Monday Morning RxPile:

by Rox Girl on May 14, 2007 11:26 AM MDT in Rockpile

Purple Row: A Colorado Crush Blog

Alright, I'll admit I've got pent up issues stemming from yesterday to deal with here. I'm going to try to keep them buried for as long as I can, but I can't promise that this post won't veer off into NSFW or children language. I'll just make sure if that happens that I keep it in the comments or read more section so you have some way of not engaging. Seriously, yesterday's loss caused me some real angst. I'm talking PTSD angst. Okay, what was that, exactly? Anyway, I've got some bloggerly duties to attend to:

What has been politely suggested that the Rockies need to do to fix the team:

That thing we don't talk about regarding the manager.
XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXX XXX O'XXXX XXXXXX on his XXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXX. (portions blacked out under Congressional seal for 25 years)
Trade Byung Hyun Kim for Jorge Julio. While we're at it, we should also trade John Mabry for Willie Bloomquist and Steve Finley for Brad Eldred. There. Didn't that instantly make us a better team?
Move to Portland.
Sell to Kroenke.
Trade Todd Helton to contender X for a scrap of dignity.
Send Chris Iannetta back to the minors for walking too much and Omar Quintanilla back for how he played last year.
Blow up the bullpen.
Invent a time machine
Sign Roger Clemens or another of the Grade A free agent pitchers last year. Like Jason Schmidt.
Oh, while we have the time machine, I liked this one I saw today: Go back and get our "ace" Jason Jennings back and give back Willy Taveras, Jason Hirsh and Taylor Buchholz. You are a super smart guy, Woody Paige.

Am I missing any?

What will really make this team better:

Okay, so he's right about lopping off Mabry and/or Finley. Too bad none of us saw that train wreck coming... Barker and Spilborghs should be welcome. Joe Koshansky's not ready.
Replace Josh Fogg in the rotation with Greg Reynolds. The team's afraid of pushing it's youngsters, but Reynolds' Pac-10 draft mates Morrow and Lincecum are already in the majors and doing alright, Reynolds was as polished as either of those coming out of college last year.
Keep Buchholz on a short leash.
Jamey Carroll needs to only be used against left handers, and even then judiciously until he can break out of his slump. Otherwise use Q.

Tweet Comment 29 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I like the Crush

but they have inconsistent QB play, and cutting Hawkins, McCullogh, et al for "salary cap" reasons now looks kinda stupid as that group is playing quite well. The addition of Chris Angel on D has been huge.

Now to make the playoffs, and beat the Rush.

As for the Rockies....well....my mom said if you can't say anything nice.....

We may stink, but we won't be swept!

by Redhawk on May 14, 2007 11:41 AM MDT reply actions

Renck

also has his mailbag entry. He tackles Clint Hurdle's job security and a the high socks/long pants situation.

On Hurdle's job, Renck believes the two-year contract extension gives him security. I don't exactly buy that but with the Monforts it's more than likely going to mean security. Yet, I'm just giving a general overview of the arguments back in April. So unproductive . . .

by Russ Oates on May 14, 2007 11:57 AM MDT reply actions

fair enough

my favorite point is number 9- i think we should definitely do that, then use it to not only fix the rockies but also buy a bunch of 2007 sports almanacs, then go back in time and give them to ourselves in the past and win a bunch of money betting on sports! i saw this in back to the future 2, it always works.

in all seriousness ive been a little down on quintanilla in the past but hes looking better these days. so i take that back, at least somewhat. if it came down to keeping him or carroll at this point id go Q all the way.

in all not seriousness, do you know what our record would be if someone else (like joe girardi) were managing the team this year? i ran a simulation on this website and it turns out wed be 42-11 so far. no typo there. thats our record after 38 games without our current manager, according to www.clinthurdleisaresponsibleforallourproblems.com.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 14, 2007 1:07 PM MDT reply actions

That URL

is bad. It didn't work.

We may stink, but we won't be swept!

by Redhawk on May 14, 2007 1:35 PM MDT up reply actions

it might have been .net

or .org. i dont remember. it was there though, trust me.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 14, 2007 1:42 PM MDT up reply actions

found it

I typed in "Chimpanzee" and the Rockies were a .500 team. So it seems like a pretty accurate program.

We may stink, but we won't be swept!

by Redhawk on May 14, 2007 2:04 PM MDT up reply actions

where

what is the url for this site? cause i wanna try ditka.

by roxfan4life on May 14, 2007 3:28 PM MDT up reply actions

Move around the deck chairs.....

on this Titanic, but it won't stop the Rockies from sinking into further irrelevancy.

The sad fact about the Rockies is that when they went young and cheap a few years ago, the hope was also that we'd have good enough talent to compete. Instead, we have insufficient talent.

Holliday is as solid a young OF hitter as there is in the league.

Atkins can rake and, as we've seen so far this year, can also disappear for 40-game stretches.

Hawpe has a nice arm, good patience at the plate, and just can't quite seem to ever get it going with the power we all THINK he has.

Helton has done a great impersonation of Wade Boggs this season, and probably secretly hopes he can display it where Boggs was in his prime.

We are an underpowered, uninspired collection of talent. Dave Krieger said it all today - He said the intangible infecting this ballclub is a "culture of losing". I have thought the same thing for years.

So suggest all the roster changes you want, and in the end, we will be in the same place no matter what O'Dowd & Co. do. That culture of losing is hard to overcome, and since we cast our lot with a bunch of nice young kids with insufficient talent, we are who we are.

And it gets no better in '08 without a serious commitment to bringing in more talent from outside since we won't have enough MLB-ready talent in the minors to make a difference.

"Losing becomes us."

by Roxpert on May 14, 2007 1:21 PM MDT reply actions

Loosing

I agree with the culture of loosing. And changing that is EXTREMELY hard to do.

It's even harder when winning isn't even a goal of the Monforts. (and as the saying goes, it all starts at the top) Not loosing money is the goal.

Which brings me to a relatazation: why do the Monforts not sale? Isn't the only way to MAKE money is sale and cash in? ('cause they don't appear to be making money or a good return on investment in operation cash profit)

We may stink, but we won't be swept!

by Redhawk on May 14, 2007 1:40 PM MDT up reply actions

Its LOSING, not loosing

loosing means "to release pressure or to allow something to escape"

Losing means "The Rockies suck".

Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear. Fuzzy Wuzzy had no hair. Fuzzy Wuzzy wasn't fuzzy, was he!

by Lightning on May 14, 2007 2:03 PM MDT up reply actions

Loosing

Actually, "loosing" is not eaven a word LOL, just looked it up... silly me ;-D

Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear. Fuzzy Wuzzy had no hair. Fuzzy Wuzzy wasn't fuzzy, was he!

by Lightning on May 14, 2007 2:05 PM MDT up reply actions

Highly profitable....

The Monforts aren't interested in selling because the Rockies are highly profitable on an annual basis, even when not contending.

Forbes recently estimated that the Rockies were the 6th most profitable MLB franchise in 2006, generating close to $25 million of income. Actually, nobody knows outside the organization since the franchise is privately held, but it stands to reason that it makes a lot of money.

The Monfort franchise got about $16 million of revenue sharing from the league last year. Keeping costs under control, combined with the "free money" from rev-sharing and the FSRM rights fees can make this a very worthwhile endeavor for the Monforts and their partners in the ownership group.

Our payroll is about $30 million below the major-league MEDIAN, i.e. about half the teams spend over $85 million this year, and half less. We are spending about $55 million.

On the field, we lose, and we lose as fans. Off the field and at the bank, the Rockies' owners win bigtime. So why should they sell???

by Roxpert on May 14, 2007 2:08 PM MDT up reply actions

If those numbers are correct

and I'm assuming Forbes is fairly accurate, then they (the Monforts) have no incentive to sell. I assumed the team was fairly close to breaking even.

And if they are making $25 mil a year then the Monforts have succeded in their goal. (which isn't winning) So what do they care if the team is in last place again?

We may stink, but we won't be swept!

by Redhawk on May 14, 2007 2:13 PM MDT up reply actions

Krieger's column

As usual, Krieger hit the nail on the head. It's little wonder he's the only readable sports columnist in the Rocky - how do we have two newspapers in this city but only two sports columns (Jim Armstrong's Opening Shots being the other) worth a damn?

Too long, the Rockies have allowed themselves to be happy with mediocrity. I don't know how it will change, or when. But maybe (hopefully), like Krieger said, getting the shit kicked out of you a few times might be the motivating factor.

In past years, the Rockies were supposed to be mediocre - it was a rebuilding period, a phase that's clearly still in place. That's fine. Every team has to rebuild at one time or another. I can be patient for a year or three while waiting for young stars to blossom (worked for the Tigers and is currently working for the Brewers, after all). But this year we were supposed to see steps in a higher direction, and we haven't. And it does send a message to the players on this team when the bench is carrying three guys with averages below the Mendoza Line, and the team shows no urgency to improve those spots.

I don't think our talent is as insufficient as you make it out to be - we're not going to win a World Series this year, but we're a sight better than those 73-win clubs that all ran together in the early part of this decade. But even sufficient talent has to be motivated by the knowledge that their jobs aren't safe, and that mediocrity isn't acceptable. I don't think the guys in that clubhouse are happy with being 16-22, but on an unconscious level... maybe lethargy has already set in. And that's a damn shame.

mvn.com/mlb-rockies - The Row's only Josh Fogg fan

by Franchise26 on May 14, 2007 1:44 PM MDT up reply actions

Helton

This Helton = Boggs talk is nonsense. Helton's been driving the ball this year plus he has always had a football player's mentality. You won't find a more dedicated professional. Boggs was a good slap hitter and a party boy. With Helton's resurgence this year, there is no way the Rockies will trade him to Boston.

by DeepPurple on May 14, 2007 6:21 PM MDT up reply actions

Completely off topic

And I don't know if it's been posted on this site yet or not but have you seen what Jack Cust has been doing for the A's? Wow. I remember him being a pretty legit prospect that never quite panned out and we traded him to the d-backs. I honestly didn't even know he was still in baseball until this year. I am very happy for him though. That Billy Beane sure knows his stuff.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 14, 2007 2:15 PM MDT reply actions

Slight correction

Mike Myers was traded to the D'Backs for Cust and Closser. In 2003, Cust went to the Orioles for Chris Richards.

by Russ Oates on May 14, 2007 2:18 PM MDT up reply actions

That's right

He went to the Orioles. Whatever happenned to Chris Richard? I know he didn't do so hot here.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 14, 2007 2:36 PM MDT up reply actions

Out of baseball for all of 2004,

Richard has spent the past few seasons in the minors, first for the Rangers in 2005 and then the Pirates in 2006. He's with the Durham Bulls this season.

by Russ Oates on May 14, 2007 2:46 PM MDT up reply actions

Cust

He's a DH.....and he couldn't even cut it with Baltimore when given a chance to be their DH.

I'm not sure Beane deserves credit here. Cust was leading the minors in HRs this year when Oakland traded for him.....he wasn't exactly "flying under the radar". He just needed a team willing to finally give him the full-time DH spot.

Its Baltimore's fans that need to be depressed right now......Don't forget, Oakland is his 4th major league organization (Arizona, Colorado, Baltimore).....he's an AL guy that just "took a while" to finally stick.

by sg8335aa on May 14, 2007 2:19 PM MDT up reply actions

True

But it just seems like every move Beane makes turns out to be genius. It's really weird. I read the book "Moneyball" and his decisions are all obviously very well thought out. Maybe Cust is like the Chauncey Billups of the MLB, a guy that just took a long time to finally get it and perform like he's capable of doing. What orginization traded him to the A's?

by stuntdaddy1 on May 14, 2007 2:30 PM MDT up reply actions

Also

I'm not blaming the Rox for this at all. They gave Cust a chance and he didn't perform at all so they almost had to cut their losses.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 14, 2007 2:32 PM MDT up reply actions

Cust

Cust would have been a good player for either the Rox, D-Backs, or Padres, except that he couldn't play the outfield to save his life. His natural, and only, position is 'hitter', and I'm glad to see him getting the chance to do just that in Oakland. As for the three teams he washed out with, it's too bad they play in a league without the DH.

mvn.com/mlb-rockies - The Row's only Josh Fogg fan

by Franchise26 on May 14, 2007 2:20 PM MDT up reply actions

O'Dowd

I find it amazing that this whole string has not single mention of O'Dowd and his inability to find a combination here in over 10 years. Gebhard was canned when he was at or near 500 most years. O'Dowd has had one winning season (82-80 about as thin a wiining margin as it gets) and noone is crying for his head. He has recycled this team many times thru new directions, Gen R, veteran movement (Zeile, Clayton) and his trades where he unloaded top players, Walker, Kile, Hampton, Neagle, Castillo, Burks, etc netted virtually nothing.

I was stunned they gave him an extension. I am stunned he keeps his job. A GM should be judged on W's as their own P and L and his has been absolutely pathetic.

by PinchHitLancePainter on May 14, 2007 4:20 PM MDT reply actions

Let's really look at what you're saying here

First, let's see what we did get in those trades where he 'unloaded top players':

Walker: None of the three arms we got from St. Louis for Larry did anything for us, but one of them (Jason Burch) was used to get Rodrigo Lopez and the extra money saved from trading Larry when we did went towards signing Dexter Fowler, one of the top tools prospects in the Rockies system at present.

Kile: Got a couple solid years from Jose Jimenez out of this trade.

Hampton: Got a monster year from Preston Wilson, a couple servicable campaigns from Charles Johnson, and monetary relief.

Neagle: Wasn't traded.

Castilla(?): OK, Aaron Ledesma and Rolando Arrojo weren't much. But outside Coors, neither was Castilla.

Burks: Was traded in 1998, two years before O'Dowd took over.

Wouldn't hurt to straighten out the facts first, I figure.

Secondly... O'Dowd was roundly - and rightly - criticized early this decade for never sticking to a plan. Well, O'Dowd and the Rox have had a plan since 2004 - they're rebuilding through young talent and the draft. Now, it's success shouldn't be immaterial, but it's way too early to judge the success of O'Dowd's youth movement, particularly since this was supposed to be the first year it began to bear serious fruit. In the meantime, maybe the big club has underperformed, but as far as building up an entire organization, O'Dowd's done a great job. Our farm system is absolutely top-notch at this point, and that's not just me saying that - that's common wisdom saying that the Rockies farm system is among the game's best.

I don't think it's fair to judge O'Dowd on the performance of the big club in the past three seasons and 38 games. He was pretty bad at this job when he started but I think he's gotten better and I'm a lot less outraged that he's got two extra years on his deal than I am that Hurdle has the same deal.

mvn.com/mlb-rockies - The Row's only Josh Fogg fan

by Franchise26 on May 14, 2007 5:38 PM MDT up reply actions

edit:

The first sentence of the last paragraph should read:

"I don't think it's fair to judge O'Dowd SOLELY on the performance of..."

mvn.com/mlb-rockies - The Row's only Josh Fogg fan

by Franchise26 on May 14, 2007 5:39 PM MDT up reply actions

I'm with you on that

As critical as I am of the Rockies I have never blamed O'Dowd. He does have a solid plan now that he is apparently going to stick to, and I just think the guy does the best job he can possibly do with the resources available to him. Although I don't agree that this is a "small market" as so many like to call it (Anyone who had the attendance numbers we had our first few years is not a small market, I don't care what you say) the owners are unwilling to give him the money to go out and sign key free agents to patch up some of the holes that are minor league system is obviously not ready to patch up yet.

Overall I don't think you could do much better then O'Dowd is doing right now. Building from within is really the only way to go for this franchise, and the only fault you can find in him is that he didn't realize that, and implement this plan sooner.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 14, 2007 5:49 PM MDT up reply actions

There's article in Baseball prospectus

from a week ago that does some serious number crunching to rank market sizes. Denver comes out much lower than I would have thought - 27,30. With current levels of attendence, the Rox are most definitely small market.

by moomacher on May 14, 2007 7:20 PM MDT reply actions

Yeah exactly with current levels

But it didn't used to be that way, which was my whole point. We used to average somewhere like 47,000 fans a game. That is not a small market. The only reason it is now is because of seasons of irrelavency and dropping fan interest.

by stuntdaddy1 on May 14, 2007 9:14 PM MDT up reply actions