvious lighthearted attempt to end this rather hopeless discussion on a humorous note.

[TyCobb]

Not trolling. I stand by everything I've said up until that obvious lighthearted attempt to end this rather hopeless discussion on a humorous note.

Santana is the only LHP better than Bedard. IMO Bedard will have a much better season than Santana in the up coming years.

[24fps]

I question the offensive issues of the Dodgers....I think they just need to watch some of their young guys get older and more mature.

Really, the Dodgers should be in good shape all around but they do have injury concerns in their staff...Penny has always had injury woes and Schmidt has his issues.

Maybe, just maybe, they are concerned by this???(just speculating here)

You could very well be right about this, but you know the old saying about generals always preparing to fight the last war....

Given their offensive shortcomings last year - especially during September - I think that last year's struggles are significantly affecting the Dodgers' preparations this off season. Perhaps more than is necessary

There are a lot of "ifs' implied in your opening sentence. IF Kent stays healthy (unlike last year), IF Nomar stays healthy and returns to (at least) 2006 form (unlike last year), IF Furcal stays healthy all season (unlike last year), IF Kemp, Martin and Loney continue to progress and not regress, IF LaRoche can contribute up to his expected potential, and IF Jones's 2007 season was a fluke and not a harbinger of his future then the Dodgers can relax about their offense.

I, for one, think they are correct to be a little concerned about all of those things coming together at the same time and sustaining over the course of a season.

Consistent, effective pitching overcomes a lot of offensive shortcomings, so I think paying a good price for Bedard makes sense for the Dodgers, but I do also understand their wanting to add another bat or two, and their reluctance to part with any offense at all at the ML level for 2008.

[Rockbird]

Just an FYI someone mentioned this to me.

Loo retired at the beginning of 07, didnt show up for spring training and retired to be with his family.

Is there any doubt that the Syd Thrift would have been sold that this guy is a top prospect and traded for this guy?

[owl]

I don't want to start up the debate again if it's already dead but people like to discredit any season that shows significant improvement from career numbers - and without really looking deeper into it. Bedard has improved every year he's been in the league and it's all easily attributable. Just some quick and dirty notes:

The O's went from one of the worst defenses in 04-06 to top 10 in defensive efficiency in 2007. What's this do? Well, it significantly improved his BABIP which resulted in less hits and a much better percentage of runners left on base. For the first time, his defense wasn't hurting him. His opponent's batting average against went from .261 in '06 to .214 in '07 -- and essentially all of that is improved defense and more strikeouts.

Consistency, stamina, confidence. Marked improvement in how he works the plate against righties and worked significantly better deeper into his pitch counts than he had before. He was consistently better working from behind in the count and a leader in achieving the K after 2 strikes on the batter - something like 50% better than he was in 2006. That's huge; and something he showed an ability to induce. I don't see how anyone can consider that sort of improvement to be luck.

One point for contention might be whether turning more linedrives into flyball outs is ability or chance but it's often enough been a regular occurrence in pitchers, especially lefties, of the same vein so there's definitely credence to it being a product of his improved pitches and selection. He might have "2-3 pitches" but he's throwing three or four different fastballs and his breaking ball in any count. In any event, there's some balance anyway since this inevitably led/leads to more homeruns as well.

Also, since there's talk of how his division effects the numbers and what a move to the NL may do: in the small sample we have, 70 innings, Bedard has a 1.93 ERA, 1.06 WHIP and 87 strikeouts against NL teams. That's a good trend to start with.

Anyway, he was so dominating last season that it's hard to say he'd duplicate it. But if you're saying it was a fluke and he's only a "good" pitcher who is "not one of the best lefties in the game" then you're just not looking closely enough and you're fooling yourself.

[orioles119]

Rich Hill

Ted Lilly

Sean Marshall

Neal Cotts

Friggin' homer.

Ironic I called YOU that? :SuN049:

[ChaosLex]

Friggin' homer.

Ironic I called YOU that? :SuN049:

Pretty soon Dave will tell us that we'll have to throw in an extra piece (or two) with Roberts, simply to land Cedeno.

[baltfan]

Bedard 2006 gamelog

As of June 21, Bedard's ERA stood at 5.09 after his 16th start -- essentially 1/2 of a season.

On June 9, 2004, Johan Santana had an ERA of 5.12 after his 13th start. He went on to win the Cy Young award and has been pretty good since.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/gamelog?statsId=6441&year=2004

While on its face this looks like it might be a credible argument when you look at Bedard's outstanding peripheral numbers it really falls flat.

[clapdiddy]

I agree. However, you must be completely bummed that your favorite team just signed Zambrano to a 5 year/91 million dollar extension rather than selling high also. I mean, as my analysis clearly shows, Bedard and Zambrano have essentially been the same pitcher over the last two years EXCEPT for the fact that Zambrano appears to trending downward and Bedard appears to be trending upward. I can only imagine how upset you were that Zambrano was given that huge contract.

The flip side of this is that you almost always are paying a player for past performance. Zambrano has been by far the better pitcher over the years, and its obvious that the Cubs value that.

Bedard COULD be better than Zambrano over the next 5 years and the trends seem to point that way. He hasn't yet shown the durability to be put in Zambrano's class yet, and let's not forget that he's 28. He's not that young any more, although since he doesn't have a lot of innings under his belt, I'd bet these next 3 to 4 seasons he is going to be outstanding.

I wouldn't be bummed having Zambrano on my staff if I were a Cub fan.

[clapdiddy]

I was joking. I'd be fine with having Zambrano on my staff EVEN for that crazy salary. I was merely pointing out that Dave's flippant "I'd sell high" remark could be used for lots of people.

BTW, I understand the need to look at full history when making decisions on people, but I'd weight 2006 and 2007 results much, much more than I would weight 2003-2005 results regardless of what player is being discussed. Zambrano has definitely been better for longer, but I believe Bedard has shown his results over a long enough period to be considered basically as good a bet as Zambrano to continue performing well WHILE excluding durability.

Sorry...didn't realize you were joking....no smilies!

I think we both agree that Bedard will probably be slightly better than Zambrano over the next 3 or 4 seasons, especially if he moves to the National League.

[bigbird]

That's not a very compelling argument when the subject is 29 years old.

Odds are good that 2007 was his career year.

Then the Cubs are stupid giving that contract to Fukodome who must be in steep decline.

[Mackus]

Then the Cubs are stupid giving that contract to Fukodome who must be in steep decline.

You see it'd be this mat, and it'd have different conclusions written on it, that you could jump to!

[bigbird]

Bedard 2006 gamelog

As of June 21, Bedard's ERA stood at 5.09 after his 16th start -- essentially 1/2 of a season.

Interesting you picked 6/21. Right before 8 great starts his ERA dipped to sub 3.90. Let's back out thoise 2 bad outings at the end of May and see what his ERA was. People can twist figures anyway they want. Bottom line is Bedard is a premier starter in MLB. With a decent pen and a little offense he would have won 20 games this season. Geeez.

[Sports Guy]

Just ignore Dave when it comes to Bedard...He has been completely wrong about him the entire year...His argument has more holes in it than swiss cheese.

I don't think I have ever seen him say one good thing about Bedard. He tried to get away with calling him a fluke after his 2006 campaign and this year he was totally proven wrong...Early in the year, he called him a solid #2 and has never retracted that statement.

But hey, he is our NL "expert"!

[Sports Guy]

Interesting you picked 6/21. Right before 8 great starts his ERA dipped to sub 3.90. Let's back out thoise 2 bad outings at the end of May and see what his ERA was. People can twist figures anyway they want. Bottom line is Bedard is a premier starter in MLB. With a decent pen and a little offense he would have won 20 games this season......

...and if he had stayed healthy and finished the year, good chance he wins the Cy Young...ERA title was in sight and he would have easily won K title....Not bad for a solid #2, huh?

Oh and let's not forget that his BABIP through early May was close to 400....He was very unlucky early on in the season or his numbers could have ended up even better.