Week In Review: April 7-13
by Jay on Apr 14, 2008 11:00 AM EDT
in Week In Review
Email
Print|
|
|
The series: Visited the Angels (loss, win, loss) and hosted the Athletics (loss, loss, win).
The big story: The 2008 rotation became Bizarro 2007 Rotation. Westbrook and Lee were the team's biggest problems in early 2007, combining for a 6.99 ERA through June 2, with just four quality starts in just 13 tries, having missed nine starts due to injury. Their paths diverged after that, with Westbrook returning from the DL to be one of the league's better pitchers in the final three months, while Lee's downward spiral culminated in three straight seven-run trainwrecks and a demotion to Buffalo. This season, the two have combined for a 1.31 ERA and have the same four quality starts in their four tries. This week, Westbrook was either one ground ball or 480 feet away from a shutout, depending on how you look at it, while Lee baffled the Athletics for eight innings of two-hit ball. Lee has allowed just one walk and one extra-base hit in his two starts.
On the flip side, Carmona, so dominant in 2007, started 2008 with fine results but worrisome walk totals, and they finally caught up with him this week in an eight-walk trainwreck in which he was lucky to give up only 3 runs in 3.1 innings. Byrd, surprisingly good to start 2007, has been surprisingly terrible to start 2008. Sabathia, the Cy Young incumbent, produced his third trainwreck in three tries, in fact the worst of the three, and has been the worst starter in all of baseball this season. The last time an Indians starter made three straight starts with an 11-something ERA, he was demoted to the minors the next day, despite his multi-year deal and multi-million-dollar salary. That man, of course, was Cliff Lee.
In other news: All in all, it feels like we're closer to 4-8 than 6-6, whether or not that's actually the case. JoBo served up the first totally incomprehensible and indigestible loss of the year. Iron Rafi seemed to right himself with two perfect innings following a very shaky start, while Steel Rafi got roughed up pretty good. Carmona signed a deal almost too good to be believed, with the Indians guaranteeing just $14.5 million for 2009-2011 while securing Carmona's services at bargain prices clear through 2014. Victor slowly returned to the lineup with little sign of ill effects. The Tigers deepened their early-season hole with a 2-4 performance, getting outscored 39-18 and suffering the losing side of three shutouts along with a minor rash of minor injuries. Gutierrez had the sniffles ("I am Jay's total lack of surprise"), leading to the natural conclusion that Wedge should be fired, while Dellucci defiantly emerged as our second-best hitter behind Garko.
Post of the week: Now taking nominations.
Who fed it: Peralta slugged a cool 947 with three home runs, now on pace for 40. Dellucci smacked three doubles in his four starts, scored as a pinch-runner, and pulled a bases-loaded walk as a pinch-hitter, ending the week with an astonishingly useful .400/.526/.600 line. Lee and Westbrook rocked. Masa, J.J., Craigers and Stomp gave up 3 runs total in 13.2 innings of mostly long relief, with 10 K, 5 BB and 8 hits. Jamey Carroll was transcendently solid, pairing deft defense with a .545 OBP. Shoppach hit .375 with a clutch home run. Absolute Best: Peralta. Relative Best: Dellucci.
Who ate it: Sabathia and Byrd unequivocally crapped the bed in their only starts. AbaCab went 4-for-19, but it's 4-for-24 if we include last Sunday's game, with just one walk and no extra bases. Michaels was an empty 2-for-14, no walks or extra bases – which sadly raised his OPS by 50 points, all the way to 315 – and in fact his OBP (.133) was even lower than his average (.143). Sizemore slugged just .275 over the past ten games, with no extra base hits despite a fine average (the same .275 of course) and decent OBP (.362). Finally, since his clutch double on Opening Day, Blake's line is .129/.206/.161, and he really might be playing his way out of a job. Absolute Worst: Michaels. Relative Worst: Sabathia.
The other guys: Joe Saunders had a terrific outing against us to start the week; K-Rod did not. Vlad and Torii combined to go 8-for-23, and each smacked two home runs in three games. Darren Oliver faced ten batters, hit two of them and walked one, but gave up no hits or runs. Some poor bastard named Fernando Hernandez gave up six runs to us in two outings, recording only a HBP and a run-scoring walk in the first game. The second time out, he very nearly got through two whole scoreless innings, but then he changed his mind and quickly gave up four runs. Bobby Crosby went 5-for-11 with a home run and two walks.
False alarms:
- Royals and White Sox, still in first place.
- Sabathia being the worst pitcher in the league.
- Cliff Lee as Cy Young candidate.
- Marte getting a start.
Open questions:
- Could we stop screwing around and have one really good week please?
- Since any blogger writing in his/her parents' basement in his/her underwear can speculate on whether C.C.'s contract situation is distracting him, what exactly do we need newspaper columnists for?
- How good can Cliff Lee really be, and for how long?
- Can Dellucci be the nice role player he was meant to be for us?
- Still too soon for a Michaels death-watch?
- Too soon to mention a Caesy Blake death-watch, even in hushed tones?
- Martevich? Martevich Martevich Martevich Martevich?
- Still too soon for a Tigers 2008 season death watch?
- How healthy will Victor be this season?
- Could Peralta be charging into a breakout season, just one month from his 26th birthday?
- Can Cliff Lee really bounce back to be a pretty good pitcher?
- Does anybody have any clue who will be our 2009 Opening Day starter?
- For more than half our relievers, do we really have the slightest idea if they're really good or really bad?
86 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
the last question is really worrying
Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.
by Gradyforpresident on Apr 14, 2008 11:17 AM EDT reply actions
The greatest part of these recaps is that they include common themes on LGT from this past week. It's a nice reminder of how ridiculous we are.
by supermarioelia on Apr 14, 2008 11:30 AM EDT reply actions
Great recap.
I think the most troublesome thing for me is Carmona's walk rate. It's almost as if every team came to the sudden realization that Fausto rarely throws the sinker for a strike, and teams have disciplined themselves enough to wait him out rather than swing away. This could be very, very bad in the long run.
Burn on, big river, burn on...
I, at least at the moment, am leaning towards being less concerned than you. It's not as if people are hitting him yet - you can make him throw the sinker for a strike, but can you hit it?
You have no idea the physical toll that three vasectomies have on a person
by jakesinger777 on Apr 14, 2008 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
It's just an adjustment he's going to have to make, and he's not the first young pitcher to have that challenge. But he's got everything going for him you could want to face that -- youth, health, devastating stuff, composure and good control. It may take him a while to figure out how to be as good as he was in late 2007, if he ever does, but he's got too much going for him not to be effective.
That's encouraging. What adjustments do you think he can reasonably make and still maintain his effectiveness?
Burn on, big river, burn on...
by Turkmenbashi on Apr 14, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions
What am I, a pitching coach?
You have to look at the low slider as a crutch. He dominated by leaning on it, but that doesn't mean he can't pitch well while mixing in other things more often. Maybe he was using it less in the first half, when he was merely "really good," and then started to hit it repeatedly in the second half, giving him great numbers for a while until the scouting caught up to him.
Truth is, though, the specifics of how he needs to alter his approach are a little out of my wheelhouse, so I'll let others jump in on that.
We all heard the Fox broadcasters harp on how Carmona needed to "use the left side of the plate." That strikes me as lazy -- if his sinker didn't break like a cartoon, would they even have recognized which side of the plate he works? I imagine, though, he'll have to make the same adjustments Westbrook eventually made -- another off-speed pitch that he can throw for strikes.
I also am a proponent of Fausto using the four-seamer a little more often, if only as a show pitch. I think it helps him expand the zone a little bit. I'm extrapolating from what I've seen work elsewhere, though -- the applicability of this stuff to Fausto is totally out of my league.
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Lee has had very good stretches in his past. The first half of 04 (before his tired arm), and the second half of 05. He's also had some very ugly stretches. One thing I have learned though, is never give up on a pitcher. Sometimes these guys look crappy as all get out, and the next year they are well above average. Not saying that Lee will be good this year, but similar situations have happened. A lot.
Since any blogger writing in his/her parents' basement in his/her underwear can speculate on whether C.C.'s contract situation is distracting him, what exactly do we need newspaper columnists for?
I call it "underwear envy". The columnists could do a better job, but they're distracted by their contract situation. They're negotiating one that would led them follow the Indians beat from their underwear. The sticking point has been bail money.
LeCavs.com!
If you were good enough, maybe we'd name it after you.
I think you're a little easy on Grady, who hadn't scored a run in many games until yesterday. He has been on base, but he hasn't been sparking the offense in his usual way (extra base hits, taking the extra base, etc.). I haven't counted, but it seems to me that he hasn't been on base early as much as last year, which would help explain why they have had so few leads (something they were great at last year).
I do think Lee can be a useful pitcher -- he has been showing the ability to keep the ball down and away (not just pitch inside when he's trying to get people out) and to throw strikes. He's not going to win 20 games, but 12 to 15 is quite reasonable.
The bullpen has been up and down, but not hopeless. No one has been consistent, but no one has been consistently bad either. I think they can fix it if the starters settle in and give Wedge time to develop a rotation, clear roles, etc.
Dellucci has played better, but I'm still not sold. He had a great week, and still only drove in a couple of runs, went 1 for 4 behind Caroll and Sizemore on Sunday, and looks only adequate defensively. If that's what we get in a GOOD week, I'm wondering if he's really worth 400 AB's (which is what he'll get as the lefty half of the platoon). Michaels should be gone (he might be trade-able); but, the logical replacement is Francisco, not Choo, who they may lose in May if they're not lucky. I don't know how they'll handle this. Maybe Blake against lefties and Choo on the bench/platooned with Gutierrez?
They're going to give Blake a lot of rope (I don't think they have confidence in Marte at 3rd). I hope they play Marte more than once a week; he made a nice play or two defensively and should be better than Blake in that respect. I suspect they won't, not right away anyway.
I think the Tigers are in trouble. Leyland is yelling at them in the press. He's clearly trying to light a fire under them and is getting antsy.
no kidding, you haven't counted. he has a .404 OBP.
the number of runs driven in has no reflection as to whether or not you had a "great week."
leyland is an idiot.
Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.
by Gradyforpresident on Apr 14, 2008 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I was specifically asking about Grady getting on early in the game. I know he has a good OBP; I don't know (and you didn't tell me) how often he has been getting on base leading off the game. Last year, he really did a great job of getting things going in the first inning and they often wound up with a lead, so the pitchers had a more comfortable job. This year, I don't recall that happening anywhere near as often. Grady has scored five runs, total. Which, of course, leads to Dellucci (and Cabrera, who hasn't been mentioned). I wasn't the one who started the discussion of Dellucci's good week: Jay and others correctly said he did. My point was that, even though he DID have a great week, he wasn't very productive.
I think Grady's SLG is to some extent a reflection of the pitchers' willingness to face our 2-hole hitters, who have been pretty uniformly unthreatening as yet. I continue to frown at Asdrubal's ABs -- I might be exaggerating, but I feel as though we're still seeing a lot of weak flyballs from him.
I think Michaels is about to redeem himself somewhat. He had some pretty good contact these last few games and not much to show for it. He frustrates me, but I try to remember he's in a limited role for a reason -- not the least of which is that our immediate RH outfield depth isn't super: Blake, who's hardly an improvement presently, Francisco, who isn't in gear yet, and ... Cooper? Goleski?
Kind of a quiet awesomeness for Jhonny P, thanks to the occasional trademark "what the heck was that?" AB. For whatever reason, I think we fret over Jhonny's production at a rate inversely proportionate to Hafner's success. Jhonny's doing his part, but he's never going to carry an offense.
Can I pose another question? How good is Ryan F. Garko, really? I used to think, perhaps unfairly, that he might be a cut below the other young 1B-man -- Kotchman, Loney, Jackson. But take a peek over at Athletics Nation: They were really glad to see him go. Not that that's evidence of anything in particular, it just makes me wonder.
The bullpen: I'm cautiously optimistic about the new guys, who have done everything we've asked of them so far. Stomp's been the man so far, covering, I think, for troubling performances from the other Infinitely Sided Polygon of Trusters. Here's a different way to think about it: Who else do we have? The Buffalo gang's had a rough go of it so far. I'm thinking J.D. Martin smells an opening.
2009 Opening Day Starter: A. Miller. (Why not?)
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Asdrubal actually looked damned good in that pinch-hit spot last night, even though he eventually struck out. I expect him to struggle off and on this season, as he certainly didn't have time to get fully seasoned in the minors.
Fair -- I ought not to hone in on Asdrubal when there are plenty of 30-somethings to gripe about.
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
In re: our bullpen. I did a little Fangraphing (is that a verb now?) of Betancourt. In a very SSS, he is throwing his FB 6% less frequently and making up for that by throwing the changeup 7% more frequently (with a bit of a drop in slider rate as well). It seems like he is having trouble throwing the fastball for strikes which has led to a reliance on the off-speed stuff and an increase of 0.28 in his GB/FB rate and more line drives. That is, obviously, turning into more hits. Again, SSS.
So that is a bit of analysis of what, to me, has been the most worrying aspect of the season.
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
Blake/Martevich
Doesn't Marte have to do something to suggest that he deserves to play to start caring about Blake's early struggles?
And, even if that happens, Blake will still likely get thrown into the outfield mix, making Michaels the odd man out.
Right now, though, if I was going to make a bet, it would be that Marte never gets going, Blake returns to last year's form, and that Michaels is jettisoned in favor of Francisco.
What exactly can Marte do to "deserve" the playing time? Make cookies for everyone?
He doesn't have options left, so he can't prove himself in the minors any further. That won't change. He squandered a chance to prove himself in the minors in 2007, that also isn't going to change. He was enormously successful at a very young age in the minors for four years in a row, 2002-2005, that too has not changed.
At this point, either they give him extended playing time, or they don't. He had earned his shot a year ago but fell victim to bad timing. He is no less worthy of a shot now, and Blake is no more satisfying as a 3B a year later, either.
So it isn't anything Marte can control other than through his conduct and game preparation. When Gootz was called up last year, he didn't exactly take off like a shot – through 20 games and 40 PA, his OBP was .250, but he was able to warm into extra playing time as a defensive replacement for Nixon. Gradually his playing time increased, and he flourished, but initially, his increased playing time had more to do with Nixon's production as Gutierrez's. In that first month, the attitude was, well, none of these guys are hitting, but at least this young guy is a good defender.
I think Marte would settle in at third base within 5-10 starts – there's just not much reason to think he wouldn't, he's been rated as a good-to-great defender his whole pro career. As for settling in as a hitter, that's harder to say, but as with Nixon last year, it's not like Blake is hitting or fielding well anyway.
It really is a Catch-22: Marte needs to "earn" playing time, but he's so rusty that he doesn't look good.
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Also! Forgot to mention the more general point ... if Marte has to "earn" playing time, then he can't get any, and if he doesn't get any then he will never get going, and if he never gets going then he hasn't "earned" playing time. This is stupid. You have to play the guy to know what he can do.
As for Blake returning to last year's form, he's sitting on a .246 average, .297 OBP, .357 slugging over his last 81 games, since last year's All-Star break. And since I like you, I've taken the trouble to figure out that his BABIP is .296 over that period, which is basically the same as his career mark of .297. And he only hit 4 HR in those 81 game, one every 74.25 AB, where prior to that in his career he hit one every 24.37 AB. So basically, his HR production is down to one-third his old level, and his OBP would be unacceptable even for a middle infielder.
We have a real problem here, whether you want to see it or not.
Wow. That really makes things clear. What is Blake's BP Collapse %? Or is he tabbed as an Attrition guy?
Jay,
I'm not trying to trash Marte, but I'm just a little sick of the Blake-bashing on LGT. Even if he's just an average ballplayer, he's also incredibly versatile and has done whatever the team has asked of him. That's more than can be said of Marte.
Simply because I want the team to win, I hope that someone, anyone -- including Marte -- really gets going and wins the 3B position outright. If that happened, I'd be happy to have Blake become the super-sub he used to be.
However, laying out all of Blake's stats doesn't change the fact that Marte's AAA numbers last year weren't much better than Blake's ML numbers. (Or the fact that Marte blamed his early season woes on cold weather, which is the lamest thing I've ever heard. Blake didn't complain a few years ago about going through a divorce, which seems like a bit of a more life- and playing-altering event than the chills.) In other words, Marte would have to be better at the ML level than he was at the AAA level to justify starting. Plenty of players trajectories say that will happen, of course. So, I'm not discounting the possibility.
Yet, nothing the Indians organization has ever done suggests that they would sit a good team guy like Blake and hand a starting position to someone like Marte who has really just coasted since coming to the organization.
That being said, I'd be happy to give Marte 2-3 starts per week at 3B and see what happens. But if he's not performing and Blake is in, say, 5-6 weeks, the team can't just let him try to figure things out because he's out of options when the goal is to win games.
Once again, my post was merely to point out that there's a bit of a pro-Marte and anti-Blake thing going on at LGT that doesn't seem to accord with the reality of Marte's performance since joining the organization.
I'd also like to point out that it seems everyone read my comment as advocating a Marte deathwatch, whereas it was actually saying it's stupid to start a Blake deathwatch until Marte starts producing.
I sincerely hope Marte isn't a bust, and I think it's smart to give him a good amount of playing time (though not to hand him a starting job).
But it is just a little hilarious to read the game thread from yesterday. Everyone was making excuses for Marte's awful at bat with the bases loaded, and then everyone jumped all over Wedge for pinch-hitting for Marte when he came up again with the bases loaded. Pinch-hitting Droobs was the right thing to do. And it would have been the right thing to do if Blake was up. (But I'm certain the reaction to both at bats would have been different had it been Blake batting.)
The point is that the team is trying to win ballgames. Period.
Well, it's a tough situation.
Any Indians fan worth their salt wants to see Marte succeed. They want guys to get a chance like young guys on the team from 2002-2005 we able to. But the reality is that the day-to-day expectations are far greater now than then.
So, you have to balance out giving guys a "fair shake" and winning games at all costs. It's a situation that will leave a lot of people sore in the end.
Well, Blake had a horrible April last year (.200 BA on Apr 26th) .. than got pretty hot in May (.321, .971 OPS). So, at least he has a track record of doing this.
Marte has no track record .. and in fact, is coming off a very bad Fall league stint and Spring Training stint.
Didn't Marte lead the team in home runs in Spring Training?
Declining veterans get the first shot over rookies but ultimately not that much more of a shot. Just as with a young player, we're waiting to see if Michaels, Dellucci and now Blake can actually play at the level we need, but Blake is not divinely entitled to much more patience. He's already sucked for 81 games, that's the reality.
From here...
I've said it before: For better or worse, the difference in production between Casey Blake and Andy Marte is highly unlikely to be the difference between winning or losing the division. Given that, I would rather watch Marte improve than Blake decline.
And whatever you may think about Andy's chances of significant improvement in 2008, Casey Blake's decline isn't really in question. He turns 35 in August, now four years removed from his career year. He's league average for his career, but I don't see much evidence that he's going to be league average this season -- at the plate, or, for that matter, in the field.
I don't see how the Indians can afford NOT to play Andy Marte. And I recoil at the notion -- admittedly not one necessarily espoused by anybody here -- that the Indians owe Casey Blake anything. They rescued him from AAA and kept him in the lineup when I imagine many other teams would not have. Sink or swim, he gets $6MM this season. I'd say the gratitude/loyalty ledger is pretty well zeroed out.
I agree with your last statement -- the end is the W's -- but I think the opposite course of action is the proper means.
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Winning ballgames is the key.
I think the point most of us are trying to make is that despite what you might *THINK* about the effort it seems Casey Blake exerts (rightfully so, he seems a hard worker), his versatility, his "team-first" approach, and the sympathy that we've been pushing him out the door since stepped inside, on a pure numbers basis, Casey Blake doesn't really provide that many more wins than Andy Marte, if any, in 2008.
And if Blake is a win or two better than Marte in 2008, the idea is to put Andy Marte in a position to be on par or better than Blake or any reasonably available $400K alternative in 2009. Winning ballgames is the key--but there's a balance between today (2008) and tomorrow (years beyond 2008) that you're ignoring.
And these character claims of Marte "coasting" are unsubstantiated? Have you ever met the guy or been personally privy to his workout? Marte's just as much a "character" guy as he is a "talent" guy...he's exactly the type of person the Indians want on their team. That comes to me directly from people in his life: the guy who scouted and signed Andy Marte as a 16 year old in the Dominican Republic, and his agents for the last eight years. Don't let the lack of of a muscular appearance full year- Marte's an athlete, a damn good one, and at age 24 has done nothing but suggest he's worthy of a chance to be a Major League ballplayer.
I don't know the guy personally. Marte SHOULD have to earn his shot, but he can't exactly do that when Todd Hollandsworth is hitting for him in any meaningful situation or he's being asked to bunt in the third inning.
It's been a recurring theme here: If you rooted for 2006, early 2007 Ryan Garko, you should root for 2008 Andy Marte. Both were accomplished minor league players with somewhat lackluster previous-year minor league stats. And like Garko was, Marte's blocked by a major-leaguer who, whatever his merits, is inadequate at his current position. It just happens that both of those major leaguers are Casey Blake.
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, but you really are trashing Marte.
Blake is not "incredibly versatile," he's merely versatile. He doesn't play any skill position and isn't a good third baseman defensively. And if he can't play third base well, then his bat isn't good enough to call him an "average ballplayer," either. That's how it shapes up.
Marte's main early struggle was getting injured. The rest of it is miniscule samples and anecdotal stuff. I'm willing to grant you that Blake is the great guy ever, but that shouldn't be held against Marte, who is a good ten years younger and has been waiting for his turn for going on three years now.
You hardly ever see a major leaguer get injured and then not be given a chance to get his job back, but that's exactly what happened to Marte last season. This is very much against the usual protocol in baseball. "Coasted" suggests a lack of effort, and frankly, we have little to no basis for saying something like that. It seems likelier he's been frustrated and tried too hard. You imply he's not a good team guy like Blake, but based on what?
And then back to: "it's stupid to start a Blake deathwatch until Marte starts producing." No, it's impossible for a player to produce unless he's given a meaningful opportunity, and it's stupid to expect otherwise.
I think you will find, in general, that the pro-Marte sentiment will very closely follow the collapse in Blake's play. If Blake goes on a tear, nobody will be complaining about Marte. They'll be saying he has to wait his turn, and they'll be right.
How do you know that Andy Marte has not done everything the club asked him to do? This spring he spent several games working at first base. Yesterday, the club asked him to bunt twice.
Are you privy to some inside information that the rest of us don't have regarding what the club expects of Andy Marte?
Free Andy Marte!
by woodsmeister on Apr 14, 2008 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Yikes!
I think that all of these comments are proving my point at the negative/positive reaction to Blake vis a vis Marte.
I retract the term "coasted." Or, at least, I didn't meant to imply that he's a bad guy. (I don't retract that his cold weather comment was lame, though.)
Once again, I really, really, really WANT him to do well. And I want him to get 2-3 starts per week, plus other opportunities, to demonstrate what he can or cannot do.
All I meant by "coast" was that he's done less well than (or, at his best, about as well as) he did in the Braves organization since we got him.
My comments were only meant as a defense of Blake. Virtually no one on this site says anything positive about him, and therefore I felt like speaking up for him. Is he a great player? No. Is he our future third baseman? No. Yet, the famous ground-out aside, he was one of the team's best LCS hitters, and he's served the club well since he came here.
I'll be as happy as the next guy if Marte turns out to be the great player everyone expected him to be when the team traded for him. (And if he can perform as well as Blake this year, I completely understand and at least partly agree with the sentiment that it's better to go with the young guy.)
So, once again, defending Blake from a lot of mean-spirited and irrational bashing is not the same thing as rooting against Marte. I root for everyone in a Cleveland uniform.*
*except when we had John Rocker.
Well, for one thing, it’s a bit circuitous to mention a divisive topic, and then claim your argument is supported by the mere fact that it drew a lively response. More seriously, though, is that I’m not out for Blake’s head. I’ve got nothing against the guy. My problem is with his batting line. If Andy Marte were playing every day, with league average defense, hitting .250, that would be an improvement.
by fleerdon on Apr 15, 2008 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Nice writeup . . . liked the Fight Club reference (until you started making me doubt that it was being j. Martevich).
The Dellucci we are seeing may well be the Dellucci we will be getting. This is what he does. Get on base (although this rate is unprecedented). He could even increase the power, although more random drug testing should prevent a return to his earlier HR numbers.
The bell will not toll for Blake so long as he is sharing underwear with Wedgie (ugh, even writing it that way turns the stomach a bit).
No, not too soon to think the MCKitties are going to have trouble this year. This is a sign of things to come. They're Old. Injuries will hurt them all year, and their 'best' pitcher has been Bonderman. They are in trouble despite the fact that they will still score a bunch of runs at times.
I fully support giving Marte the chance he should be given, but it will probably be at Michaels' expense, not Blake's (with Blake filling in at LF, maybe).
The talk that Michaels' hits are 'just not falling in' worries me.
Is that anything like hitting balls right at people (a related malady afficting Dellucci and referred to -- not by me -- in another thread on LGT)?
Michaels' numbers are a bit too horrible to be explained by that alone.
I flipped through all the game logs looking at Grady's at-bats. It looks like he's the one who has been getting a lot of hard-hit outs, lots of deep flies and a few line-outs, fliners right at a guy, etc. I'm not really worried about him, but I thought it was worth noting.
I was just commenting on the fact that when we talk about guy we don't like, we're skeptical about the idea that "balls aren't falling in." When we're talking about a guy we DO like, we talk about hitting in hard luck, hitting it right at people, as if that were different. I agree that Michaels has been horrible and that Grad will be okay (although I wish he'd learn to hit the ball on the ground a bit more and use his speed).
I'm leaving J-Mike's troubles up to SSS. One peek at Russell Martin's line would have you think he's terrible.
No, Michaels isn't the player Martin is, but every player can have awful stretches of play.
To clarify, I don't think Michaels is all that good, but just that he has to get better from where he is now.
I don't know that Sizemore's speed is so explosive that we want him hitting balls into the ground deliberately. It's not much of a strategy for a guy easily capable of hitting 30 HR.
No, he shouldn't be Mickey Rivers or someone like that. But, sometimes he frustrates me because he seems always to try to drive the ball, resulting in a lot of fly ball/line drive outs, in situations when putting the ball in play might be a better strategy. Don't get me wrong, he's a wonderful player and will get better. But, he might be even better if he varied his approach a bit more (that might reduce the strikeouts too).
Could we stop screwing around and have one really good week please?
Seriously!
Since any blogger writing in his/her parents' basement in his/her underwear can speculate on whether C.C.'s contract situation is distracting him, what exactly do we need newspaper columnists for?
Who knows.
How good can Cliff Lee really be, and for how long?
With that fastball and if he is keeping his curveball low and his changeup lowing and away (and actually throws the latter two pitches at a moderate rate, he can easily be a 180 IP 160 K 20 HR 40 walk guy. With those peripherals, his absurd GO/AO rato stops looking so bad. Not to mention, I have a feeling that if he mixes those pitches in well, he will get that ratio closer to 1 than .5. If he does all that, he is at the very least a great number 3, probably an above average number 2.
The thing is with Cliff Lee I'm just skeptical that he is going to continue to consistently throw all his pitches. I think he is going to (but I hope not) revert back to just throwing his fastball after he starts to have moderate success for like 10 or so more starts. I hope I'm wrong though, because quality pitching like that is an asset and we could sure use him.
Can Dellucci be the nice role player he was meant to be for us?
I really think so. People just gave him such a short leash last year and I think it was somewhat unfair. The guy has shown plus walk rates in the past and if he can continue to do so for us, he is an extremely useful player.
I just wonder what we will do with Choo once he returns from the DL if Delucci continues this success. But those problems are nice to have.
Still too soon for a Michaels death-watch?
Honestly, I don't think so. the guy has had 721 AB's with us in 2006 and 2007 and failed to post an OPS over even .725 in either season. You can't attribute this to sample size anymore like you could have with Dellucci. At some point, you have to come to the conclusion that this is the AL Jason Michaels. Gone are his excellent walk rates from Phildelphia and still here is his sub par power (especially for a LF).
Too soon to mention a Caesy Blake death-watch, even in hushed tones?
Yes. Blake/Dellucci or Blake/Choo in LF please.
Martevich? Martevich Martevich Martevich Martevich?
Not sure what this means but he should have been our starting 3b the second he recovered from his injury last year.
Still too soon for a Tigers 2008 season death watch?
Definitely too soon. I wonder if they're going to call up Porcello earlier than they should to shore up their bullpen issues. Unlike the offensive struggles so far, the Tigers' bullpen is no mirage. They need to fix it fast. I'm not familiar with their relievers on the farm, but they can't do much worse than the current squad.
How healthy will Victor be this season?
Not sure, But I think he'll be fine.
Could Peralta be charging into a breakout season, just one month from his 26th birthday?
It's possible. The guy is an extremely useful player and I am glad he has remained at SS, which is where he belongs.
Does anybody have any clue who will be our 2009 Opening Day starter?
I'll say Carmona. I really wish we'd trade CC for Phil Hughes. That desire has nothing to do with anything that has happened so far in this year's season.
For more than half our relievers, do we really have the slightest idea if they're really good or really bad?
That's a question you can ask of any bullpen each new year. I think it will even out as we have talented relievers. I don't think their acheivements last year was all luck, even though Betancourt was helped a ton by luck last year.
About Detroit, sure they haven't been scoring, but their pitching has been truly, utterly, comically, worst-in-MLB, atrocious. Not to toot our own horn here or anything, but isn't this exactly what we were talking about when they made "THE TRADE?"
Fact: Detroit is Old.
Fact: Old players tend to get injured.
Fact: Detroit has no pitching.
Now I'm not saying they're going to finish 28-134, but this seems a lot more systemic than just a "bad start."
yeah, i tend to agree with you here.
Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.
by Gradyforpresident on Apr 14, 2008 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Is the 4.8 mood rating a weekly average, or your mood at that moment you wrote this?
I'm sitting at 5.1 following yesterday's win. It'd be higher if Marte was starting, but the whoopin' we're about to put on the Sawx will lift everybody up.
I'm making a conscious effort not to be completely swayed by the immediately preceding game, really taking in the whole week and where it leaves us for the season. I mean, we could do a mood meter every day and make it really crazy.
We'd have to seperate major and minor league moods, since most of the folks around here seem to take in the total picture. When things aren't going so well up top, I look for a bright spot somewhere in the organization. There's almost always something good happening somewhere (an independent league Peralta, for example). Even still, my mood isn't going to be above a 7 if the big club isn't winning
I get to watch Akron take on Bowie this weekend, so that's a good thing.
POTW...
"The surge is working." SuddenSam, no? I'm willing to start calling Jamey Carroll "The Surge."
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 2:19 PM EDT reply actions
* Could Peralta be charging into a breakout season, just one month from his 26th birthday?
I thought that this was the most interesting question. I really think Peralta will be an offensive force and part of the upper tier of American League SS. He probably won't hit .300 but I bet 25-30 homers and close to 100 RBI will happen.
* Does anybody have any clue who will be our 2009 Opening Day starter?
Jake Westbrook.
* For more than half our relievers, do we really have the slightest idea if they're really good or really bad?
Tough to say. I'm worried about Perez. Hitters have been teeing off at times. He was a large part of our success. Hopefully he finds whatever he has lost.
FWIW (not much), Raffy P doesn't seem to be able to throw the slider for an "ALMOST STRIKE" as consistently as he was last year. When he's right, that thing looks like a meatball right down the middle then ends up midway through the batter's box. Could he still just be looking for the feel of it, or are guys just laying off it and making him throw fastballs?
Tune in next week for the Pitch F|X fueled answer.
I'm all for killing Michaels and leaving him somewhere in the middle of the night.
That's what that question was asking, right?
Gutz for MVP!!!
Lee for Cy Young!
or an abandoned rowhouse
Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.
by Gradyforpresident on Apr 14, 2008 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions
It looks like just another "white knuckle April" of the Wedge era to me. Hopefully, it won't be followed by a white knuckle May.
I thank Jay for educating us on Blake's drop off in performance since midseason 07. Perhaps Wedge believes we owe Blake 100 at bats in 08 before asking him to play a reserve role.
Anyhoo, the common theme of my post is, patience, patience, patience.
A couple weeks into the season, and it seems we have some roster problems. Since Wedge refuses to play Marte, that leaves Michaels as our 4th and only outfielder against righties. Wedge, rightfully so I think, has decided to give Franklin some days off against righties. The problem with that is that puts Michaels into the lineup, and that is not a recipe for success (.717 career OPS, last year in 131 ab it was .636.). If Wedge is unwilling to give Blake some starts in right, the preferred situation, then we need to jettison Michaels in favor of Mr. Francisco.
I agree - patience, patience, patience. CW states 40 games before you know a team. I'd say we start making changes around 25-35 games in (if necessary). Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that roughly coincide with Choo possibly coming back?
I also agree there's a decent shot that Westbrook is our Opening Day starter next year. Strangely enough, that doesn't worry me as much as you'd think. I also think there's a 40% chance it's Fausto and a 10% chance it's CC. Is it too early to start daydreaming that Jake could win the Cy Young?
Too early for a Detroit Death Watch, but there are systematic problems on that team - all of which were predicted to a certain extent. This might be a convergence of the worst possible scenarios.
I like Blake and want to see him do well. I admit that I'm part of the "anti-Blake" crowd here and embrace all LOBlake remarks tending to be surprised when he does anything at all with men on base. But part of this comes back to the idea that I think he's overextended in his role with the team. IMHO he's the perfect example of a role player that can be plugged in where needed for short term solutions. He might have been more in the past, but now he's more valuable giving days off than benching a guy with potential upside.
I just can't shake the feeling that DD and Lee with both either implode or get injured. I like the fact both seem to be upping potential trade values. I've said for over a year now that Lee could be a successful ML pitcher, just he has a better chance of it in the NL.
I'd love to be proven wrong about Peralta. My ideal IF in 2 years would be Garko, Barfield, AstroCab, and Marte all doing amazing things. Is it wrong that I equate Peralta with Baerga somewhere in the deep recesses of my mind?
As for our relievers, I have faith we'll be decent. Elarton hasn't looked too bad in Buffalo. We've got depth. There's always some fudging of things.
Still the local "Barfield Bounces Back Believer" but also a developing a Gutz mancrush. Free Marte, 'nuff said.
Barfield Watch: 325/386/400 for a 786 OPS.
feh.
His middle name is still LaRoy, which is kinda sweet.
After last year, I'm willing to call that start from Barfield participle fantastic.
by fleerdon on Apr 14, 2008 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
"Too soon to mention a Caesy Blake death-watch, even in hushed tones?"
His playing time will start to drop off, and by September, he'll be a strictly bench player. I think we all need to relax about this whole Wedge/Marte thing - yes, I'd like to see him get more time, but we're all of 12 games in. If I'd told you in the offseason that Blake was going to start 10 of 12 games at third to open the season, who here really would have been surprised? His numbers are obviously terrible, but give him a chance to rebound before we start castigating management for playing him.
"Still too soon for a Tigers 2008 season death watch?"
Too soon for a death watch, not too soon for a suck watch. Who knew you couldn't fix your pitching staff by trading for a third baseman and a guy who ERA+ed 83 last season?
"Does anybody have any clue who will be our 2009 Opening Day starter?
Carmona had the best ERA in the American League last year, he just signed a multi-year deal, and he's ERA+ing 190. I'm a huge Westbrook guy, but he's not starting opening day ahead of Fausto.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe
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,’ featuring the Miami Marlins
- 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.
