Sunday Rockpile: Rockies 2009 offense stable, chances of recovery good

by Rox Girl on Nov 16, 2008 11:31 AM MST in Rockpile Comment 29 comments

Prior to the humidor, I would look at any Rockie hitter who finished out of the top five in the NL in OPS at his position as a liability that needed replaced. Now it's closer to a more natural top eight that I use as a threshold. Last season, the Rockies had three positions qualify, but perhaps more galling was how bad two of those three were. Had we had even moderate increases in production from Helton/Atkins at first and Taveras in center, had we removed Jayson Nix from duty sooner, the season could have turned out much differently. To make this point clear, notice that the World Series champions had just as many failed slots in their lineup, the difference (well besides them also having Cole Hamels) was the degree of failure by the Rockies trio of misery.

2008 by position with NL OPS rank in parentheses:

1B: .254/.348/.403 (#15; Phillies #4)

2B: .252/.305/.404 (#11; Phillies #1)

3B: .293/.343/.468 (#5; Phillies #15)

SS: .272/.326/.423 (#7; Phillies #6)

C: .250/.347/.441 (#3; Phillies #10)

LF: .323/.403/.531 (#1; Phillies #5)

CF: .258/.316/.333 (#15; Phillies #4)

RF: .288/.382/.500 (#3; Phillies #12)

So, how much confidence should we have that there will be a different story in 2009?

Carlos Gonzalez (.242/.273/.361) on the basis of his 2008 non-adjusted numbers wouldn't seem to be much of an upgrade offensively over Willy Taveras in center, but there are a host of reasons why we should expect him to be a considerable improvement in 2009, ranging from Gonzalez switching to a more favorable park and league, to his age and scouting profile and the general consensus that Taveras' skills don't have much, if any, room for improvement at the plate. The question for Rockies fans will be how much of an improvement will Gonzalez be, and will it be enough to offset the step down from Holliday to Ryan Spilborghs that we take in left. That should be the other question for Rockies fans, how much offense, exactly, are we going to lose in left field?

Spilborghs' career line of .302/.374/.466 isn't far removed from Holliday's .321/.409/.538 line from last season. What's more, in terms of getting on base, Spilborghs has shown improvement in each of his three MLB seasons culminating in last season's .407 OBP, which is almost an exact match for Holliday's .409. Where Spilly clearly falls short is in his power production, which just happens to be the arena that Gonzalez has a decisive advantage over Taveras in. Let me put it another way, over the course of a full season, the Rockies project to lose about 15 extra base hits in the switch from Holliday to Spilborghs, but gain over 20 in the switch from Taveras to Gonzalez with a small, predictable step forward from CarGo, not even a real breakthrough. The key to improving on 2008's hitting performance in the outfield will be in optimizing the lineup to take advantage of the net gain in XBH, but not expose Gonzalez' weak on base skills as much as Taveras' were. An optimal lineup with this team would have Spilborghs leading off and Gonzalez batting relatively deep.

While concerns about how our hitting will fare without Holliday seem relatively overblown, where the Rockies will take a big hit with this trade is in the baserunning department. Taveras and Holliday were the team's best, stealing successfully an immensely valuable 96/105 times in 2008, and otherwise providing added runs throughout the season by taking advatage of advancement opportunities. For all their virtues, Gonzalez and Spilborghs simply are incapable of duplicating that performance. How are the Rockies going to make this up? Again, this goes back to lineup construction. The hope for me is that this gain comes through better efficiency than we saw last season. Clint Hurdle wasted an inordinate amount of outs last season by insistently putting Taveras at the top of his lineup cards, completely nullifying Willy's positive effects on the basepaths by denying better hitters more plate opportunities. Without Taveras or a similarly speed oriented player available, it's my hope that Hurdle will be more inclined to build a lineup around who truly sets the table for the team. Do I have any confidence that the man will actually make the right decision and do this? That's a different question, but I like the chances of it happening better without Taveras around.

In sum, last week's trade actually keeps some overall offensive stability in the outfield, and leaves the onus of improving 2008's offensive lag onto the infield, where it would have been even had we kept Holliday. The right side in particular will be the key to the Rockies competing next season. Todd Helton and Jeff Baker/Clint Barmes have to rebound if the Rockies expect to get back into the playoff hunt.

The cutoff for being a top eight first baseman in the NL in OPS last season was .845, about .100 points higher than what we had last season, which is what the Cubs and Mets got from Lee and Delgado mostly. Helton can actually put up a line similar to his 2006 .302/.404/.476 numbers and still be helping the team be competitive. Of course, we'd like him to be more like 2007, but let's not get too greedy for the the 35 year old with back issues. As for second base, that's more problematic. The Rockies seem to be ignoring what everybody else sees as a problem, but the upgrade that's needed here to be competitive in the NL is relatively small, only about .050 points of OPS, which possibly could be made up simply by having fewer Jayson Nix starts. Still, I see a little too much confidence from the team for Baker/Barmes, two players who have had a wild history of highs and lows. The lows, and the strong possibility of a replay of them, are what worry me.

The baseline for a competitive NL centerfielder is fairly high, something along the lines of Mike Cameron's .244/.332/.479 for Milwaukee last season. As the Phillies at third showed in 2008, it is possible for an NL contender to have one major hole in the lineup and be successful, but without a Hamels like ace fronting our rotation, I don't know if we have that luxury, so the closer Gonzalez gets to that .800 OPS line the better. We can earn some wiggle room at these other positions with a strong season from the left side of our infield, Tulo and Stewart are already well positioned competitively despite being very young and not having what we would consider peak seasons last year. Overall, it looks like the prognosis for recovery for our offense in 2009 is decent, but I would really like to have a more reliable bet at second.

I'll look at the state of the rest of the NL West's (sans San Diego) offenses on Thursday.

0 recs | Comment 29 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Since you are talking OPS....

I really don’t understand why you’d pin our CF hopes on CarGo at all. His OPS numbers, pre and post All-Star break:

Pre – .274/.293/.432, .725 OPS
Post – .212/.255/.295, .549 OPS

The benchmark you’re using for hitting proficiency is an .800 OPS, and you were saying the closer CarGo gets to that level, the better. Sorry to show these facts, but he got farther away from that number as the season went along. And he had more ABs after the break (156) than he did before (146). The league figured him out, and he wasn’t exactly knocking the cover off the ball in Sacramento when he was sent down.

CarGo, in my view, won’t hold down the job. Assuming he isn’t traded, he will compete in Spring Training for the starting CF job, and may win it. However, I think Seth Smith will likely get more playing time (if Hurdle has any brains) in LF with Spilly playing CF. Or, if that doesn’t materialize, Fowler will beat out CarGo in the fullness of time.

Remember also, that just trying to maintain our 2008 offense without Holliday and (likely) Atkins isn’t good enough. We need a serious upgrade in that department since our 2008 offense was the worst in Rox history, humidor or no humidor, in overall numbers. Situationally, were we even worse than overall (with RISP, mainly).

So I’m not so sanguine as you are that we’ll be OK with our offense next season, lacking serious upgrades at a couple key spots. Tulo will have a better year, but will Stewart keep progressing, or regress? Jettisoning out Taveras is addition by subtraction, but will his replacement(s) overall rank even 8th in NL OPS at CF? Baker shows sporadic promise, and Barmes is adequate at times, but isn’t 2B always a revolvoing door for us? Helton will be fully healthy (let’s hope), but will he ever hit .300 again, much less 20 HRs? Iannetta having the #1 job at catcher from opening day is a plus, but the way Hurdle manages his catchers he’s liable to only get 100 to 110 starts anyway. And our bench is still lacking in punch or depth.

For the NL West, our offense isn’t BAD. However, to be a serious NL contender, we need much better than what we have.

by GoRoxGo on Nov 16, 2008 3:17 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

I can just about guarantee you that our second half production out of center will be above .750

How much closer we get to that .800 mark depends on how much development two players see. If you were looking at CarGo’s splits, you probably also saw:

263/.298/.406

It’s still not fantastic, but against RHP’s he’s markedly better. Fowler vs LHP’s in AA last season:

.405/.479/.619

We’ve got an effective natural platoon combination built into the system at that position. If Gonzalez continues to get crushed by LHP’s, I’d expect to see Fowler switching out with him by the end of June, so for me, the biggest question is how bad will CarGo be in the first three months. Just because his second half stats were depressed doesn’t by itself tell us anything. Gonzalez was apparently still bothered by a hamstring injury in August, his BABIP by month was .324 in June, .357 in July, .259 in August and .358 in September. One of those isn’t like the others. Where pitchers did apparently adjust to him shows up in his power numbers, his ISO dipped from .175 to .053 in September. If he was another Taveras type of speedster, this would be a bigger concern to me, but as it is, I feel safe in assuming that number’s going to be coming back up. I see little reason to believe his power has peaked at 22. What’s more, he’s moving out of McAfee into Coors, he’ll be going up against weaker bullpens and 4th/5th starters than he saw last year, so what you’re diagnosing as a stalled career in his rookie season, I’m just seeing as typical growing pains. I don’t know how good he’s going to be, but he’s not going to be the same bad hitter he was last season.

For your other points, as I pointed out above, I don’t think we need 20 HR’s from Helton anymore, if everybody knows it’s wishful thinking, why bring it up? His OBP, defense and doubles should keep him beneficial enough. Not worth the contract, but that’s crying over spilled milk. Apparently I’m more confident in Stewart than you, but I can see where some people would have reason to doubt. I think where we wind up having the major cavity in 2009 is second base. I just don’t trust Baker and Barmes to be more than illusion, but I didn’t trust them last season either, so they’ve shown they could prove me wrong. Everything else I see shaping out better than what those people who are only focused on the Holliday loss will realize.

I don’t know how much better we will be in 2009, I think we will be a little better though. The scenarion I’m kind of envisioning is 79 wins and a bunch of Rockies fans wondering what might have been had we kept Matt, but I think what they should be wondering is what might have been had we signed Sabathia or Hudson and traded Holliday anyway.

by Rox Girl on Nov 16, 2008 4:51 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Better yet....

Why not count on Seth Smith as the LH hitter in the 1st half, playing in LF? Spilly would put up better OPS numbers in CF aginst righties than CarGo, though maybe not the highlight reel defense. I’d rather sacrifice a little defense for more proven hitting with Spilly in CF and Smith in LF.

Smith IS more proven than CarGo, based on his demonstrated plate discipline. I think he could have a big year in 2009 if given 400 plate appearances. CarGo? Not so sure.

by GoRoxGo on Nov 16, 2008 5:31 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, there's the downside...

I’d rather CarGo work out, and that way we’ll keep the defense and still have a decent bench with Smith being able to sub when needed, but your depiction of what happens if he doesn’t is fairly accurate. I think you’re underestimating the defensive hit we’d take here, it definitely isn’t a better alignment than we’d have with modest gains from Gonzalez, and is barely a better alignment over what CarGo provided last season.

by Rox Girl on Nov 17, 2008 7:47 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

From Sunday's Post:

Linkage to Saunders’ article

General manager Dan O’Dowd said last week the Rockies will not be a major player in the sweepstakes for high-cost, free-agent starters. O’Dowd did say the Rockies might pursue a starting pitcher in a trade, but he doesn’t believe there will be much trade action for starting pitchers this winter.

Or in other words….Holliday was a salary dump….don’t forget to renew your ticket plans!

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 16, 2008 5:22 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

Not a salary dump.

Do you seriously not get it? It was a trade for value.

2009 Matt Holliday + 2 early 2010 draft picks for 6 years of Carlos Gonzalez, 5 of Greg Smith, and 2 of Huston Street.

The alternative was to keep him and let him walk next year. Rather than let that happen, the team got something of value for him.

Salary dump is Marcus Camby to the Clippers…This was not a salary dump.

If you need someone to explain it to you please refer to David‘s post earlier this week or RoxGirl’s on Thursday.

I would love to see them use the 13mil they save from Matty, 7mil they may save from Garret, and the 5 mil they save on Fuentes and go out and get a quality starter. But that doesn’t have anything to do with this trade.

by Hizilla on Nov 16, 2008 5:55 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

salary dump and holliday was a scumbag

last year he became me first and all money oriented. he became a disraction in that clubhouse. me me me me helps your team in no way, from june on he didnt care about winning

by Hawkinshero on Nov 16, 2008 6:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

.....?

Talk about kicking a guy when he’s already out the door, especially a guy by all accounts a humble, hard-working, and pleasant friend and teammate.

Blast and botheration.

by Silverblood on Nov 17, 2008 6:19 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

It's axiomatic

A popular player leaves, and the low-info voter types come out of hiding.

Watching the purple row from high atop the big brown monolith on California Ave

by Mondogarage on Nov 17, 2008 7:45 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Calling Holliday a scumbag is definitely out of line

As is calling the Monforts something similar, but I understand these reactions are just part of the psychological healing we’ve got to go through as fans. There’s definitely a sense of betrayal when you lose a player like Holliday. I deal it by trying to pretend I’m okay and seek out rational justifications, even if I have to ignore the leaps of faith and illogical conclusions I have to make to get there. Most others lash out at the owners or management as a convenient target (it’s always easy to blame “The Man” and usually be right) and a few, like this poster blame Holliday. I’m just waiting for the category of fans who blame themselves for the loss to start speaking up.

by Rox Girl on Nov 17, 2008 7:56 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I've read theirs and other opinions

but this is a salary dump. The Rockies saved 13 million dollars. They are not better in 09 by trading Holliday. Did they get something in return? Yes.

But this deal or one close to it could have been done in June. The reason it was done now, was to get Holliday’s contract off the books. If they would take the money saved from Holliday and Atkins and Fuentes (about $20 million dollars) and invest it in say Ben Sheets….then it’s freeing up salary and money…but if it’s NOT respent…then it’s a salary dump.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 17, 2008 7:44 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

This deal could have been done in June?

You keep saying that, but I still haven’t seen much evidence to support this. When the Braves traded Mark Teixeira, a better hitter than Holliday, to the Angels last summer, all they got back was Casey Kotchmann, a less promising prospect than Gonzalez, let alone Street and Smith. The Reds didn’t get anything of particularly high value for Dunn although that was after the trade deadline. Jason Bay netted just a little more for the Pirates, but he wasn’t going to be a free agent after the season. I really think that you’re fooling yourself (as a lot of A’s fans are right now) that the return for Holliday would hold for the summer.

Still, it’s looking like you could be right about salary dumping being a large part of the appeal of this deal to Rockies brass. I’m hoping that they are just waiting out the ridiculous money with the belief that they’ll get quality for less later in the offseason given the economy. But if this is a bluff, by O’Dowd, it’s a good one.

by Rox Girl on Nov 17, 2008 8:09 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Still calling Kotchman a prospect?

Don’t forget that the Braves also received Stephen Marek: a guy who, if all the pieces fall together, could be a closer, but will likely be a setup man. Not exactly wow, right?

"Never Surrender Dreams" - Inscription on J. Michael Straczynski's bench

Purple Row - Covering all your Rockies needs!

by Russ on Nov 17, 2008 8:26 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah, Kotchman as prospect

stretches the definition of the term to an outer limit I normally wouldn’t go to, it was a misstatement made in haste. Marek’s pretty much the definition of a throw-in, Wren will look smart if he works out, but chances are his value in the MLB will be even more limited than you suggest.

by Rox Girl on Nov 17, 2008 9:45 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Holliday in June

Kotchman was a major league ready starter, and before was one of the top prospects to watch. Even the Bay trade which would be a good comparison, Bay brought back Andy LaRoche who was a well thought of prospect, a young starter with potential in Morris, a bullpen arm in Hanson, and a throw in minor league OF in Moss..not that much different then the Rockies got for Holliday

Holliday in June, could have gotten a close to MLB ready position player, a starting pitcher that throws soft who at best will be a #5 starter. The only part of the deal, would be the reliever, and that would not have been an MLB bullpen arm, but rather a minor league reliever. Which in Streets’ case, might be an improvement for the up side.

in 09…would the Rockies better with Holliday, even if they couldn’t trade him, or with this trade. I say the Rockies would have been better off WITH Holliday, even if he walks. After Holliday walks in 2010 would they have been better? That all depends on wither Gonzalez becomes a major league starter. The Rockies were running out of minor league talent especially at the upper ends of the system. But is Gonzalez really that much better than Kotchman or Andy LaRoche?

My big issue, is the Rockies appear to have gotten rid of $13 million dollar one year contract, and don’t look like they are going to spend it on quality players. It looks like a salary dump.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 17, 2008 8:28 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

There's a huge difference between Bay and Holliday

And it’s that Bay wasn’t in his walk season. The Rockies could probably have gotten LaRoche plus Morris plus a reliever from the Dodgers last July if we traded Holliday to them then, but would you really have been satisfied with that? I don’t have much doubt that we’d be reading Redhawk’s rants about how terrible a trade that was (to the Dodgers, in our own division!) and what an unproven and lousy return LaRoche was. You’d be right, I’d be arguing right along with you, even if we didn’t have Stewart at that position already.

Where is Gonzalez in relation to LaRoche and Kotchman? Only one plays a premium position, but all have about equal power potential. LaRoche is just half a year younger than Kotchman, but hasn’t put up anything remotely as valuable as Kotchman or even Stewart (1.5 years younger) at the MLB level. Add in Gonzalez’s age and it’s pretty clear that he easily has the highest ceiling of the three. You lose a bit in refinement, but I’m gladly taking that trade for the chance of an All-Star caliber player. Stocking the system with ho-hum guys like Kotchman and LaRoche wouldn’t be bad for an Atkins exchange, but for Holliday, I don’t think so, but that’s not what we did here.

Again though, you’re right that if the Rockies don’t turn around and reinvest the $10 million saved from trading Holliday (Street’s going to get a chunk of it) then it’s a downsizing. We’ll know at the end of the offseason when we can compare the Rockies payroll to last season or what it would have been with Matt and Garrett this upcoming season.

by Rox Girl on Nov 17, 2008 9:34 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Lets look at it in another way

either this deal was lopsided or it was a deal of equal value. If it’s unequal…who got the better end?

Did the Rockies get better in 09? No way…they got much, much worse.

Did the Rockies get better in 2010…maybe. If Gonzalez becomes the star you think he might be….or he might be the guy that 2 organizations were happy to part with.

Unless the Rockies go after a Free Agent starting pitcher. Between Atkins, Fuentes and Holliday’s contracts off the books, that should be about $20 million. Should be almost enough for Ben Sheets (not sure I want Lowe at his age, and price, we couldn’t out bid anyone for Sabathia, AJ Burnett I think will be over priced as well, Penny could be interesting). And that is what the Rockies truly need….a front of the rotation starter. As been said before, if we had an ace (or in Penny’s case a #2/3) then the rest of the match ups become stronger, when Cook is 2, Jimenez is 3, Francis is 4 and George of the Rose is 5

heck, I’d be happy if the Rockies would spend some cash on Orlando Hudson. Bottom line…the Rockies can not be competitive with a payroll of 55 million dollars. (over the long term, sure a year or two here and there maybe….but to do so they have to draft and sign/pay better players then they’ve shown a willingness to do.)

And I have a ticket renew letter sitting on my desk right now……..

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 17, 2008 5:32 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

That's where we differ

I don’t see them being much much worse with just the loss of Holliday. I just don’t think the step down from him to Spilborghs/Smith is as much as the step up from Taveras to Gonzalez/Fowler.

Would the Rockies have been even better than this if they had kept Holliday? Sure. Better enough to make it worth keeping him? I don’t think it would have been over the package we got from Oakland. I see us improving a little in 2009 and a lot in 2010 and 2011. Had we kept Holliday and traded him at the deadline for a Kotchman like return (or to St. Louis for that Ryan Ludwick package) I think we would have improved a little more in 2009, but not enough, certainly not nearly as much in 2010 and 2011.

The team is going the right direction still. The Rockies are of better quality and have more talented players than the 2006 team in every position except three, and two of those (1B and RF) it’s because we have the same guy as we did then. The same is true of the rotation although to a lesser extent. I might be a kool-aid drinker, but I just can’t look at what we have right now and not think the team is better situated than it was then. 2007 was just a taste of where we’re going here.

by Rox Girl on Nov 17, 2008 6:19 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

It's all complex

It’s kind of funny that Matt Holliday was replaced by Carlos Gonzalez. In a way, they’re both pretty similar. The whole thing about Gonzalez is that he has the tools to be amazing but so far hasn’t been able to put it all together. Occasionally this happens to a player where they display ability and eventually, through experience and refinement, they put all their abilities together and rather quickly go from poor/decent to a bigtime player. I don’t know about the hype surrounding Holliday and I don’t think there is generally a whole lot of hype for a 7th round pick but he’s a guy whose minor league numbers really don’t jump out at you in any way and yet here he is one of the best players around. Gonzalez’s numbers aren’t too shabby and on the plus side, IMO he really needs to work on one facet of his game – and that is strike zone judgement/discipline (aside from just more general major league seasoning). Now how easy this is is another issue.

I also agree with Rox Girl about Helton. He will be overpaid and his numbers won’t be ideal for a 1b at all but a guy who can bat .300 with 15-20 hrs, a .400 obp and who is an excellent defender can help any team. Also, he has value for being one of the few veterans around on the team in terms mentoring younger players.

My last thought on all of this is that while I don’t think the Rockies are any worse off heading into this 2009 season than they were heading into the 2008 season, I still don’t expect them to have a very successful 2009 (in terms of wins and losses). I do think though that the team can be built for 2010. I’ve mentioned it in a few other posts but there are still too many question marks for the Rockies. A few positions and rotation spots are complete blanks and then guys like Carlos Gonzalez, Ian Stewart, even Tulowitzki and Iannetta are somewhat mysterious. 2009 needs to be a year of development. Iannetta needs to firmly entrench himself behind the plate, Tulo needs to show last year’s performance was due to injuries. Ubaldo needs to take a step forward and Francis needs to show last year was an exception, not the rule. Lastly, Stewart needs to mature at the major league level. He had amazing moments last year but he still struck out a ton and his inexperience showed. Maybe, if we’re all lucky, someone will emerge out of the whole Morales/Reynolds/Hirsh group or Friedrich cruises through the minors and there is some rotation clarity for 2010.

Lastly, a lot of people are hating on the Rockies for not pursuing a free agent pitcher but Sabathia was never obtainable, which leaves Burnett, Sheets and Lowe. Next year however, Duchscherer, Rich Harden, Erik Bedard, Kelvim Escobar, and Brett Myers will be free agents. While all those guys come with question marks, they’re also more within the Rockies grasp whereas Sabathia and even Sheets would be too much money. Burnett was somewhat overrated this past season. Lowe would probably be the best fit and if he was signed, I wouldn’t be disappointed but whatever…

by Resolution on Nov 16, 2008 7:49 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

I really agree

with this post. I think “competing” in 2009 with the likely lineup is a fantasy (though I do appreciate all the numbers, Rox Girl…at least giving me a reason to hope even if I’m too old-school to really buy it). The third paragraph here sums up my thoughts precisely.

by Teekalong on Nov 16, 2008 11:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd also like to add

That though I’m rather skeptical about the Rockies making the playoffs in 2009, I’m still incredibly excited about the 2009 season (just as long as the young guys don’t all go out and try to each replace Holliday’s bat)…

by Resolution on Nov 17, 2008 7:47 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm actually pretty skeptical of us making the playoffs too

Even if I see us being relatively stable in the offense. Right now, with no additional changes to us or our opponents, we’re pretty competitive in the NL West, but who really believes that the Dodgers aren’t going to make some moves this winter? If they get enough quality, they’re going to put a real crimp on our chances.

The good news is I see this Rockies team improving a lot as the season progresses, if we can catch a couple of breaks and stay close early, we should be in a decent position to make another surprising late season run. We absolutely can’t afford to fall as far under .500 last season, though.

by Rox Girl on Nov 17, 2008 8:19 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

As long as we can rebound

And look like a playoff, Division winning team. It was hard watching last year, when you knew what we did the year before!

by Mosul_DolFan on Nov 16, 2008 9:24 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

To be honest

I’m not really feeling this year (again). Hopefully I’ll be surprised. And no, I don’t think there’s anyone who found last year much fun to watch, but the problem is, we have to prove that that ISN’T the norm and that the last weeks of 2007 were something besides an incredibly lucky aberration.

Blast and botheration.

by Silverblood on Nov 17, 2008 11:20 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Good to see Rox Girl has spent the offseason..

on a steady diet of Bros Monfort/O’Dowd kool aid. Warning it will turn to hemlock next season.

Virtually every Rockie trade over the last six years has been a salary dump. This one is no exception. A star is a star and tough to come by. The 5 tool headcase with low work ethic, the soft tossing lefty who walks people, and the has been closer on a free fall are hardly equal value for a proven star. Except for the saber geeks who believe in qty over quality.

However there are some truth to the Holliday distraction rumors. I was in Cincy in July when the Rock were there with a client. At one table sat Holliday alone and two tables over were Tulo, Atkins, Stewart, Hawpe and Barmes. Do the math.

by PinchHitLancePainter on Nov 17, 2008 12:29 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

I'd still like to hear some realistic alternatives

from the Holliday-trade naysayers. What would you have had O’Dowd do differently?

It’s easy to pan the trade if you don’t believe in Carlos Gonzalez’ potential. But given what was traded recently for Sabathia, Teixeira, and Santana I don’t see a big difference between those trades and this one.

The market sets the terms moreso than the individual GMs.

by Roberbola on Nov 17, 2008 1:05 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

I would have

kept him for now and at least until mid next year. No one knows how the economy is going to influence the FA marketplace. It always seems you get more value on in-season deals. Look at Cleveland, Texas, etc recently. I am not sure the two sandwich picks are not a better deal than what the Rocks got.

One of my primary reasons for feeling the salary dump, is the timing of this. You get to mid year next year and the Dodgers, Red Sox, Yankees, Phils, Cubs, Cards, Angels, DRays could have all been players. Not to mention you may be in the race yourself and in a better bargaining position if the salary market goes soft.

My gut is the Rocks over reacted too quickly and took the best deal they could get at the time in a money saving venture. Patience is a virtue.

by PinchHitLancePainter on Nov 17, 2008 1:21 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

What did Cleveland get?

They got a hitter. That’s it, a hitter and some fill ins for Sabathia. On scouting grades and rankings, LaPorta and Gonzalez are roughly on par with each other. In comparing the fill ins, the Indians got a pitcher that has never had success in the majors in Jackson, a relief prospect still far away, and possibly an interesting name but no sure blue chipper in their PTBNL. The Rockies’ fill ins were a two win worthy MLB reliever, and a pitcher who has had major league success as a back end guy.

Texas traded a guy that had 1 1/2 years of arb remaining. NO COMPARISON. Using Texas is arguing apples to oranges, as rox girl has said many a time. Why this is continually brought up displays a lack of insight.

Do you mean Texas’ Gagne trade? Beltre’s nice but a ways off and hasn’t yet had Gonzalez’s success at lower levels.

At least Pittsburgh wasn’t brought up again, anybody know why Bay hasn’t filed for free agency yet?

by David OhNo on Nov 17, 2008 10:01 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Salary dump?

Every trade is virtually a salary dump, the trade of Volquez and HAmilton last year being an exception. The Braves certainly have the money for Texiera, but didn’t feel that the money and years were a good fit for them. Every team has to evaluate contracts in more than the money factor.

As has been pointed out over and over, Helton is proof of that strategy. A baseball player is at his physical peak around 27 years old; after that, power and discipline may increase, but speed, arm strength and the ability to recover quickly diminishes every year especially in less roided game.

I think the Rockies would have given Matt more money if he would have considered a 4 year deal. Its the years not the money that is at issue. When you consider what teams like Tampa Bay had already started doing before the Rockies, Minnesota and other teams there is a definite strategy to salaries.

You sign young talent to long-term contracts while they are young ie Tulo. As those older players get to the end of their contract years, you look at moving them for young talent. Like him or not based on last year, Gonzalez was the top of prospect in the A’s organization as he had been in D-backs. Three pieces is more depth and security than one.

Maybe 2009 is a side step, but working the plan has to be done. The truly good teams have tons of prospects and don’t get rid of prospects for just any reason. The Minnesotas and Tampa Bays have recognized they have a way to potentially compete each year even though each year may totally unravel by trading away high priced older talent for multiple prospects.

As fans, we don’t always like it, but for a sport without a salary cap, its the only responsible way to run the team unless you are one of the teams. When the Red Sox come to town and more people cheer for the Rox than the Sox, then we can say we are one of the teams. I mean the Red Sox fans stay with their team when they let Johnny Damon become a Yankee; when they ship away the best right handed hitter in the game over the last 10 years, when they let Roger Clemens go.

Its not fair to compare the Monforts to our other owners in town because they have salary caps in those sports. I have often asked myself the question, would I have signed Matt to a 6 year deal. My honest answer is that I would not based on what I see in baseball today. The pitching is too awful and too many mediocre hitters have great years. Mark Reynolds had about the same number of at bats as Holliday, batted 90 points lower, but drove in more runs. I think my chances are better to get a great year from someone I don’t expect than a long term contract to actually work out.

by brainteaser on Nov 17, 2008 1:40 PM MST reply actions 0 recs