All Things Baseball

There was a funny spoof before saying the Cardinals traded Albert Pujols to the A's... but apparently the truth can be stranger than fiction!!!

Billy Beane has traded Mark Mulder to the Cardinals for Dan Haren, Kiko Calero, and Daric Barton.

WHAT the heck is going on???

I guess from some weird economic standpoint, given the A's situation, this was a "good" move - no way Beane and the A's could afford Mulder, even after trading Hudson away. And he did get a pretty studly prospect in Danny Haren, and Kiko Calero fits their trend of getting power arms in the pen.

But WOW. WOW WOW WOW. I mean, WOW.

So his starting rotation is now: Zito, Harden, Blanton, Haren, Meyer? He really IS planning for the future, isn't he?

WOW.

I mean, I respect Beane, and I wish Ed Wade was bold and creative. But maybe not THIS bold. I hear Barton has a .445 OBP, and .511 SLG as a catcher, and that's certainly great. And Haren is potentially great. And Mulder had an off year. But to trade both Hudson and Mulder in the same week... well, I'm glad I'm not a diehard A's fan.

After completing his admittedly amazing deal for Tim Hudson, Braves GM John Schuerholz came out and declared that his new 2005 rotation is the best starting five he's ever had in Atlanta. Well, that was obviously exaggeration, given that he 1994, his starting five was:

Greg Maddux, who was at the top of his game and arguably putting up some of the best numbers in MLB history.
Tom Glavine, who was also at his most effective as a control pitcher.
John Smoltz, who was striking out batters at a great clip.
Steve Avery, a youngster was was still the brilliant pitcher people hoped he would be.
Kent Merker, an incredible guy to have as your number 5 pitcher.

There is no way the current starting five can compare to this great list of pitchers, and I immediately dismissed Schuerholz's statements as marketing hype, gamesmanship, and salesmanship tactics.

But nevertheless, as a Phillies fan, I was definitely depressed and angry to see the Braves acquire Tim Hudson, and it immediately put a damper on my expectations for the 2005 Phillies, a team whose window is just rapidly closing... to the point of wondering whether it's already shut.

Was I right to immediately put a downer on my expectations? Should I be worried about the 2005 Phillies' chances because of this acquisition of Tim Hudson and the new great Braves rotation?

Well, no Phillies fan can truly be confident about the next Phillies season, no matter how high the praise, how good the team looks on paper, and how much the prognosticators are predicting a playoff berth (ie: 2004). And at first, as my previous posts clearly show, I was worried about the Tim Hudson deal. In fact, nearly all of the sports-world has called this Hudson deal one of the best this offseason. Yahoo experts are saying that Schuerholz has driven the rest of the NL East into obscurity. ESPN polls and experts say that the Braves rotation is one of the best in the MLB.

But I now believe, after more thought, that the Braves rotation is a grossly OVERRATED rotation. And I believe that the Braves will come to disappoint many fans. And I believe that without some extra offensive firepower, the Braves will finish behind the Phillies in the East. Why? Let's take a look at their projected rotation:

Tim Hudson: Well, okay, this guy is now the best pitcher in the NL East (though I do believe Pedro will put up great numbers this season, I think it's a mirage and a cover for the future injuries he'll have to face). I don't know how much Mazzone will actually improve his numbers - given that it seems like Hudson has figured this whole pitching thing out and really doesn't need Mazzone to work his magic or teach him an offspeed pitch or anything like that. In fact, I could see Hudson helping the other pitchers out in the Braves organization... but I think the numbers we've seen from him will be the numbers we will see from him, all things considered (pitching in Oakland's stadium, facing pitchers instead of DH's, etc).

John Smoltz: This is where I diverge from many experts. Many people are praising his return to the rotation, claiming that he'll return to elite status, posting his phenomenal K rate as evidenced by his years as a closer. I disagree 100%. I expect a rather pedestrian season from John Smoltz... perhaps he'll be great in April and May, but come July, August, September, I really don't think Smoltz will be a great number 2 pitcher. Why? He's almost 40 years old. Now I know that he's saved his arm over the last 3 years as a closer, and he'll be fresh this season. But as a closer, he was able to do his job by facing each batter just once and (usually) striking them out. That changes drastically as a starter - just ask Eric Gagne! Now, to be effective, he'll have to go through the lineup 3 or 4 times. I know he did great things his last year as a starter - 1.12 WHIP, nearly 4-1 K/BB ratio, very low HR rates in 1999. But I just don't think he'll be able to do that now, 5 to 6 years later. Come the 4th, 5th, 6th innings, I really expect him to suffer... Roger Clemens aside, 38, 39 year old pitchers just have issues getting through the lineup.

John Thomson: His season last year was good, okay, but not great. 1.32 WHIP, 2.5-1 K/BB ratio... that's okay, but nothing exciting. He did put up some impressive WHIP numbers in Colorado (1.16 and 1.28 in 2001 and 2002) and most of his career numbers reflect time spent in Colorado and Texas, thus inflating his ERA and HR totals. But that said, Thomson is at best a run of the mill number 3 starter... and at 31, 32 years of age, he's nothing to hang your hat on. Count me as unimpressed.

Mike Hampton: Here's an prime example of people overestimating a Braves pitcher just because Leo Mazzone has gotten his hands on him. Yes, in 2003, he put up pretty good numbers that were a vast improvement over his Colorado days - but last season, his numbers? 1.53 WHIP; .290 BAA; nearly a 1-1 K/BB ratio; and only 172 innings pitched. Tack on a 4.28 ERA, and this, folks, is a bad pitcher. He's not 33 years old, a long time away from his one excellent season in 1999 in Houston. Ever since, he's been an overrated pitcher (check out his career stats). His K/BB ratio has never been good. His WHIP as a result suffers immensely. He posted ONE excellent year, 1999, and all other years have been good, not great. Yes he's their number 3 or 4 pitcher, but I personally would rather have Vicente Padilla and Brett Myers ... and there is no way Hampton is a scary starter.

Kyle Davies/Horacio Ramirez: I don't know much about Kyle Davies. Horacio Ramirez put up some interesting numbers last season, but the statistical data set is just not extensive enough to predict what till happen. In any case, as number 5 starters, they may do well, but nothing that scares me.

So there you have it. The vaunted Braves rotation. Yes, Tim Hudson is superb and I desperately wish he was a Phillie. But best Braves rotation ever? No way. Best rotation in the NL East? Maybe. It's arguable. Dominating rotation? Absolutely not.

After completing his admittedly amazing deal for Tim Hudson, Braves GM John Schuerholz came out and declared that his new 2005 rotation is the best starting five he's ever had in Atlanta. Well, that was obviously exaggeration, given that he 1994, his starting five was:

Greg Maddux, who was at the top of his game and arguably putting up some of the best numbers in MLB history.
Tom Glavine, who was also at his most effective as a control pitcher.
John Smoltz, who was striking out batters at a great clip.
Steve Avery, a youngster was was still the brilliant pitcher people hoped he would be.
Kent Merker, an incredible guy to have as your number 5 pitcher.

There is no way the current starting five can compare to this great list of pitchers, and I immediately dismissed Schuerholz's statements as marketing hype, gamesmanship, and salesmanship tactics.

But nevertheless, as a Phillies fan, I was definitely depressed and angry to see the Braves acquire Tim Hudson, and it immediately put a damper on my expectations for the 2005 Phillies, a team whose window is just rapidly closing... to the point of wondering whether it's already shut.

Was I right to immediately put a downer on my expectations? Should I be worried about the 2005 Phillies' chances because of this acquisition of Tim Hudson and the new great Braves rotation?

Well, no Phillies fan can truly be confident about the next Phillies season, no matter how high the praise, how good the team looks on paper, and how much the prognosticators are predicting a playoff berth (ie: 2004). And at first, as my previous posts clearly show, I was worried about the Tim Hudson deal. In fact, nearly all of the sports-world has called this Hudson deal one of the best this offseason. Yahoo experts are saying that Schuerholz has driven the rest of the NL East into obscurity. ESPN polls and experts say that the Braves rotation is one of the best in the MLB.

But I now believe, after more thought, that the Braves rotation is a grossly OVERRATED rotation. And I believe that the Braves will come to disappoint many fans. And I believe that without some extra offensive firepower, the Braves will finish behind the Phillies in the East. Why? Let's take a look at their projected rotation:

Tim Hudson: Well, okay, this guy is now the best pitcher in the NL East (though I do believe Pedro will put up great numbers this season, I think it's a mirage and a cover for the future injuries he'll have to face). I don't know how much Mazzone will actually improve his numbers - given that it seems like Hudson has figured this whole pitching thing out and really doesn't need Mazzone to work his magic or teach him an offspeed pitch or anything like that. In fact, I could see Hudson helping the other pitchers out in the Braves organization... but I think the numbers we've seen from him will be the numbers we will see from him, all things considered (pitching in Oakland's stadium, facing pitchers instead of DH's, etc).

John Smoltz: This is where I diverge from many experts. Many people are praising his return to the rotation, claiming that he'll return to elite status, posting his phenomenal K rate as evidenced by his years as a closer. I disagree 100%. I expect a rather pedestrian season from John Smoltz... perhaps he'll be great in April and May, but come July, August, September, I really don't think Smoltz will be a great number 2 pitcher. Why? He's almost 40 years old. Now I know that he's saved his arm over the last 3 years as a closer, and he'll be fresh this season. But as a closer, he was able to do his job by facing each batter just once and (usually) striking them out. That changes drastically as a starter - just ask Eric Gagne! Now, to be effective, he'll have to go through the lineup 3 or 4 times. I know he did great things his last year as a starter - 1.12 WHIP, nearly 4-1 K/BB ratio, very low HR rates in 1999. But I just don't think he'll be able to do that now, 5 to 6 years later. Come the 4th, 5th, 6th innings, I really expect him to suffer... Roger Clemens aside, 38, 39 year old pitchers just have issues getting through the lineup.

John Thomson: His season last year was good, okay, but not great. 1.32 WHIP, 2.5-1 K/BB ratio... that's okay, but nothing exciting. He did put up some impressive WHIP numbers in Colorado (1.16 and 1.28 in 2001 and 2002) and most of his career numbers reflect time spent in Colorado and Texas, thus inflating his ERA and HR totals. But that said, Thomson is at best a run of the mill number 3 starter... and at 31, 32 years of age, he's nothing to hang your hat on. Count me as unimpressed.

Mike Hampton: Here's an prime example of people overestimating a Braves pitcher just because Leo Mazzone has gotten his hands on him. Yes, in 2003, he put up pretty good numbers that were a vast improvement over his Colorado days - but last season, his numbers? 1.53 WHIP; .290 BAA; nearly a 1-1 K/BB ratio; and only 172 innings pitched. Tack on a 4.28 ERA, and this, folks, is a bad pitcher. He's not 33 years old, a long time away from his one excellent season in 1999 in Houston. Ever since, he's been an overrated pitcher (check out his career stats). His K/BB ratio has never been good. His WHIP as a result suffers immensely. He posted ONE excellent year, 1999, and all other years have been good, not great. Yes he's their number 3 or 4 pitcher, but I personally would rather have Vicente Padilla and Brett Myers ... and there is no way Hampton is a scary starter.

Kyle Davies/Horacio Ramirez: I don't know much about Kyle Davies. Horacio Ramirez put up some interesting numbers last season, but the statistical data set is just not extensive enough to predict what till happen. In any case, as number 5 starters, they may do well, but nothing that scares me.

So there you have it. The vaunted Braves rotation. Yes, Tim Hudson is superb and I desperately wish he was a Phillie. But best Braves rotation ever? No way. Best rotation in the NL East? Maybe. It's arguable. Dominating rotation? Absolutely not.

Well, it's a dark day for all Phillies fans, and really, anyone who has a team in the National League East that is not the Braves. John Schuerholz just showed everyone why the Braves are the class of the National League East and why they will win their 52nd NL East title in a row (exaggeration intended).

The worst possible thing just happened. The Braves acquired Tim Hudson, and they really didn't give up that much to get him. Juan Cruz, Charles Thomas, and Dan Meyer really don't add up to a Tim Hudson, and the Braves really are a big bat away from a World Series appearance. While I'm not sold on John Smoltz returning to the starting rotation, he will be serviceable at the least, and a rotation headed by Tim Hudson will always be strong.

Could the Phillies have gotten into the Hudson sweepstakes? Yesterday's posts to the contrary (talking about the economic problems that would surface should give up cheap players for a one-year rental), I think they should have tried something still. I'm underwhelmed by the ultimate deal... I'm surprised Nick Green wasn't involved. I'm surprised Marcus Giles wasn't involved (even with Matt Ginter being a new Athletic). I'm surprised the Dodgers didn't finish off this deal.

Now with Leo Mazzone getting his hands on Tim Hudson, I really have to think that the Braves will manage to sign Hudson to a long term deal. And meanwhile, we have the Phillies with a rotation headed by Jon Lieber and Randy Wolf.

Well, we'll just have to see what happens.

When I have more time, I'll take a look at the Tim Hudson stats, compared with what they gave up. Let's see if this was as great a deal as I lamentably believe. In the meantime, I'm gonna keep rooting for the Phillies, as hopeless as that may become for 2005.

So, now that the A's have acquired Matt Ginter from the Brewers (my fiancee's hometown team), it would seem that the Braves don't have what the A's want for Tim Hudson! Good news for Phillies-philes. I mean, without Jose Cappellan, without Marcus Giles being needed by the A's... perhaps Hudson will end up in LA in an Edwin Jackson-type deal.

We Shall See.

(See what I'm reduced to as a Phillies fan! Rooting against the Braves' deals.)

Ah, the stuff of dreams. If only baseball worked like fantasy baseball, with no (real) concerns about money and salaries!

Anyway, Tom G. over at Balls Sticks & Stuff (link to the right) makes the 100% correct point that the Phillies will never trade for Tim Hudson. And he's right, there's no way ... and more than that, he's absolutely correct about the reasons: It would be a one year rental, we'd never be able to afford him for 2006 and 2007, we'd lose out on young cheap talent in the trade.

Deep down, I knew it was a pipe dream. And while Hudson would be that ace pitcher that every team would covet (he is on my keeper fantasy team, by the way), I know that given the salary structure of the Phillies, there is no way for this deal to ever happen.

I think my real point, however, was to continue my growing attacks on Ed Wade. I know that I'm beating a dead horse, or at least harping on an issue that I will never ever affect or influence. But I will still use this blog to air my thoughts on it (with my apologies!).

It's not that the Phillies won't trade for Tim Hudson. You're right, it's just not feasible.

Rather, it's that the Phillies would NEVER trade for Tim Hudson, even if it was feasible. We'd never TRY to make it feasible. I'm not even sure Ed Wade could come up with a way to make sure that Hudson goes to another team in a 3 way deal and stop him from going to the Braves.

Last year this time, I was excited about the Phillies - Thome, Billy Wagner, Millwood, these were heady times. As ShallowCenter said earlier, it looked like we had turned the corner into an exciting, possibility-rich team. But instead, it looks to have been a way to get fans to our new stadium in that first year. And that's it. Not a change in philosophy. Not a change in tactics. Not a change away from stagnant conservatism. Not a sign of creativity and intelligence.

Instead, we now get assurances that our mediocre pitching staff is actually great. We get "bargains" like Kenny Lofton. We get unnecessary risks like Jon Lieber while Odalis Perez (he's back!) and Matt Clement remain on the market, perhaps for cheaper. We get exciting players being passed around... All while the Phillies look for a 6th member of the bullpen. We get Ryan Howard stuck in the minors. Chase Utley as the hope of the future. Marlon Byrd as a useless minor-leaguer, to be replaced by Jason Michaels and Lofton.

I know Tim Hudson isn't possible. I realize the economics just don't work out.

But it's not like we're sitting on the sidelines in the market now because we've gotten the players we truly need... it's because we're going the "safe route" of signing those players that other teams don't want.

Well, yesterday was almost a good day for me, as a Phillie fan. I learned that the Mets were actually guaranteeing FOUR years, about $50 million for Pedro Martinez. Yes, Pedro may be pretty good in 2005, but who really thinks that the Mets are one stud pitcher away from relevance? Now let's take a closer look - though it's the same look that nearly every baseball analyst has taken at this deal:

1. Pedro has about a 90% tear in his labrum, give or take a few percentage points.
2. Pedro has become a 5 inning, 90-95 pitch pitcher. In other words, you better have a good bullpen when Pedro is on the mound.
3. The Mets are so anxious to make this move that they are perhaps willing to forego the MRI on his physical examination!
4. The chances of having Pedro healthy for all of 2005, let alone 2006, 2007, and 2008 are about as close to zero. Any closer to zero, and it would be negative.
5. 50 million dollars... man, it's like the Mets are trying to repeat the Mo Vaughn situation.

So, in my mind, the Mets have become a non-factor for the next 5 years. And that made me happy as a Phillie fan, especially considering my best man is a Mets fan.

But then, I learned a new bit of news... the Braves are going after Tim Hudson.

Now, I just saw that "A Citizen's Blog" has stolen my thunder! His latest post - the link to his site is to the right - urges the Phillies to deal for Hudson. I agree with this 100%. I don't think Ryan Howard, Marlon Byrd, and a pitcher like Myers will be nearly enough to get him, but I do think something like Ryan Howard, Ryan Madson or Brett Myers, and maybe Chase Utley would be closer. I don't think people want to give up on Chase Utley, but I don't think he'll turn out to be anything special. Call it a gut feeling.

That said, there's NO WAY that Ed Wade will ever try anything like this. Even though we desperately need an ace pitcher. Even though we desperately need some sign that our GM is competent. Even though Hudson is one of the best. Even though Hudson is a great groundball pitcher.

No, this will never happen. Because in Ed Wade's mind, our pitching staff is among the best in the majors. Because Wolf and Padilla will hopefully be better than last year. Because Myers will hopefully develop.

Well, I'd like to tell Ed Wade where to stick that hope. And please, tell me, what is the point of keeping Ryan Howard when you have Thome, Abreu, and Burrell playing the positions that he could play??

Why can't we have a GM like Billy Beane, whose quote from the winter meetings was something like "I'm feeling creative today"? You just gotta love that.

Hello all! My apologies for the recent lack of posts - I was finishing up the last of my law school exams (no 29 year old should ever have to take exams ever again). And I spent this last weekend recovering and staying up late watching my Phillies waste away their future and any shred of momentum/energy they had built up over the last 2 years with their Thome and Wagner signings and trades.

ShallowCenter (link to the side) has the relevant quotations from the Inquirer, from Ed Wade, showing how terrible a GM he is. No more needs to be said. The way he relies on his average players reminded me of how the Eagles relied on Pinkston and Thrash before finally getting Owens.

Suffice it to say: The Phillies went into this offseason needing a starting pitcher and a centerfielder, and they ended up with Lieber and Lofton. In the meantime, Odalis Perez, David Wells, Beltran, Finley, Lawton, Tim Hudson, Andruw Jones, Edwin Jackson, Matt Clement, and more were all available via trade or free agency, and the Phillies, the hometeam for a major East coast city, were non-players in this interesting market.

It's just not acceptable for a Philadelphia team to be so irrelevant. The Eagles wanted Kearse and Owens? They got them. The Flyers wanted Roenick and Primeau? They got them. The Sixer wanted... well never mind. But the Phillies need to wake up, realize that this is not a baseball town, and that they need to take some bold steps to get our team back into contention.

Much more later. We'll take a look at Pat Burrell, and see if he can really hold down the heart of the lineup. In fact, we'll take a look at that lineup as a whole.