Pirates Shouldn't Be Quick With Non-Tenders
by Charlie Wilmoth on Oct 11, 2010 7:59 PM EDT
Email
Print
I enjoyed reading John Perrotto's prescription for the Pirates' offseason over at Baseball Prospectus (subscription required). There's a lot in it, like the report that Cardinals third-base coach Jose Oquendo will probably interview to be the Bucs' manager. Here are a couple of thoughts:
-P- Paul Maholm, James McDonald and Ross Ohlendorf will very probably have three spots in the rotation, leaving two up for grabs. I'm coming around to the idea that the Pirates should just keep Zach Duke, who really is no worse (or not much worse) an option than a guy like Kevin Millwood, and I think the Pirates should begin to look at their problem primarily as a defensive one rather than an issue with the pitching.
What would be the harm in moving Pedro Alvarez to first base right now? He's already below-average there, and I don't think that's for a lack of coaching or anything he might readily improve. He's just a big guy, and he's not terribly fast or quick, and those things are just going to get worse. Five years from now, we're going to remember his time at third base the way we currently remember Jim Thome's. A couple months ago, Adam Reynolds proposed moving Alvarez to first and Neil Walker from second to third, where his defense plays much better, and acquiring a defensively strong middle infielder, like Orlando Hudson. I think he might be right. Duke's and Maholm's ERAs should drop substantially given that alignment, and then the Pirates could avoid the Millwood types or just sign one to fill the last spot in the rotation, in the reasonably likely event that Charlie Morton or Brad Lincoln can't do better.
-P- Perrotto also suggests non-tendering Duke, Lastings Milledge, Wil Ledezma, Andy LaRoche and Delwyn Young. LaRoche and Young I'm fine with, but I don't see the point in dumping Milledge and I think giving Ledezma a contract would be a great idea. The key is that both these guys will be cheap. Milledge isn't even that bad, is still relatively young and probably won't make much more than $2 million in arbitration. (I'm trying to think of comparable players from the recent past here, mildly disappointing but useful players with good pedigrees - Austin Kearns made less than $1 million in his first year of arbitration; Corey Patterson made $2.8 million.) If it were possible to sign a 25-year-old former first-round pick with a .723 career OPS to a $2 million free agent contract, wouldn't that be a great move with clear upside? Milledge shouldn't be handed the keys to the city or anything, but I think non-tendering him would be an overreaction to a disappointing year.
As for Ledezma, Perrotto specifically mentions his peripherals as a reason he shouldn't be kept. Actually, his peripherals are precisely the reason he should stay. As I've said before, I think he pretty clearly should get a contract. He's throwing harder than he ever has, he struck out more than a batter an inning last year, and because of his spotty history, he should be very cheap, probably around $1 million. Ledezma is 29; it's not at all unheard of for players his age to suddenly become good relievers, and with his improving velocity and peripherals, his is exactly the profile I'd look for if I were trying to find that sort of player. I actually like the Pirates' chances of putting together a decent bullpen next year, led by Evan Meek, Joel Hanrahan, Chris Resop and Ledezma.
113 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think this is about right
People complain about spending money on Duke, but the question is where would they end up spending it instead? I don’t think the draft is a possible answer, they already spend more than any other team and if they keep upping their spending all they are doing is pricing themselves out of the future draft market because the yankees/red sox/dodgers/etc. will respond by giving out bigger bonuses also. You can make an argument for them to go in a hybrid route of their current strategy plus the route of the cardinals where they sign 25-30 high upside reach type picks and sign a bunch of fillers to 25K-100K bonuses and just hope to get lucky on some of them. We could spend more on international free agents, but with what Duke is going to make in arbitration I don’t think it would make a substantial difference. Our SP options are not deep at all in the MLB and AAA level and I’d rather have Duke than someone marginally better and at least 2x as expensive.
Ledezma is definitely worth a $1M contract. The chance that he becomes the next Dotel and nets us two prospects is with the opportunity cost of $1M.
What about.....
I’ve often wondered why teams, such as the Pirates, that don’t have a strong rotation, don’t go to a 4-man rotation? Really, you’re only talking about 5 or so more starts, maybe 25 innings of workload. I know that teams stick to tradition, and there’s a fear of burning up the arms, but somebody’s eventually going to get hurt, at some point to throw off the rotation. Or, you can give some occasional spot starts to somebody. Plus, trim a few innings off of their spring training work, and you’ll just about break even.
But, I would think it would accomplish a couple of things. 1. Get your better starters more games, thus more chances for you to win. 2. Allows you to take that spot and carry an additional reliever (to cover some of the innings) or an additional bat off of the bench.
Perhaps it’s a dumb idea on my part, but it seems that if you’re having trouble finding 5 guys, why not drop down to 4?
I don't think its dumb to question it...
…however I don’t think the Pirates will go to it. In my opinion 2011 is a lost season anyways, so lets still go with a 5 man rotation and give people like Charlie Morton, Brad Lincoln, Donnie Veal, Kevin Hart, etc. at least one more chance to prove their long term worth to the franchise in a season that at the major league level really doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things when it comes to wins and losses. Next year is all about determining which assets are most valuable and clearing 40 man roster space for the crunch that is occur both this and next offseason.
Four man was once the tradition
and it worked out quite well in many cases. Hell, Chuck Tanner went with a three man one season back in his White Sox days. Of course he had rubber-armed knuckleball guys led by Wilbur Wood. But in all seriousness, why not four man?
"Never mistake motion for action." - Ernest Hemingway
Probably could be done
with a 12-man staff.
4 starters X 40 starts X 5 innings = 200 IP/starter
3 two-inning guys to pitch the sixth and seventh
2 guys (LH/RH) to pitch the eighth
1 closer
1 long guy for spot starts (doubleheaders), extra innings and when the starter can’t get past the second
1 jack of all trades
i remember those days of 4 man rot's
never ever gonna happen again. not even in Texas with Ryan in charge.
Specifically for us, it can't
Not in 2011 anyway: as someone noted in this thread, McDonald will be pushing it to reach 170 innings (that would be 30 more innings, a 20% increase, over this year).
That said, I’m fine with that makeup, with the caveat that finding 3 effective 2-inning guys may be hard. It would be well-suited to Karstens, but it’s hard to find guys who are both immediately effective (as opposed to taking an inning or two to settle in) and able to throw 2 innings a night. Maybe a lot of mental preparation could convert, say, a DCutch to coming in and being wicked for 30 pitches instead of pacing himself for 85, but that’s a total crapshoot.
i can solve the mcdonald issue
have him throw LESS warm up pitches. this way he can throw more “real” innings…
but seriously, wheres Carrasco when ya need him?
Or just shut him down in September when we're out of it anyways
Seems like a pretty obvious and simple solution. My 2 inning guys would be Karstens/Lincoln/Veal when healthy. DCutch could be the long man for mop up duty. Meek, Hanny, Resop, Ledezma could be the other 4. It’s not the worst plan I’ve ever heard.
Agree
I agree on ledezma,i saw some positive things, and i also belive given his age he has a good chance to become a good lefty reliever. I also like him with resop meek and hanny, wich should be a decent bullpen next year
i dissagree on duke, i do think he could be AVERAGE on a team with good defense, i could see him being 14-14 on a good team with good defense, but the pirates will be niether, and even if they were F*** zach duke, i just personally am sick of seeing him and think its time to move on., i rather see a spot goto lincoln, or gasp morton.
Milledge is still too young to totally give up on he is young and might be worth platooning with a lefty in r.f.
also F andy laroche, and i’ll miss DY but he can go also
age of last winning season: 5
I liked
the Charlie Morton that rocked up for his last few starts. With any luck he might continue on that way.
I would Keep Andy LaRoche
why not? he’s nice to have around as a back up at 3B, 2B, and 1B, and he’s not going to cost too terrible much, so why not? rather keep him with the chance of him still having break out potential then signing a Ramon Vasquez or Bobby Crosby again that have zero potential. I would tender LaRoche, Milledge, and Ledezma..Duke can just move on, its plain and simple he just doesn’t have good stuff, and does anyone think he really knows how to pitch? idk if he does, he doesn’t even have Paul Maholm stuff in my opinion, rather see Lincoln or Morton be in the rotation over him if its just going to be the same results.
The worry with LaRoche
is that he may simply be one of those guys who can’t hit as a PH. Being a good PH may not be a super-valuable skill, but it’s a skill, and some don’t have it. Keeping a bench guy whom you’re afraid to use as a PH is dubious strategy at best.
I won’t weep if they keep him, but I can certainly see why they wouldn’t.
The worry with LaRoche is that he may simply be one of those guys who can’t hit
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 11, 2010 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions
This concern isn't really valid though
Unless you’re saying you’d rather have Ramon Vasquez pinch-hit as well. It remains to be seen how much the new manager will sub in his bench players but if it’s anything like JR, Andy will have some value
I think someone of LaRoche’s prospect pedigree would still have some value on the trade market. A team like Seattle who could use a 2B or a 3B might give up a 4/5 MLB ready starter type like maybe Luke French for him.
Jason Heyward wins at baseball.
Don't think so
They might give up a long shot prospect and I would make that trade if i was Seattle in a minute. Someone like a Tim Alderson who has fallen out of favor or the Calvin “the Creture” Anderson who might have value someday but is a long shot. I think we will try to trade LaRoche for very little and I doubt we we non-tender him if we can’t.
Yinzers uber alles
I might keep him around...
But I would non tender him, then try to resign him, probably to a minor league deal.
The only thing that worries me about LaRoche is that he was so bad this year, there must have been something wrong with him. I don’t want to hear any " Andy = Joey Bats" stories in two years.
We know about the back
It’s entirely possible that’s all it was – cool start, red-hot May, tweaked his back, never got another chance to play regularly, and that was that. I’m hard on the guy, but completely open to the idea that, without his back acting up, he forces his way into the starting 8.
That said, back problems often don’t ever go away, so…
Can we expect a Donnelly-esque signing or two this offseason?
I’d be all for signing a buy-low type like Chad Qualls to work sixth innings and maybe get flipped at the deadline if he turns it around.
Resop-Meek-Hanrahan down the stretch should be nice.
Zach Duke
SUCKS get over it.. Its not the defense people. I don’t know what your man crush on him is about. He has had 1 solid season, his rookie campaign… The rest have been average but mostly below average. Give it a rest with this…
by Jake The Snake1 on Oct 11, 2010 9:12 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Does anyone on this board realize we lost 105 games last year?
You would think reading the posts of the regulars that LaRoche and Duke and Ledezma were players who would easily gain employment elsewhere….but it is apparently easy to forget they were some of the worse players on a team that lost 105 games!
Duke was hit all over the field all year and finished the year nibbling corners and throwing 87 mph. His days as a starter in the majors are either over now or will be by the middle of 2011. You cannot survive even with the 87 Cardinals behind you when you are getting hit like Duke was getting hit and not missing any bats.
LaRoche was terrible and will be hard pressed to get a job as a 25th man next year and LeDezma will be back in a Triple-A bullpen. All 3 of these guys mustbe replaced with more talented players . I would consider keeping Milledge and maybe Young. Milledge as half of a platoon and Young as the 25th man off the bench. The other are bad rubbish.
You would think reading the posts of the regulars that LaRoche and Duke and Ledezma were players who would easily gain employment elsewhere…
And you would be right! Most teams are smart enough to base acquisitions on what the player is likely to do next year, and not what he did last year.
Duke was hit all over the field all year and finished the year nibbling corners and throwing 87 mph. You cannot survive…when you are getting hit like Duke was getting hit and not missing any bats.
Duke missed plenty of bats – he had the second-highest K rate of his career in 2010. He was getting “hit all over the field” because our defense sucks at turning balls in play into outs.
My thoughts ...
1. It’s much easier to improve the defense than the starting pitching or offense. Go hyper defensive.
2. Alvarez will end up at 1b. Put him there now.
3. Walker will end up at 3b. Put him there now.
4. Sign Duke if you upgrade the defense. Maybe he’ll net a B prospect or two at the deadline. But you’d have to pay more for a #5 starter in free agency this offseason anyhow.
5. Make a run at the good defensive 2b: Hudson, Ellis (if available).
6. Find a platoon partner for RF. Let Milledge compete. But realistically, he looks like a back-up.
7. See how healthy LaRoche is. Bring him back at a reasonable price.
8. Let DY go. I think Moss would offer more to the team anyhow. At least he can play defense.
9. See if Ledezma will take a non-roster contract. Bring him back at the right price. But remember: He wasn’t very good in the past. There was a reason we got him as a non-roster guy last year.
10. Bring in several more relief pitchers. I’m fine with Dotel2.
11. Scour every AAAA guy. Maybe a Dan Johnson if he’s available.
12. Consider moving one of the Altoona pitchers for a comparable middle infielder.
Moss
Based on their use of him in September, his recall was purely a reward. He saw almost no playing time, and didn’t play well when he did. I don’t put a lot of stock in September performances (recall what Walker did last year, between and awesome 6 weeks in AAA and then 2010), but it surely reveals a lot about the FO’s view of him. If they saw him as a legit 5th OF, then he would’ve seen a few starts and a lot of PH/defensive replacement appearances. Neither happened. He’s gone.
I think you are right
I’d just rather have him, and plus defense on the bench, than DY.
Moss won't be a minor league free agent...
…unless they drop him from the 40-man roster, and if they were going to do that, they probably wouldn’t have bothered to add him to it after the roster expansion in the first place.
No
Walker, will not end up at 3rd base, no matter how much you ask for it. The FO is going to keep him at 2nd base because he is still learning the position, i mean cmon, we have said he will be a crappy 2nd baseman after what? 110 games in the majors at that position is not enough to say he should play at 3rc.
A big part of the argument for moving Walker back to 3B...
…is that there are several strong defensive 2Bs who would potentially sign with us as FA this offseason, while the 3B list of realistic candidates pretty much begins and ends with Brandon Inge (who looks like he’s ticketed for a return to Detroit, and who hits like a 2B, anyway).
Milledge only had a disappointing year...
… if you expected anything out of line with his prior history… sometimes a failed prospect is just that… they don’t always turn into brandon phillips or carlos pena… milledge’s numbers over the years have actually been remarkably consistent… here’s how his numbers have looked over time:
in 391 PA with NYM: .257/.326/.414/.741
in 613 PA with WAS: .263/.326/.391/.717
in 651 PA with PIT: .282/.332/.386/.718
… for a career line of .269/.328/.394/.723
overall, I’m not seeing any development here and I don’t see much reason to expect anything more from him in 2011 or at any point going forward… if anything, he’s trending toward being a batting-average fueled singles hitter… and a defensively challenged one at that… I would have to think the pirates could find someone else to provide this type of middling production for a cheaper price… hell, DY could probably fill the role just as well while perhaps being more accomplished off the bench…
otherwise, I’m on board with moving pedro to first, but I’d like to see walker really fail at second before moving him back to third… we know he can do that… might as well see if a little time doesn’t help him at the keystone… he’d be more valuable there if he can stick in the long run…
by Captain Easychord on Oct 11, 2010 10:18 PM EDT reply actions
You mentioned Carlos Pena.
How linear was Pena’s development? Not at all. He got non-tendered by the Tigers after 2005 for exactly the same reason that you want to dump Milledge: A lack of forward progress. His Detroit OPS+es by year over that time frame? 113, 108, 113, 112, and then the shoe. They missed out on his big breakout because they got preoccupied with his trend line and forgot about his age and pedigree.
If we cut Milledge loose this offseason, we would be making the very same mistake. He hasn’t shown the big breakout that some hoped for, but he was still only 25 last year. Lots of solid hitters don’t even get their first steady job in the majors until they’re 25.
I agree
no need to give up on Milledge yet.
by BlindSquirrel on Oct 12, 2010 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions
so while pena was stagnant with an OPS+ around 111, milledge has been at 91, 89 and 93 for his tenures in new york, washington and pittsburgh, respectively… that’s a pretty huge difference in baseline… furthermore, pena didn’t have a breakout season until age 29… are we to suffer another three seasons of mediocrity from lastings until he has a similar breakout?
ultimately, this sidesteps the point that the carlos penas of the world are the exception and not the rule… sometimes a failed prospect is just a failed prospect… and I don’t see any reason to think that milledge will ever amount to much more than that…
I’m somewhat sympathetic to the age & pedigree notion, but when you’re talking about a guy with this much playing time under his belt, I’m guessing you’ve seen all there is to see in most cases… but if you disagree, I look forward to the argument about sending andy laroche out for another year on the hot corner thanks to his age (only18 months older than milledge) and pedigree… (not to mention that he has over 400 fewer major league PAs than lastings)
and if so, what of andy laroche, who has been given less time to prove himself and is only 18 months older than milledge? why not continue running him out there everyday too?
by Captain Easychord on Oct 12, 2010 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Wait, were we talking about Milledge being handed an everyday role, or just keeping him on the team?
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Part of the gap between the Milledge and Pena...
…gets eaten up by positional adjustments and defense. A corner outfielder is more valuable than a 1B/DH.
You can get into all kinds of trouble by assuming that a young, aggressively-promoted player who has stayed at a given level of production for a couple of years will never get any better. Look at Brandon Phillips, who was putting up the same numbers in AAA at 24 that he was at 21. Or Edwin Jackson, who was allegedly washed up at 23, in his fifth year in the majors. Or Jose Guillen, who was pushed into the majors before he was ready at 21, and was consistently mediocre right up until he dropped a 30-HR season on the league.
Or what about this guy? Up in the majors at 21, getting regular PT for his first five seasons, and only putting up an 89 OPS+ as a corner OF. Were we wrong to keep him around for 1960?
the reason
that milledge gets chances (part time or full time) and laroche doesn’t is because we have better options than andy at 2B and 3B, whereas we don’t in RF.
Ledezma should just get a minor league contract and spring training invite, correct? No other team would give him a major league deal, so there’s no point paying full price.
We did the same thing with Karstens last year, and it also makes a ton of sense to non-tender Karstens again and try another minor league deal for him. These two give us some adequate depth, but as Plan A in the pen, they don’t look very attractive.
Chan Ho Park is another possibility for the pitching staff if he wants to, but I agree with Perrotto that there’s no way he should get guaranteed money, given his age and the up and down nature of his track record (particularly him stinking up the joint and being DFA’d by the Yankees just this season).
Karstens ...
may not be great, but someone will claim him this time.
I think that this year
Karstens would have been almost as lucky as Ohlie was unlucky. He usually seemed to have some run support.
by BlindSquirrel on Oct 12, 2010 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I have to disagree. I think a lefty who throws gas and is coming off the sort of season Ledezma just had, even if most of it was in the minors, would get a major-league deal. It’s a different situation than with Karstens, since Karstens had no particular upside.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Oct 12, 2010 1:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Seems like 1 million could be better spent on a vet who’s done something. We went 3-for-4 under those parameters last season (with Donnelly as the only $$$ miss), which is a fine success rate.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Awfully skeptical on Lincoln
I wouldn’t bet the farm on him or anything, but nothing in his MiL career suggests that he can’t be a #5 MLB pitcher, if not a solid 4.
I realize that was a bit of a throwaway line, but still: sample sizes don’t get much smaller than 9 starts and 50.2 innings.
I suppose there’s an argument for bringing in a legit-ish FA starter to provide competition for the last spot (if they keep Duke), but I wouldn’t hand it to him.
If they non-tender Duke, then of course they need a starter from the outside, even if Morton + Lincoln theoretically provide decent production (remember, their ceilings are #2 and #3).
I don’t see how Duke makes this rotation..
Maholm
McDonald
Ohlendorf
Morton
Lincoln/McCutchen
any better. I think this is especially true since hopefully at least one of Owens/Lock/Morris will force their way into the rotation by midseason or earlier. What happens when you are paying a below average starter 5M and you want to replace him with a young starter with actual upside? Plus I think there is a good chance that one of Morton or Lincoln will get it figured out and hold down a spot.
Its incredibly hard to figure out at this point in the offseason who will be available at what price and who will be available by trade. But in my opinion tendering Duke for that kind of money just about locks him in for a starting spot that could be be filled by someone cheaper who is just as good or better or filled by someone just as expensive or a bit more expensive who has proven to be better.
Jason Heyward wins at baseball.
+1
I’m completely fine with that rotation, everyone there besides Maholm really have more to prove and they may be better or worse than what we have seen so far so we might as well see as much of them as possible.
If Huntington thinks Duke can be flipped at the deadline for a prospect or two, then bring him back. If not, I’d say let him go. I think the decision comes down to just that and not directly how he is going to perform for 2011 (even though that will affect his trade value).
Flipping
If Huntington thinks Duke can be flipped at the deadline for a prospect or two, then bring him back.
This is an important point. If you bring him back and he’s at all competent, then you can flip him for something more than the nothing you’ll get by non-tendering him.
The last thing this Pirates team needs to consider in their planning is making space in their rotation for Lincoln, Owens, Locke, or MOrris…
yet if NH brings Duke back
and he stanks it up just like he always has, then everyone is going to say that he
should have been let go for nothing. for every capps theres a duffy
So don't sign him to a multi-year deal.
Congratulations! You just made room for Lincoln, Owens, Locke, or Morris in 2012.
Maholm will probably be the spot we use for one of the rooks anyways. I’d say 80% Paulie is dealt by the deadline if his numbers are at all competent in 2011.
$6mil in budget flexibility is hardly "nothing"
Whether we sign a FA to replace him or not, trade for a SP or not, having that money to toss around is still an asset we won’t have if we take Duke to arbitration.
I dont see Duke regaining enough value to be traded to a contender.
I just don’t see him as an upgrade to any contending team.
by MarkInDallas on Oct 13, 2010 2:58 AM EDT up reply actions
A lot of contending teams...
…were supposedly interested in him at the deadline in 2009. He could pitch like that again, given reasonable defensive support.
In that rotation...
…you’re counting on Ohlendorf’s health AND Morton’s psychological well-being AND Lincoln or McCutchen stepping forward. You probably lose at least one of those bets, and maybe two of them.
just about locks [Duke] in for a starting spot that could be be filled by someone cheaper who is just as good or better or filled by someone just as expensive or a bit more expensive who has proven to be better
Which mid-rotation starters are going to be available for less than Duke’s money? I can’t come up with many.
+1
Agree w/ Vlad, that’s too many “ifs”. I don’t see anyone in Duke’s price range that is much better and many who are worse. I would keep Duke and trade him at the deadline if he’s having a good year. I think DCutch is at best a long reliever.
Yinzers uber alles
Maholm is just as poor of a bet as Ohlendorf or Morton, given his declining peripherals and stuff. McDonald, while he is by far the safest bet to do well in 2011, has only one solid partial season as a major-league starter
5 huge question marks in the rotation make me almost certain we will see some kind of Millwood/Westbrook acquisiton who can pick up 200 innings and not be a disaster.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions
It was
and I ate crow after watching Duke do pretty well in a start or two toward the end. Really, at this point I would bring him back and try to improve the defense around him. There are so many question marks things might actually be uglier if he is non-tendered.
by RichieHebner on Oct 12, 2010 1:03 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
for Duke to have any success
all 5 infielders need to be gold glove candidates… aint happ’nin, pahdnah… the same awful defense was behind ohly and mcdonald. face it, duke is not a good pitcher. it might be best for him and the pirates if he walks.
Also, McDonald only pitched 140 innings last year, so expecting him to be a workhorse in 2011 is a massive stretch.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions
And the year before, he was below 100 innings.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions
You will likely those 3 of those bets and maybe all four
I like this theory, run out the same rotation that just lost 105 games…and magically they will all improve. That is ridiculous, it is more likely than not that Morton will NEVER be a league average starter, McCutcheon is Triple-A filler and Lincoln is a Quad-4 starter and Ohlendorf is a good 5th starter on a wild card team but a 3rd of fourth starter on the worst team in baseball..
Morton and Lincoln
That sounds a bit rough.
Morton has the ability to be a solid #3.
Lincoln is certainly better than AAAA.
They may not be elite guys. But they do have ability.
I agree on Ohlendorf and McCutchen, but Morton was a league-average starter last season, and Lincoln didn’t get much of a chance to make a judgment.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions
That's a bit harsh
DCutch is probably better out of the pen. Lincoln could be a decent starter if he could throw his curve for strikes. If not, then he’s really got nothing, though. Ohlendorf actually can be an above average pitcher.
But, I agree that doing nothing is likely to be a disaster.
by MarkInDallas on Oct 13, 2010 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Jeff Karstens
comes to mind. He is fine as a fall back if we can’t/decide not to replace Duke from FA/trade pool.
Zach Duke with our IF… It’s like putting Gary Payton on the Phil Jackson-Lakers. Sure, it looks nice on paper but he just isn’t a good fit for the triangle and would be more effective elsewhere.
A couple months ago, Adam Reynolds proposed moving Alvarez to first and Neil Walker from second to third, where his defense plays much better, and acquiring a defensively strong middle infielder, like Orlando Hudson.
Just for the record: Adam’s not the only guy who’s been pushing that idea.
No matter what we do next year our rotation is doomed
I just hope we have a couple of AAA guys start lights out to give us something to look forward too.
This is basically right
It’s one of the reasons I’m not too worried about Duke’s status. I’m basically on board with the tender-and-upgrade plan, except there’s no sign of an upgrade. Uh oh.
But regardless, McDonald, Morton, and maybe Ohlie are the only ones we’re really counting on/hoping for for contributions beyond 2011. It would be nice for Lincoln to establish himself as more than a Karstens type, but the Altoona Four all figure to be as good or better than him, the 2009 overslots are only a year or so behind them, and then come Taillon and Heredia. Those are the guys who’ll make a difference. Even if 2011 promised to be a decent year otherwise (and it doesn’t), the rotation is overwhelmingly not guys who will contribute on the next pennant winner.
It would be nice for Lincoln to establish himself as more than a Karstens type, but the Altoona Four all figure to be as good or better than him
I wouldn’t say that Justin Wilson with serious control problems and Jeff Locke with no plus pitches are ahead of Lincoln.
I agree that Lincoln’s equal to Owens and well behind Morris.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Locke
That’s if you accept that he has no plus pitches.
I’ve seen that once or twice.
I’ve also seen people rave about his stuff.
The truth is that he’s probably another #3 starter.
Either way
4 avg. pitches >> 2 avg. pitches.
Also, I guess the Giants should just cut Jonathan Sanchez with his equal BB/9 rate to Justin Wilson. Until teams start hitting him it shouldn’t be a huge red flag, but any improvement is of course welcome.
This is like when someone said earlier in the year that Moskos was doing better than Porcello.
The league is kinda important, and there’s a huge difference between Double-A and the Show.
Just ask Zach Duke.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions
This isn’t ERA though, it’s walks. 4.5/9 has the same effect in AA as it does in the majors. Some pitchers can survive a high walk count, some can’t. So far Wilson has.
If you’re arguing though that ML hitters will have better discipline and he will walk more like 6/9 for Pitt then that at least has some merit but I’d still mildly disagree.
I’m not saying he will walk 6/9 for Pitt, but it’s very true that major-league hitters have more discipline and him getting into walk trouble is at least a possibility.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 13, 2010 9:25 PM EDT up reply actions
hmmmmmm, locke has no plus pitches...
which was never said on here until the BA chat about the Altoona players went online. Yet another BA writer says that Locke had more potential than both Morris and Owens. whom do we believe?
Exactly ...
If you read old scouting reports, he is compared to Lester, hardly a guy with no plus pitches.
So one guys says that he has average stuff and it becomes the truth.
Lets face it it is hopeless.............
The worst pitching staff in BB and at or near the bottom of every other catagory and people here are debating about whether or not we should keep Duke. It is like trying to decide which form of cancer you want to die from.
Too many holes and not enough fingers.
by oldfrothingslosh on Oct 12, 2010 11:51 AM EDT reply actions
Lastings Milledge:
“If it were possible to sign a 25-year-old former first-round pick with a .723 career OPS to a $2 million free agent contract, wouldn’t that be a great move with clear upside?”
It would be if the “clear upside” was there. The Pirates have seen enough of Milledge over the past 1.5 years to figure out that he’s probably not worth the extra dough.
“What would be the harm in moving Pedro Alvarez to first base right now? He’s already below-average there, and I don’t think that’s for a lack of coaching or anything he might readily improve. He’s just a big guy, and he’s not terribly fast or quick, and those things are just going to get worse. Five years from now, we’re going to remember his time at third base the way we currently remember Jim Thome’s.”
I’m also thinking it would be better to prepare Alvarez in the offseason for 1B and get Walker entrenched at 3B. There has to be at least one solid defender at 2B we can get into the fold. And Jones would probably be better off for another year as a backup first baseman/part-time RF.
The postseason is interesting,
but somehow I just find myself wanting 2011 spring training to get here already so we can start to see if the team can be a bit more competitive next season.
Yes, exactly.
If you think that there’s better out there for less, you need to put your money where your mouth is.
There should be a ton of relievers, possibly buy-low, with more prior success like a Chad Qualls, or a bunch of other guys. I’m not too worried about the bullpen, the reliever market is usually saturated.
If you’re gonna pay a million plus, don’t spend it on an awful track record.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 12, 2010 8:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Chad Qualls
got $4.19M in 2010. Even if he is currently a “buy-low”, it’s not going to be as low as Ledezma.
I’d guess the upper end of the $1-2 million range, but the important thing is, he’d be much better than Ledezma.
Even more relevant, Qualls could have actual value at the trade deadline due to track record. Certainly I wouldn’t mind another July 31st like we did this year.
That’s the kind of guy we should target to fill the non-Hanrahan/Meek/Resop spots, IMO.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 13, 2010 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Just one question/thought...
If we were to move Alvarez now, and then move Walker to 3b, what and this is a big IF, but what if we were to draft and sign Rendon, who also plays 3b…..are we then to just move Walker back to 2b whenever Rendon is ready for the bigs or am i missing something here?
You're missing:
a) that we haven’t drafted Rendon yet (if at all).
and
b) that Rendon will still probably need two years to be ML ready after being drafted, even if he does end up being our pick.
I don’t want to put up with lousy defensive play for all of next year (not to mention the year after that) purely on the off-chance that we might have a positional jam forming in mid-2013 or early 2014. You can’t afford to take that much for granted. Maybe we won’t pick Rendon. Maybe we’ll pick Rendon and he’ll be a bust, or Pedro or Walker will unexpectedly collapse. Maybe one of Pedro or Walker or Rendon will get hurt. Or even if none of those three things happen, we could still always trade one of the guys to get something different that we need, like a shortstop or a front-of-the-rotation starter.
I wouldn't worry about it
If we draft Rendon, the earliest we can expect him is June 2013.
Things have a way of working themselves out.
If he can hit, the Pirates will find a place for him.
Duke being non tendered is an absolute no brainer
However, it doesn’t mean you have to cut ties, resign him at a smaller salary. After his awful year, i’m not sure he gets guaranteed money from any other ML team.
as much as i dont like watching Duke pitch
there are 20 plus teams out there who would still sign him if he were let go by NH.
If you can take Duke's money and add to it
That’s the only way I see non-tendering Duke. I’m hoping that will happen.
Ledezma and Milledge should be kept. I would try to sneak LaRoche through waivers at the end of ST and send him to the minors to get his swing back if possible.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
Related FanShots on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Baltimore’s tradition of fans shouting ‘O!’ during national anthem sparks interleague feud
- Chris Perez follows rant against Cleveland fans with even better rant against Cleveland fans
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
