News and Notes
by Ryan on Nov 10, 2008 11:51 PM EST
in News
Email
PrintSo far, it's been quiet for Cleveland this offseason, though I think we all expect this winter to be eventful. We know that the Indians will acquire an infielder, a significant reliever, and possibly a another starter. With only one arbitration case on the roster and no significant free agents to try to retain, the Indians should be aggressive in both free agency and the trade market.
Anthony Castrovince previews the Indians' offseason with the type of story we've seen for the past six years:
The Indians have the needs.
But as tends to be the case for small- and mid-market teams in the high-priced and high-risk world of free agency, they don't have the dollars.
Free agency is a very inefficient way to get decent talent if you don't have a lot of payroll to work with. And even if you are a GM with a large payroll, building your team from the bottom up with free agents isn't a great idea. It's much better to go just for the stars and fill in around them with your farm system. And if you can't make a play for the Sabathias or the Teixeiras of the market, you're left with the second-tier free agents, who are even more expensive if you consider the value you're getting.
Therefore, Shapiro and his staff will prioritize their needs, which include an infielder at third base, second base or shortstop, back-end relief help (preferably in the closer's role) and a third starter.
Three seasons ago, the Indians signed Paul Byrd to replace Kevin Millwood in the rotation. And as free agent pickups go, Byrd was a pretty good deal, starting over 80 unspectacular but effective games for the Indians. He cost the Indians roughly $21M; for Cleveland to get a starting pitcher with a similar profile is probably going to cost them at least $2-3M more a season. The rub is this: the Indians are already paying Jake Westbrook quasi-market value, and he won't pitch until mid-season. And this offseason is the time to get an extension done with Cliff Lee. So between the rising cost of the current rotation and other priorities, I don't see the Indians spending a lot of dollars or talent to land a starter.
So how about the infielder? Second base would be the choice if you want to improve your defense, but Mark Ellis just re-signed with Oakland, leaving just Orlando Hudson as a good fit (in other words, better than Jamey Carroll). The legitimate third base options consist of creaky Joe Crede and Casey Blake, part deux. I think Hudson makes a lot of sense considering the current roster and lineup; if the Indians are going to spend on anyone this winter, it should be him. Brian Roberts would be an option if Baltimore lowers their demands significantly.
Though the Indians won't have a chance of landing Francisco Rodriguez (sigh of relief) or even Brian Fuentes, I think they'll get someone. The Padres aren't bringing Trevor Hoffman back, so he's an option, especially since he came close to signing with the Indians the last time he was a free agent. I think a trade would make more sense here, especially Huston Street (if he's not in the Holliday deal).
142 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
In regards to your last paragraph, it’s not a given (according to analyst chatter— of course take from that what you will) that Colorado will keep Street. I would if I were them, but I guess it’s possible they flip him.
Also! Juan Cruz.
Steel Nick
second
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Nov 11, 2008 2:45 PM EST up reply actions
I recall Hudson asking for $15M per season in his extension with the Dbacks. A lot of folks out here raised a fuss about it (they love them some O-Dawg just as much as they do Luis Gonzalez), but that price is obviously not even close to what Cleveland would pay.
Of course that’s just what he’s asking, and he assumes (per my assumption) that it’s his high offer and he knows he’ll be getting less than that. I think Furcal’s recently expired 3 year, $39M is a high-end benchmark for anything Hudson can expect, and he’ll need to take less cash if he wants more years.
I honestly don’t know if he’ll get that. He’s in great demand, but he’s also had persistent injuries.
I’m intrigued about the recent availability of Hoffman. It looks like Shap is planning on “taking a look at him”. His going rate at the Pads was about $4 million plus incentives. While I think it would probably take a little more money to get him to Cleveland he still could be a decent option. Maybe.
Hell’s Bells would be nice though.
Hoffman: Paying for Past Performance (PPP).
I’d stop around $5m, he didn’t look very good last season. 101+ ERA+ in 45IP. Still a K/IP though…
Don't be stupid. PUT IN MELOAN.
Yeah, he’s not what he was in his prime, but he can still be effective. Sign him to a one-year deal, keep him healthy, and hope that a 2010 replacement appears (Adam Miller? Tony Sipp?) this season.
He had some crazy home/away splits this past year:
Home 31G 7HR 4.25ERA 0.94WHIP .207AVG
Away 17G 1HR 2.87ERA 1.21WHIP .254 AVG
I expected the opposite, considering the reputation Petco Park has. Maybe “Hells Bells” is a jinx?
Edwin Jackson is apparently available for trade. I wouldn’t mind making a deal for him and putting him in the rotation. He’s better than Byrd, and is still young and improving as a pitcher, even though it seems he’s been around forever.
30+ starts the last 2 yrs, league avg era (that’s AL era!) last year, better than that save for a bad last month. Plus he’s righty and throws hard. Considering cost, ceiling and recent track record, I’m not sure we can do better in the FA market.
Not sure what to do about a closer. I just don’t think we’ll bring in anyone that’s better than internal options. And if we do, we gotta go thru the obligatory multi-month period of sticking with’em even if they’re not the best we have for the job.
With Adam Miller, Tony Sipp, Stevens and Meloan all looking to get ML time next year, I’m thinking Jensen Lewis and Raffy Perez will have more leeway at the backend of the pen. And who knows? Its not inconceivable that Miller will be our Papelbon at some point. He certainly has the stuff for it. I have no problem acquiring a veteran reliever, but I just don’t see handing the closer job to someone a lot better than what we already have.
And yes to O-Dogg!
Sonnanstine is also from Wadsworth. That would be a nice PR coup, as well as filling a spot in the rotation.
by woodsmeister on Nov 11, 2008 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
I was looking at Edwin Jackson’s numbers the other day and I don’t actually get it. His numbers really aren’t good and NEVER have been. He has consistently had a high WHIP in the majors, walks a ton of guys, gives up a lot of hits, doesn’t strike out that many, and so on. His numbers in the minors were equally unimpressive — he had some success in AA, but his AAA numbers look like his major league numbers — ugly. I’d pass on him unless there’s something that’s not showing up in the data.
The upside is the attractive part. You can look at a guy like Edison Volquez, who similarly had wildness in the minors and in Texas before being traded to Cincy. He was able to put it together to be dominant at times and at least effective the rest. Jackson has the ability to strike out tons of hitters, possibly with some overhaul of mechanics he can improve his control enough to limit his walks so that they no longer are a liability. He doesn’t have to be Paul Byrd out there.
If Jackson has the ability to strike out tons of hitters, he has to become a different pitcher than he is and has been. He hasn’t piled up impressive strike out numbers up to now (even in the minors). If he were a guy who struck out a lot of guys but ALSO walked a lot of guys, I’d see your point a bit more (maybe he turns out to be one of those guys who eventually finds the strike zone). But, even with all the wildness, his strikeout totals have been modest and he gives up a lot of hits – i.e., batters are able to make contact. That makes me think he’s not going to be a big strikeout guy.
I have the sense that Jackson will make a very good reliever.
But Tampa likely is (and should) shop him as a starter.
Steel Nick
Thing about Jackson, what made him such a prospect at a young age, is he has a really live arm and a strong physical makeup. He’s a horse.
And I agree – if he’s close to his ceiling as a starter, he may find more headroom later in his career as a reliever.
Being a horse isn’t everything. You need control. I mean, otherwise, you could just use an actual horse as your “horse.”
Overall, I have a feeling a lot of people would get runs in on him.
by Logodaedalus on Nov 13, 2008 2:48 PM EST up reply actions
It would keep guys from charging the mound, though. A horse could pitch inside with impunity.
by woodsmeister on Nov 14, 2008 10:56 AM EST up reply actions
I’ve been thinking about it and rather than getting a high-upside low-risk guy like Jackson, I would be willing to fire major trade piece bullets to acquire Sonnanstine and Jake McGee. Our offseason would be practically done at that point.
Steel Nick
Frankly I don’t think that the Indians will sign any FAs of any significance this year. Maybe a 32 yo Japanese infielder or something, but no one who’ll have an immediate impact on their pennant chances.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
Yeah, I am pretty much convinced we’ll sign Hoffman. Shapiro seemed to make real inroads the last time around and he fits our need and budget.
yeah, that’s pretty much exactly the general feeling i’ve got. i don’t know if he’s one of those “west coast only” guys, though.
From what I recall he decided to stay in San Diego because he wanted to be near his kids and not take them out of school. Not sure if a couple of years would change his opinion. I could see another NL West team somehow finding a good role for him.
The vibe out here in San Diego seems mixed. From the majority of fans there is a lot of angst toward the management of the team (the owner is getting divorced and it appears the players salaries is now turning into the lawyers salaries). Regarding Trevor though I’d say that 30% of the people think he’s finished, 20% think he’s finished (but should finish with the Pads) and 50% think he has maybe a year left. I’d count myself in the 50% who thinks he has about a year left, whether in a closing role or with the Indians that remains to be seen. FWIW I’d have more confidence in him now than JoBo circa 2007.
Three years is a long time, but Hoffman’s sons will be 12, 11 and 10 years old when the 2009 season starts. One would think that uprooting them is still a significant issue, but there isn’t necessarily a good option close to home. He may also feel that he made the decision to stay put for the last three years but can go play elsewhere for a season or two. The Indians train in Phoenix now, and the season only lasts six or seven months, not the whole year.
SI.com is reporting the White Sox are listening to offers for Bobby Jenks. They have Linebrink and Dotel as potential replacements. The White Sox spent $121M last year, Jenks is arbitration eligible, and while he’s been pretty successful, his strikeouts are way down. I don’t believe the Sox are looking to shed payroll, though.
All the FA closers want the Mets to bid on them, cause the Mets can pay. But if the Mets go a different route, there should be some trickle down effect in terms of availability of other options. Of course, who knew Cincinnati would offer Cordero 4 years and $46M? There’s always a surprise team out there willing to spend money despite not having a shot (see: San Francisco). You just never know how these things are going to shake out. I’m optimistic that if the big money teams get creative and other teams look in-house, somebody will be left for the Tribe’s pen.
Not likely to find a better use of our free agent dollars. He’s been awfully good for an awfully long time, I think his results will look more like Wickman’s than Borowski’s. That would be a significant plus.
I can’t bring myself to be excited about a 40 year old closer who throws as fast as Joe. If we are going to take a risk, make it a Cordero or Cruz.
Different types of risk. Hoffman is a cheap, one year risk.
Cordero and Cruz are expensive multi-year risks. Go look up Danys Baez’ deal.
I think you are letting generalities dominate your thinking on this.
Hoffman is not “a 40-year-old closer,” he’s one of the greatest relievers of all time, at age 40.
I know he’s one of the greatest, but you could quite simply say that he WAS one of the greatest.
His ERA went up to 3.77, in the NL. That’s the first time his ERA has been over 3 since 2001 and it quite substantially went up.
I see nothing to be excited about.
i mean, its ERA for a reliever
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Nov 12, 2008 9:06 PM EST up reply actions
for lack of a better place to post this, witness Chuck Lofgren’s truly bizarre line from today:
0.1 IP, 0H, 0ER, 6R, 3BB, 0K
huh
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Nov 11, 2008 7:14 PM EST up reply actions
2 errors, a HBP and a bases-clearing triple allowed by his successor. Tomlin also gave up five runs, but at least he pitched five innings.
Pretty much all the Tribe pitchers in winter leagues are, well, finding it challenging.
Except: Adam Miller went six scoreless and struck out 8 the other day. Should be moved to the pen after one more start. I’m actually pretty excited to see him make his Cleveland debut this year – I think the pen is the right place for him at this point, he could make a real contribution in ’09.
I echo your thoughts on Miller, although I don’t think he’s the only one doing ok in Winter Ball. Scott Lewis has an ugly ERA (5.32) in part because he’s allowed 6 HRs, which I think will be something to watch out for with him if he’s in Cleveland next year. But he also has 26 Ks and only 6 BBs in 22 innings. That’s really good.
Josh Tomlin’s another guy who has been knocked around despite doing a good job of striking guys out and not allowing BBs (22:3 in 22 IP).
Also, Fausto made his first start yesterday. 4IP, 2H, 2BB, 2K, 0R, 1GIDP.
By the way, I have no idea how to value Winter League stats
If there’s any value in winter stats….
GET READY FOR THE WES HODGES EXTRAVAGANZA!
…and Matt LaPorta is proof that the Indians destroy all top prospects they acquire.
Extravaganza of not walking apparently…2 walks in nearly 90 PAs? I don’t know if that’s a positive development…
Yeah, I saw that. I like to think he just decided that the AFL pitchers suck, and so he’s going to swing away like Joaquin Phoenix.
by dgcambridge on Nov 12, 2008 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
I like to think of his character as Brad Snyder.
by dgcambridge on Nov 12, 2008 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
I was having this conversation with someone … can’t remember who or where …
I wish we had a stat on getting into hitter’s counts. The walks are not nearly as significant as simply getting ahead of the pitcher — almost everyone is going to convert a hitter’s count to a baserunner with a very high rate, the trick is getting into the hitter’s count.
My point: Hodges might well be getting into some good counts and then just hauling off on the get-one-over pitch, or the first mistake pitch. That would mean there’s nothing wrong with his selectivity. But we don’t have that data.
by Jay on Nov 12, 2008 11:58 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
of course…you can’t complain about not walking when the guy is putting up a 1.200 OPS and pounding most of the pitches he sees. but that generally won’t be the case, and it would be a bad time for Hodges to develop some bad habits against crappy AFL pitchers. The Suprise Rafters (the team Cleveland is affiliated), has an abysmal team ERA hovering around 8.
But that’s kind of my point, he hasn’t necessarily exhibited any bad habits. Just because he’s swinging at and pounding their meatballs doesn’t mean he’d be swinging at non-meatballs.
I think that’s where we don’t have the data. He might be showing bad habits but getting away with it. Without actually knowing what he’s doing in his ABs, just knowing the end result, it is hard to comment on his approach.
Well we have the data, the AFL games are all on gamecast. You just need to have a grad student look through the counts.
this is a job for nate silver
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Nov 12, 2008 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
I temporarily forgot how to read indents, and thought that Nate Silver hit a double.
by Logodaedalus on Nov 13, 2008 2:43 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, totally.
Speaking of which, Adam and I have been tinkering around with a formula that puts the PTM concepts into an “index” number, generally between 1 and 10. We’ve got a pretty good formula for hitters, but it’s a lot more complicated for pitchers. Anyway, according to this formula-in-progress, Hodges gets a 4.8, Santana gets an 8.8 — you get the idea. Victor, Grady and Jhonny would all get between 9.1 and 9.3 for their breakout seasons in Double-A.
Anyway, I bring this up because according to that formula-in-progress, Asdrubal gets something like a 14 for his 2006 season, and almost as high for 2007.
Defensive value is factored in, but it’s a very “macro” formula — attempting to account for age, level, offensive production and defensive value, so it’s complicated yet far from precise. The formula is basically:
Offense + Position + Level + 15 – Age
Position is a simple value that characterizes not just what position a guy plays but also his defensive reputation:
1B or weak OF = 0
solid OF or weak 3B = 1
strong CF or 3B or weak MI = 2
strong MI or C = 3
strong C = 4
You usually would just assign an integer to each player, but you can use one decimal if needed.
Okay, I’ll give you the rest.
Offense is OPS/60, and we use the “double-neutral” OPS from minorleaguesplits.com whenever possible. That is, both park-neutral and luck-neutral. We use the most recent season of stats, assuming that is the player’s best season at his most advance level. If it isn’t, if he regressed or was injured, then ideally we use cumulative stats for the highest level where he’s played for at least a couple of months. (Remember, what we’re measuring here is the best the player has accomplished so far.)
Position is above.
Level is the number of levels above Low-A, times two. So Low-A = 0, High-A = 2, Double-A = 4, Triple-A = 6. The idea is to establish a somewhat steep incline between the levels, so that players closer to the majors are given substantial preference.
Age is the player’s age, with one decimal of precision, as of the previous July 1. (Or, if we were looking at stats for next April and May, for next July 1.)
And that’s it, for the hitters.
Okay, here’s the working formula for pitchers. Much tougher to concoct, and this one is mostly Adam’s fine handiwork.
(K100 – 2*BB100)/3 – 2*(FIP + ERA) + (GB100 + GS)/5 + Level + 20 – Age
Now, you can think of this as applying almost the exact same concept as the hitter’s formula, as in:
Production + Position + Level + 20 – Age
where:
Production = (K100 – 2*BB100)/3 – 2*(FIP + ERA)
So we’re defining it in terms of both peripherals and run suppression. K100 and BB100 are strikeouts and walks per 100 batters faced, cumulative for all levels last season. FIP is park/league neutral, ERA is raw ERA. All four variables are cumulative are for all levels this season. By using both along with the rate stats, we squarely focus on peripherals and neutral stats, and then applying a slight regression back toward the pitcher’s actual success (or failure) at suppressing BABIP.
Position = (GB100 + GS)/5
This isn’t really "position," but it describes the style of pitching (giving bonus points for inducing lots of groundballs) and the role (how many starts). GB100 is groundballs induced per 100 batters faced, GS is games started, both are cumulative for all levels last season. This gives a solid bump to starters over relievers, and it makes sure that starters are rewarded for being especially healthy and durable. (Huff had 26 starts, SLewis only had 21, and that certainly is worth 1 point.)
Level and Age are defined the same as for hitters.
As far as the starters go…Huff is leaps and bounds ahead of the group. Next in line is Rondon, followed by Lewis, De La Cruz, Joey Mahalic (definitely a sleeper guy to watch), then Jeanmar Gomez.
That is awesome. Asdrubal was a watershed moment for me in learning how to evaluate prospects. He was the first time I was able to clearly see how much age mattered.
For me, too. I remember doing the prospect ranking that year, and I was thinking, if you really believe what you say you believe, then you have to call Asdrubal one of our very best prospects. And I thought about it, decided I really did believe it, and called him one of our very best prospects.
What you can see from the formula is that Asdrubal gets 3 bonus points for being a strong middle infielder, as compared with, say, Matt LaPorta. Which means that even if he were a first baseman, he’d have gotten an 11 for that season. From a PTM perspective, he had everything going for him except his offensive performance, and his offensive performance was not off-the-cliff terrible.
As Jay keeps reminding me, it’s also why Carlos Rivero might be quite good. He’s certainly not Asdrubal and doesn’t have the same kind of defensive projection, but he’s pretty good. And it turns out he actually got pretty “unlucky” this year when you compare his OPS to his “neutral” OPS.
Fun fact: He had a 981 OPS in August, but his double-neutral OPS in August was actually higher: 1036. His BABIP was .384, but he hit so many line drives that apparently the .384 was UNLUCKY, and it should have been .419. Freaky.
12.4 + 2.5 + 2 + 15 – 20.1 = 11.8
Believe it.
I think that’s not a bad guess. Peralta was younger, but similar in a lot of ways, and had his big breakout at AA. Rivero has basically been a year older but a little better up until this point.
I don’t know if I’m making sense, but In your opinion, is the formula than stating Carlos Rivero should “matter more to us as a prospect” than Carlos Santana by a factor of 11.8 vs 8.8?
Or is it stating Rivero is actually a better prospect by that factor?
Sorry, I’m not even sure I’m making sense in my own mind. I guess in the latter question, I’m trying to get at Santana’s value at more advanced levels vs Rivero but then I would supposed the formula accounts for that.
First, as noted below, I was using my own formula wrong (yikes), so Rivero is really a 7.6.
Second, yes, that is essentially what the results were (or would have been) suggesting. Except that this all gets back to semantics.
I’ve already changed the name of the system once, and now maybe I have to again. The purpose of both of its names (Exciting Prospects Standard and Prospects That Matter) was to highlight the system’s strong emphasis on advancement. From the beginning, being close to the majors was weighted extra-heavy, for two reasons: (1) I felt that factor was heavily under-emphasized in most prospect ratings in favor of “ceiling,” which was used in a very vague way with a vague scent of BS. (2) I felt that Joe Sixpack (as opposed to Joe the Season Ticket Buyer) was more interested in guys who were closer to the majors.
Hence, prospects who are “exciting” (to less maniacal fans who don’t scour the minors every day) and who “matter” (ditto).
Inevitably, though, those elements end up over-emphasized at the expense of others, such as a reasonable consideration of age and positional value. There will always be a few guys who “matter” or “excite” who don’t do all that well by these standards. Ultimately, though, that’s a naming problem.
The name I’m thinking of for this formula in particular is “Performance Progress Score.” That is, the score tries to show how much progress each prospect has made purely in terms producing the kind of production expected of a prospect who “matters.”
Hodges is a good prospect, scouts like him, but his PPS is just 4.8. That makes him a real prospect, but he hasn’t made as much real Progress in his real Performance as we might like to see.
Now LaPorta, he gets a 6.4. That tells me on the one hand, he’s been doing okay, and I’ve been worrying too much about him. It tells me on the other hand that his performance has not progressed to the elite level we might have expected out of a prospect of his reputation. He was 23 — not old, but not as young as most elite prospects — and he was in Double-A, not Triple-A. Had he been in Triple-A and put up a neutral OPS 24 points higher, he’d have the same score as Santana. But he didn’t.
That doesn’t change what the scouts have said about these guys, and this method has an eye toward projectability but ultimately doesn’t do any projecting. It just tells you how the performance is progressing relative to age and level, and nothing more.
Thanks for the explanation. Makes you wonder what with LaPorta, Hodges, Weglarz, and Mills all towards drifting the wrong way on the defensive spectrum, all (I think) in the 4.8 to 6.4 range in terms of your score, who gets moved.
Realize they’re all not arriving at the same time, and all aren’t totally banished to 1B/DH just yet, but seems like we need to convert some of that to the middle of the diamond or to arms or something else.
I don’t know about that. It isn’t all that easy to develop impact bats, so I think you have to allow LaPorta, Wegz and Mills to all advance toward the majors and see who actually can make it there. There is a far better chance we can use all three of them than there is that all three of them will make it that far.
Hodges isn’t the most exciting prospect, but he’ll be moving into his prime as Garko exits his (if he hasn’t already), and part of the point of this is in having cheap, solid replacements for a few years. It’s not hard to see Garko exiting by the end of 2010 and Hodges moving into that roster spot for his prime seasons.
Uh … this is embarassing … the main reason is that I mis-stated the constant for hitters as 15, when it’s supposed to be 10. No doubt you’re using the correct constant.
The smaller reason is that you used neutral OPS, and I didn’t.
So Rivero is really a 7.6 — still the third-highest score among our prospects, after Huff and Santana.
My sense of it is that it’s a little below Double-A. Possibly the Winter Leagues are like Double-A, but the Fall League has kind of sunk to Advanced-A status.
Not an expert, but I think the Dominican League is the best of the bunch, with a lot of true stars playing, intense competition, and pure talent probly avging out somewhere between AA and AAA.
my sense is that the level of competition varies considerably, even as the season goes on. in a lot of the leagues it seems like the early games features young guys and old major league cast-off or never-have-beens. later in the season, when it’s getting closer to the playoffs, the major leaguers come in and start playing more often.
True. Fausto’s winter season is just beginning, Adam Miller’s is ending by Thanksgiving.
Speaking of Atom, it did cross my mind that given his lack of work in ‘08 and the pending move to the pen next year, they should let him stay in the DWL for longer and get more than 2 weeks experience as a reliever before ST. It wouldn’t be like he’s piling up innings – just getting used to the change in routine.
Yeah, I’m sure that’s right. The default position is extreme caution. But, I couldn’t help but wonder if letting him get another half dozen appearances/10 innings might help him prepare more for ’09, at little cost.
Caution is great, but at some point, you’ve got to just let the guy pitch — I mean, it’s not like the club’s direct supervision has kept him healthy up to this point. He’s already 24, will we “extreme caution” him straight through age 30?
It’s shocking how quickly Lofgren went on to become the worst pitcher of all time.
I’ll say it again: he should report to Spring training as a RF.
I’m assuming San Diego can’t save face and offer Hoffman arbitration now, right? So there would likely be no draft pick compensation (granted our 1st round pick is protected anyway).
Because there doesn’t seem to be a better place to put this nor is it ’shot-worthy:
It looks like Kerry Wood will hit the market. Is he even on the radar? I haven’t heard him mentioned around these parts.
He only made 1.75 last year but he had a good year. I think he’ll make at least 18 mil over 3 or something.
he’d be an interesting buy, but someone will go above our comfort level
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Nov 12, 2008 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
“With a guy like Trevor Hoffman or Kerry Wood,” said Shapiro, “guys that have strong ties with the teams they’re with, both those guys have to determine if they [fit] with their old teams first. If not, they are guys we’d have interest in.”
by dgcambridge on Nov 12, 2008 12:57 PM EST up reply actions
I’ve been operating under the assumption that Wood will be back with the Cubs. If he’s not, I prefer him to Hoffman on a pure talent level. But when you start factoring in years and money, I’m not sure sure. I think Wood can absolutely dominant seasons as a reliever. I’m not sure Hoffman will be dominant so much as he will be just effective.
I’m not saying it’s a necessity, but what’s the last WS champ that had a non-dominant closer? Maybe 2006, even though Wainwright was pretty good. Otherwise, these guys were pretty lights out. I think Wood can be that type of stopper.
08 Lidge
07 Papelbon
06 Wainwright
05 Jenks
04 Foulke
03 Urbina
02 Percival
I’d love to sign Wood. But I doubt Shapiro will go for a 3 year deal with him.
One of my favorite prospects when he was in the minors. That 20-K game was insane.
Dreams ….
Hendry himself said today it would be best for Wood and his family to get a huge multiyear deal. Link.
In related news, it would also be best for me and my family if I was given a huge multiyear deal.
It’s “best” for Wood in the sense that he’s likely to break down at any given moment.
I hereby declare my faith in the GMs that no one will be dumb enough to sigh him for 3+ years.
Shapiro’s going to be interested in Hoffman, but I don’t think he’s going to be interested in paying him a large amount of money (or even a two-year deal, unless it involves a team option, I guess).
The Hoynes article also speculates about Colorado “flipping” Street to a team like the Indians. I don’t if that’s actual “reporting” or if it’s just speculation (he adds that they’ve “talked” to Colorado about Atkins, whatever that means). But, I’d imagine Shapiro would be interested in that possibility as well.
Really? That seems pretty favorable… I think I would take those odds (i.e. I’d stake $4 that he won’t be the closer, and if I win I get $5).
by Logodaedalus on Nov 13, 2008 3:01 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise’
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
