Thursday's Frosty Mug
by KLSnow on Feb 5, 2009 9:02 AM CST
24 comments
The biggest news from yesterday is the trade sending Eric Fryer to the Yankees for Chase Wright. Finally, a little depth has been added for the starting rotation. Tom H. has quotes from management on what they see/expect from Wright, and there's reason to believe he can contribute. Both The Grand National Championships and View From Bernie's Chalet like the move.
Also noted in the Tom H. link above: The Brewers signed Ramiro Mendoza to a minor league deal. Mendoza hasn't pitched in the majors since 2006, but posted a sub-2.00 ERA in Venezuela this winter and will pitch for Panama in the World Baseball Classic. All told, he's probably ticketed for AAA, but he's another veteran with starting experience, so worse moves have been made.
If you didn't catch Jeff's post from last night on starting pitching depth, scroll down, read it now, and come back to the Mug later. I'd rather have Odalis Perez, but Bernie's Crew thinks the Brewers should have pursued John Parrish.
Meanwhile, Corey Hart's arbitration hearing continues to creep closer. Pocket Doppler thinks a lot of Brewer fans are reacting negatively to Hart because of his comments in September on fans booing. This quote, which has been making the rounds lately but I most recently mentioned in Saturday's post on Hart, is a much bigger source of concern for me:
Just one minor note today: Alcides Escobar and Mat Gamel made USA Today's list of 100 players you should know coming into 2009.
If you read the Mug frequently, you've probably guessed that I wish the Brewers still had Gabe Gross. If you share that sentiment, you can re-live his last game as a Brewer tomorrow on MLB.com.
I'm reluctant to even bring it up, because even he admits it's not worth my time, but The Furious Wedge has responded to some of the commenters from his prediction post I linked on Tuesday. I won't burn too much time on it, except for this quote regarding Tony Gwynn:
Is a story still news when it happens every day? Jon Heyman is reporting a previously unmentioned team has interest in a Scott Boras client. In this case, it's the Rangers and Andruw Jones. Lone Star Ball lists the reasons why this move would make no sense for the Rangers. Earlier this week, Rich Lederer of Baseball Analysts discussed the relationship between Boras and Heyman.
On the hot stove:
Blue Jays: Claimed LHP Brian Burres off waivers from the Orioles.
Padres: Have reportedly agreed to terms with Cliff Floyd.
Rangers: MLB.com beat reporter TR Sullivan doesn't expect the team to sign Ben Sheets.
Rockies: Acquired Matt Murton from the A's for minor league infielder Corey Wimberly. They're also reportedly out of the running for Joe Beimel and Braden Looper.
If you've been following the links to FanGraphs the last couple of days, you've probably seen estimations that replacement level catchers, first basemen, second basemen and shortstops all fall somewhere between 1.5 and 2 wins below average. Today, we have third base (-1.5 wins) and left field (-2 wins), and they both fall into the same range.
Even in this market, apparently a bad contract is available to those who will look for it: Driveline Mechanics thinks the Mets made a mistake giving 3 years, $36 million to Oliver Perez.
As I've mentioned before, I live in Iowa, well out of the range of FSN Wisconsin but still within the Brewers' "local market," so I haven't been able to watch a national broadcast of a Brewer game at home for several seasons, just games with the Cardinals and the occasional Cub game on WGN. I had high hopes for plans to rework the blackout policy this winter, but the movement to do so has been tabled indefinitely. Thank you, Major League Baseball, for one again making it harder for me to watch your product.
On a somewhat related note: Tangotiger wants to know what you think Bud Selig should make. There are two interesting points being made in the discussion: First, Selig is effectively the CEO of a corporation worth over $15 billion dollars. But, secondly, there are probably also a fair number of people out there who would gladly take his job for less money and perform at his level. Some might be significantly better.
Of course, Selig is nowhere near the top of the charts in the running for worst person ever: Former Mets reliever Ambiorix Burgos, currently facing charges for two murders stemming from a hit-and-run accident, allegedly tried to shoot another player yesterday in response to a dispute over a game of dominoes. Joe Posnanski tells a related story about Burgos' departure from Kansas City.
Things are looking up for the Washington Nationals, but only because they couldn't go any farther down: In October the Nationals were given 300:1 odds to win the 2009 World Series. Yesterday, those odds were upgraded to 150:1. (The Brewers, by the way, are 35:1.)
Finally, as a former organizer who certainly managed his share of failed events (hence the former), I still occasionally have nightmares that go something like this one: The Marlins held an event on day 1 of their Winter Caravan, and no one came.
Drink up.
0 recs |
24 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Selig
Whatever his failings may be, I’m not so sure there are all that many people who could manage to keep all 30 MLB owners on the same page the way he has these last several years. I know that many fans don’t think this matters compared to everything else they expect from a commissioner of baseball, but I wouldn’t be so quick to write off that particular skill.
It’s an imperfect comparison, but the indy Northern League comes to mind…from its heyday with 12 teams and a fairly strong commissioner the league has devolved into a 6-team circuit struggling to keep its place in the indy landscape. First losing 4 teams at once due to irreconcilable differences between two owner factions – with the commissioner unfortunately being in with the smaller faction, even if that one was generally considered the more sensible side by most observers – then two more teams essentially being pushed out soon after because they didn’t fit into the framework of the freshly reduced league anymore (of course, one of the two team owners was also the biggest loose cannon in the bunch). Anyway, IIRC the league is now on its third or fourth commissioner in as many years since the original guy, and the current holder of the post has essentially been reduced to mere figurehead status while the left-over six owners try to right the ship they’d steered aground.
by Zeyes on Feb 5, 2009 9:42 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
well said zeyes.
i think you point at the biggest reason that selig has “earned” his salary, that managing the 30 mlb owners is the biggest asset he provides.
one of the interesting discussions in the book blog thread on selig is the replacement level commissioner. if you’re looking for a replacement commissioner ideally you’d have a former owner, with friends in washington, with a smart business mind and a love for the game.
i think that pool gets pretty small at that point. you’re looking at convincing someone who probably has zero reason to work a 9-5, to take on this role. as an owner of a franchise, i’d have no problem kicking 0.1% of my franchise value into an annual salary to have someone serve as caretaker to my anti-trust exemption.
Bring Back The Old Logo!
by jacob on Feb 5, 2009 11:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you'd be surprised how many people would love to have that job.
This isn’t just your normal “sit in a cube, make the company money” 9-to-5 gig, it’s a job where you’re paid to travel to baseball parks and guide the direction of the sport you love. I’m guessing there are people who could do the job reasonably well who would do it for a tenth of what Selig makes, if not less.
Now, would they be better than Selig? That depends on your opinion of Selig. I think baseball would be better off without him, just because he’s made enough tough decisions and irritated enough people that getting a fresh face in there would be a good PR move.
He’s not the worst pitcher ever, just the worst good pitcher.
by KLSnow on Feb 5, 2009 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the question is not who would wants to do the job. the question is who do the owners want to do the job.
i think you’re missing the point of my post.
Bring Back The Old Logo!
by jacob on Feb 5, 2009 9:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not missing it, but I disagree on the importance of it.
Selig has the trust of the owners, because he used to be one. That’s nice when he’s dealing with the owners but it costs him credibility with both the players and, more importantly, the fans. In a position that should be, first and foremost, about creating the best possible product for the paying customer, Selig is too likely to overvalue the opinion of the owners.
Would his relationship with the owners be difficult to replace? Yes. Could a new commissioner build a groundswell of fan support behind him to convince the owners to do some of the things that are needed in a more timely fashion? Probably.
He’s not the worst pitcher ever, just the worst good pitcher.
by KLSnow on Feb 5, 2009 10:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So you're looking for Commissioner Obama?
I think you highly overestimate how bothered the average fan is by the current direction of MLB. And exactly what kind of “groundswell of fan support” do you expect the owners to be swept away by? With revenues as good as they are, I’d say the owners have all the fan support they reasonably care to have.
by Zeyes on Feb 6, 2009 4:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I am looking for Commissioner Obama, I guess.
I’m going to guess, if a poll were put in play asking “Does Commissioner Bud Selig have your best interest at heart?” the answer would come back around 30-40% yes. The average fan may not hate Selig or think baseball is headed in precisely the wrong direction, but I don’t think they think he represents them.
Take, for example, the blackout policy. It’s ridiculous that it’s taken this long for them to address it. Because too many teams have ridiculously oversized home markets, there are places, like Iowa, where we are technically in the home market for 6 teams, but since 5 of those teams don’t broadcast games here, there are actually five teams whose games cannot be seen in their “home” market. If the commissioner was a representation of the fans and not a former owner, this problem would be done. Instead, it’s going to press on for another year.
A commissioner whose honest top priority was being a fair representation of the fan base would be incredibly powerful.
He’s not the worst pitcher ever, just the worst good pitcher.
by KLSnow on Feb 6, 2009 6:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I knew you'd bring up the blackout policy. :)
Perhaps you’re generalizing just a wee bit too much from yourself to the fanbase at large? I understand and agree that it’s a huge annoyance, but owner-friendly commissioner or not, IMHO that issue is still some years away from reaching critical mass.
If the commissioner was a representation of the fans and not a former owner, this problem would be done.
I’d say it’s just as likely that the issue wouldn’t even get as far as it has. Do you honestly think that a significant number of baseball fans would proceed to boycott MLB if the owners simply decided to ignore a “fan-friendly” commissioner on this? The type of fan who is most bothered by the blackout policy is also the type of fan who is least likely to just walk away to another sport, or some random other entertainment. And the owners surely realize that just as well.
by Zeyes on Feb 6, 2009 8:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Right, but the goal isn't just to "maintain" a fan base, it's to optimize it.
If the Brewers weren’t blacked out, for example, I might buy MLB Extra Innings or MLB.TV. As it is, I don’t bother with either because I wouldn’t be able to watch the Brewers.
The problem here is the assumption that a fan is a fan is a fan. Would the hardcore fans ever give up on baseball, under normal circumstances? No. But there’s a big difference between being a fan who attends one game a year to ten games a year, or being a fan who catches the box score in the morning as compared to a fan who buys MLB.TV.
He’s not the worst pitcher ever, just the worst good pitcher.
by KLSnow on Feb 6, 2009 9:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
why would the owners want a commissioner with the fan’s best interest in mind instead of the owner’s best interest? having a commissioner as lightning rod for fans like you is exactly what the owners want. you don’t blame attanasio and the brewers for the blackout policy crap, right?
the point of my post was that selig, given my imaginary pool of replacement commissioners, might be the best available option, and worth every dollar of his huge salary.
Bring Back The Old Logo!
by jacob on Feb 6, 2009 9:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I could be wrong...
… but I think Selig is the primary reason why small and mid-market teams can be as competitive as they are (if they manage their franchises well). Without the changes that Selig pushed through, the Brewer’s payroll would never have hit 90 million last year, for instance, making the Sabathia trade an impossibility. He’s not perfect and neither is MLB as it exists today, but it’s better than it would have been without him.
I have an unreasonable dislike of Bill Hall.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Feb 5, 2009 5:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Odds
Brewers are 40:1 on sportsbook.com
Some assorted teams are 100:1, while the Yankees are 2.5:1
Personally, I don’t think the Yankees are the best team in the AL. I like the Red Sox and the Angels more.
by tcyoung on Feb 5, 2009 10:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Tangent
I think the Angels are going to kinda suck this year. They have no offense and their defense is getting pretty bad.
And in Re: THE FURIOUS WEDGE, I just have to say that he makes a good point. See, I have actually never watched a baseball game, I prefer to just create a spreadsheet that simulates potential outcomes. I will cede to his superior knowledge, given that he has watched A LOT of baseball.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Feb 5, 2009 10:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha
Also, I’ll tend to agree with you on the Angels. I mean, they had a ridiculous clutch rating last year. No team can continue to have that much luck.
by Charlie Marlow on Feb 5, 2009 10:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
eh
they didn’t win that many games by luck last year. Now, if you want to call their easy schedule lucky, I’d probably have to concede that point.
What are they lacking?
by tcyoung on Feb 5, 2009 10:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say they're an 86ish win team
But they have no hitting and some pretty bad defense, and they’re getting pretty old. They don’t have Texiera or Kotchman now, and I’m not convinved Kendry Morales is the answer at first. They’re nowhere near 100 wins again, and I think Tampa, NY, and Boston will all be around 95 wins. I’d rank those three well ahead of the Angels. They’re like the inverse of the Brewers (except a bit better). They have Gary Matthews Jr., we have Suppan.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Feb 5, 2009 11:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
OK, I’ll admit, I am biased because Vlad is my favorite player.
But I don’t think you can make the argument that they don’t have any hitting.
Vlad, Hunter, Figgins, Kendrick, Napoli, Aybar.
Those are some pretty good hitters. Factor in the great pitching they have, and the division they play in; that’s a 90 win team
by tcyoung on Feb 5, 2009 11:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
They're possibly the worst defensive team in baseball.
Torii Hunter is struggling to stay near average, Vlad has lost multiple steps and Juan Rivera just isn’t very good defensively. You could replace one of those guys in the field with Gary Matthews Jr., but he can’t hit. Their infield defense is also mediocre. Nearly all their pitchers benefitted from incredible luck last year (especially Joe Saunders – expect huge regression from him, and John Lackey as well). The only above average hitters they had last year were Hunter, Vlad, Kotchman, Teixiera, and Napoli, and two of those guys are gone. The Angels will be lucky to win 85 games this year, no matter who they’re playing against.
---
Juuuust a bit outside!!
http://www.rightfieldbleachers.com
by Jack Moore on Feb 5, 2009 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I can’t argue with the poor defense. But Figgins is one of the best leadoff hitters in the game, His OBP is consistently over .350. He had an off year last year, hitting .276, but he’s a .290-.300 hitter who steals 30-60 bases. Kendrick is great at the plate when he’s healthy, also, so I don’t think you can complain about their hitting.
Also, why will John Lackey regress?
by tcyoung on Feb 5, 2009 1:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Part of it is that his ERA far outperformed fielding-independent metrics
ERA: 3.75
FIP: 4.50
tERA: 4.74
tERA*: 4.21
Also, he had a massive 80% strand rate last year, and that’s unsustainable, considering he’s never put up a strand rate above 76% in his career. I suppose the regression on Lackey might not be huge, but he’s certainly not a “true-talent” 3.75 ERA pitcher.
---
Juuuust a bit outside!!
http://www.rightfieldbleachers.com
by Jack Moore on Feb 5, 2009 4:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting
But he put up significantly lower ERAs in each of the previous 4 years. He started more games in each of those years, as well. What did the FIPs look like in those years?
by tcyoung on Feb 5, 2009 4:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The raw tERAs and FIPs were both in about the same range as his ERAs (3.50-3.75)
However, 2005 is the only year where Lackey has posted a tERA* (regressed tERA) below 4.00
Interesting to think about, I’m not really sure where I’d peg Lackey’s true talent now. He had been very consistent with the FIPs until last year.
It’ll be something to watch for sure.
---
Juuuust a bit outside!!
http://www.rightfieldbleachers.com
by Jack Moore on Feb 5, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In losing arbitration
Has there been any study about players winning or losing in arbitration? I’d think it’s a very individual thing, but I am curious as to how players have responded in the past.
If Hart loses, will he take a look at his approach to the plate to try to fix it? Will he play with a chip on his shoulder? Will he just sulk until June and then start playing for his next arbitration trial?
If he wins the trial does he take that as a justification for his plate discipline and stick with everything he’s been doing and continue his September trends? Does he think he finally got the respect he deserved and works harder to increase his 2010 salary that much more?
by ecocd on Feb 5, 2009 12:51 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Daily projection post
will be up within a half hour. No projections, I’m just analyzing the rotation projections.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Feb 5, 2009 4:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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 11.20.2009 at 4:30 PM CST)
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
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.
