Thursday's Frosty Mug
by KLSnow on Jan 8, 2009 8:56 AM CST
12 comments
So Ken Rosenthal and The Official Site are reporting that the Brewers are close to a deal with Trevor Hoffman. Oddly, one site is reporting Hoffman as being close to a deal with the Dodgers instead. Rumorville has been all over this.
I'm still not sure I like the move. Sure, Hoffman gives the Brewers the cool entrance they've been lacking. (That entrance is so cool its sunglasses are wearing sunglasses.) But the team's biggest need (starting pitching) is still unaddressed while the Brewers braintrust is off spending money on a 41-year-old reliever who gives up a lot of fly balls. I feel about the same way today as I did after the Gagne signing: I'm glad the team is doing something, I'm hopeful it works out, but it's not the move I wanted or perhaps even one I would have made.
I'm going to guess Bleacher Report hadn't taken this move into consideration when rating Doug Melvin as baseball's third best GM.
Beyond that, it's a slow news day again, so it's time to play "Where are they now?" with former Brewers:
- Joe Dillon, snagged off waivers by the A's when the Brewers designated him for assignment after the season, has been designated for assignment again to make room on Oakland's roster for Jason Giambi.
- Kevin Barker, who has made a grand total of 38 big league plate appearances since his last appearance as a Brewer in 2000, has been invited to spring training by the Reds.
A's: Are reportedly waiting and hoping Bobby Abreu and/or Orlando Hudson will slip into their price range.
Mets: Are reportedly interested in backup infielders Alex Cora, David Eckstein and Craig Counsell, but would have to unload Luis Castillo first.
Nationals: John Patterson is retiring at age 30. He hasn't been healthy enough to be a contributor since 2005.
Red Sox: Have reportedly reached agreements with both John Smoltz and Rocco Baldelli.
Reds: are reportedly talking to the Yankees about acquiring Nick Swisher or Xavier Nady, neither of whom have a consistent place to play in New York.
Going back to the Smoltz move, Braves' management's failure to retain their long-time ace has created quite a bit of vitriol from the blog community, and caused some bloggers to dig up some old stories on Wren, like this borderline unbelievable tale of the time he instructed the Orioles' team plane to take off without Cal Ripken.
Finally, kudos to David Brown of Yahoo for this story on the annual benefit dinner for scouts. It astonishes me that Major League Baseball can get away with pocketing billions, then holding a benefit dinner for people they've underpaid.
Drink up.
0 recs |
12 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
John Smoltz
If Smoltz is healthy come May – June then that signing will be a steal. I love John Smoltz. His stuff is nasty and he is a consummate professional; one of the classiest players in MLB. Nice job by the Sox. $5 million base pay and another $5 million in possible incentives.
by TimQMills on Jan 8, 2009 9:29 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Signing Hoffman...
… to anything more than $4M plus team option for $6M next will be about this cool
by Saberilliterate on Jan 8, 2009 9:39 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Actually I don’t mind the signing. Hoffman can get the job done still. Only 4 blown saves last year in 34 chances isn’t so bad.
by TimQMills on Jan 8, 2009 9:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The case for Hoffman
The guy can still pitch, and his fastball is at 85 now— it’s not like it can get much lower, and he’s still been effective with it.
Eric Seidman of Fangraphs:
Hoffman, 41, is coming off of a relative down season. Sure, he is the leader in saves for a career, but one has to wonder how much left he has in the tank. His projection calls for 54 innings at around a 3.50 FIP. Plugging his projected runs allowed into the formula used to determine relievers value above replacement, Hoffman amounts to a .612 pitcher in a .451 league. Taking the difference, multiplying by innings pitched, and dividing by nine pegs Trevor as worth +0.97 wins next season. The leverage of these innings must be taken into account as well.
A closer will generally hover between LIs of 1.80 and 2.30, meaning Hoffman could be worth anywhere from +1.75 to +1.95 wins next season. At 41 years old, Hoffman could still command $8.5 to $9.5 mil at fair market value. Given his age and the performance decline in 2008 as well as the market favoring the buyers, I could see him signing a one-year deal in the $6 mil range, but nothing more. He might want another year to go out on top, but overvaluing him for career accomplishments would be a mistake.
Which is almost exactly how I feel about it. I’m fine with $6 mil. Hopefully the next season isn’t guaranteed, but I see no reason to hate on this deal too much, unless it stops Melvin from acquiring a starter. I don’t think that’s the case. $6 mil is 2 Aaron Mileses or 2 Craig Counsells.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Jan 8, 2009 9:53 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
85 mph fastball?
Seems like it should be called something else, hopefully not a home run.
by ol Pete on Jan 8, 2009 10:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1035&position=P#pitchtype
Last 4 years: 85, 84, 85, 86, he actually went up a bit last year. But the point is that he’s been really effective over the past four years without much velocity, so it’s not like he’s an old closer that has lost velocity on the fastball and struggles as a result. He’s been pitching well like this for years.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Jan 8, 2009 10:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Update
$6 mil, possible +$1.5 in incentives, no second year. That’s fine with me. You’re valuing him at about 1.2-1.3 wins above replacement, and I think he’s a good bet to exceed that.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Jan 8, 2009 10:21 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
It feels weird to say this
but if we end up signing Sheets to a 1 or 2 year deal, we’d have a pretty good pitching staff - probably better than what we had to start last season, considering the upgrade from Gagne to Hoffman.
The weird part is saying we need Sheets. I was kind of hoping we were done with his various aches and pains, but I’d feel a lot better about our chances if we had a #1 pitcher, with YoGa as #2.
"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"
by roguejim on Jan 8, 2009 11:19 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think I agree
It’s easy to think of the mostly hypothetically 1/2 punch of Sheets and Sabathia as impossible to replace, but we didn’t have that for very long. For the most part, we had one incredible pitching season — Ben’s 1st half and CC’s 2nd half.
It’s crazy to think that YoGa is likely to replace that, but … he’s probably going to give us some of that. Even signing someone like Looper (I know, no longer impending) would make the rotation reasonably solid.
Also, cheese.
by Jeff Sackmann on Jan 8, 2009 11:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
When you hear people prognosticating on the dire fate of the 09 Brewers, they rarely mention that Gallardo was gone most of last year.
by ol Pete on Jan 8, 2009 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Brew Crew Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
St. Louis
|
91 | 71 | .561 | 0 | Lost 6 |
|
Chicago
|
83 | 78 | .515 | 7.5 | Lost 1 |
|
Milwaukee
|
80 | 82 | .493 | 11 | Won 3 |
|
Cincinnati
|
78 | 84 | .481 | 13 | Won 2 |
|
Houston
|
74 | 88 | .456 | 17 | Lost 3 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
62 | 99 | .385 | 28.5 | Lost 2 |
(updated 11.7.2009 at 4:17 PM CST)
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
