Sunday Rockpile: Colorado Rockies trending up; be wary of Torrealba

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 9:04 AM MDT in Rockpile

In the chart below you can see the difference a playoff competitive season makes over a disappointing season such as 2008, as Colorado residents are giving the Rockies six times the Internet search traffic they did a year ago. The team still hasn't approached the Rocktober peak, when Purple Fever was at an all time high, but the summer of 2009 has shown a more sustained interest in the club.

via www.google.com

Despite this, thus far the Rockies remain on a pace to sell fewer tickets than 2008, but this current homestand has seen an average attendance of a little over 29,000 fans per game compared to an average of around 23,000 for an early September homestand with the Astros and Giants a year ago. If the Rockies do want to beat 2008's 2,650,000 overall fans, they will need to average around 35,000 fans over these last 14 home games.

As the Rockies continue to rebuild their brand, the attendance base should see more lasting increases, which as we've seen some this year should in turn make the Monforts more comfortable with spending for quality players and make it easier to retain the players the Rockies develop themselves. Making the playoffs in 2009 would be a huge help to this cause. Should the Rockies be able to hold off the Giants for the wild card spot, they will be one of a handful of teams to make the MLB playoffs in two of the last three seasons. Assuming the Dodgers and Yankees hold onto their very secure playoff spots as well, the list would look like this:

Now, I don't know if this jumps out to other people as much as it does to me, but there would be only one team under $100 million in payroll on that list. I'm very glad it's the one I root for.

Onto some links.

MLB.com

Denver Post

Torrealba's key hits earn him starting job - The Denver Post

Nobody else seems saying it, so I'm afraid I'm going to have to. Yorvit Torrealba is fool's gold right now. There is nothing to suggest that his recent performance is at all sustainable over a long duration. I'm fine with riding him as long as he is hot, but a .432 BABIP over the last 30 days and a slugging percentage that's barely over his batting average suggest that he's getting inordinately lucky recently rather than skillful. His actual talent level is what it has been throughout his career, which is subpar.

There will be a price to pay eventually for holding on to him in the starting position too long, and I don't know if Jim Tracy realizes this. He's already costing the team defensively and when the other shoe drops, it's going to hurt a bit. I just hope it's either far enough in the future or realized quickly enough to not hurt the Rockies playoff chances.

Ubaldo Jimenez earns pitching's highest rank: ace - The Denver Post

Meanwhile, there's nothing to suggest that Jimenez is anything less than the stud he's made out to be. Be sure to vote for him in this soft-drink sponsored award at MLB.com.

Tweet Comment 40 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

So let me get this straight

1. We are proud that our team is under the $100 million salary mark. It makes us feel like Cinderella underdogs.
2. We hope that the Monforts will increase their spending and feel justified by fan support for doing so. Further we complain bitterly when they seem like cheapskates.

I use the first person plural to explicitly include myself in this contradiction. I wonder which would really be more important to me…

by Rock Oax on Sep 6, 2009 10:14 AM MDT reply actions

I've never really seen any criticism on this site of the Montfort's spending

They’ve added some payroll this year in the Betancourt and Beimel trades, even though the economy and attendances are in a state of flux, I can’t see a reason to criticise them.

The point about increased fan support leading to increased revenue and therefore increased spending potentially leading to more sustained success is a fairly logical and desirable outcome.

Of course, the DP commenters likely complain daily.

Oh yeah I forgot: ZOMG RESIGN HOLIDAY MONTDORKS

by djmbluemoon on Sep 6, 2009 10:23 AM MDT up reply actions

My point is more

whether we want to be an under $100 million Cinderella story (which has the obvious losing year risk) or do we want to be a big spender that gets and keeps a lot of expensive talent?
Obviously the best scenario is being the low budget success, but that is unreliable and even though we love it I think we all want a consistent winner.

by Rock Oax on Sep 6, 2009 10:47 AM MDT up reply actions

I'm not really sure anyone wants a Cinderella story

most just want a team that is successful year after year.

The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient.

by rockieprogress on Sep 6, 2009 10:55 AM MDT up reply actions

I'm not sure that being proud of past success under $100MM

necessarily requires desiring being under $100MM in the future. The difference in time negates the absolute connection of the two as a contraditiction. We can rejoice in their success dependant of future wishes. I never want them to be a top level payroll team for all the temptations of quick fixes/contracts, but some extra flexibility would be nice.

"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein

by Andrew T. Fisher on Sep 6, 2009 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions

The philosophy of the team

Is to bring talent from withing the organization and boost it with some reasonably priced FA players. I don’t think they have a number in mind. They offered Holliday a pretty sizable deal he said no. As of opening day they were 18th. But they are competing with a team that has most guys under 26. Tulo has been signed longer term etc.

More teams seem to be going in out direction than in the Yankees. And they have like 30-40 mil coming off this year.

by Roxfan24 on Sep 6, 2009 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions

And the Answer is really neither

The Rockies will always be a Cinderella story. (actually more David as in David and Goliath would be a better analogy) They can’t be a BIG spender, cause they don’t have big money to spend. Baseball is not like Football, or Basketball, or Hockey. There is little profit sharing (though growing), and no salary cap. It creates the haves (big MEDIA market teams, with big payrolls to match) and smaller MEDIA market teams with smaller payrolls) The reason the Rockies don’t have a huge payroll, is the same reason I don’t spend a lot of money on a big house or an expensive car….I DON"T HAVE THE MONEY…and that’s not being cheap.

BUT, there is a line, and a concern that the Rockies and their ownership could go the opposite end, and spend NO money, thus reducing their overhead/expenses, and just pocket the fans money that will always show up on a nice summer evening in Denver regardless of the quality of baseball played there. As the list shows…money helps make a playoff organization. It’s dang hard to make the playoffs with out money. So any additional money helps. We aren’t talking 25 million more…we are talking 5 million more. or maybe a player here or there to fill in gaps that occur when there isn’t a player to fill a position in the system coming up.

by Redhawk on Sep 6, 2009 10:59 AM MDT up reply actions

"5 million more"

We added Betancourt, we added Beimel, we took on some money. I’m not counting Contreras, because I’m not sure that cost us any $$$. $5m? I doubt it was that much, but we added payroll…who else could we have gotten that would have added to B&B to get to $5m, that would have actually made our team better where it needed to improve?

I don’t believe in adding payroll just for the sake of trying to send a message to the fanbase. Money spent well is money well spent, whether that’s a moderate amount or not.

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

by Mondogarage on Sep 6, 2009 11:20 AM MDT up reply actions

I think you understood

I didn’t mean “THE ROCKIES NEED TO ADD 5 MILLION DOLLARS”. I meant that if the Rockies are to remain competitive, then they may need to add a few players from time to time. They can be had at times fairly cheaply…but even then it may cost some money.

I used $5 mill as a range example. Adding a little. Not completely becoming something they are not, which is wealthy…just comfortable, to add a little. Like this week…I’m personally working on a couple of deals that should make me money …so when I was at the grocery store I picked up a steak on sale….I added just a smidge to what I normally buy……..

by Redhawk on Sep 6, 2009 11:28 AM MDT up reply actions

I wasn't really trying to disagree with you per se

Just outlining my philosophy generally…not that what I have to say has any importance or impact…but yes, undoubtedly, the payroll will have to grow at least incrementally over time.

I’ve been impressed this year with the club’s decision to add for the right players (or at least what they’ve perceived as the right players).

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

by Mondogarage on Sep 6, 2009 11:34 AM MDT up reply actions

me too

and on a budget. As you point out below…the Mets have buckets of money…but throw it at the wrong guys. The Rockies have little to no extra cash..yet have picked up valuable pieces.

Now….I still think money is a good thing to have, and to spend in baseball, if a team wants a regular winner…but being smart can make up for lack of cash.

by Redhawk on Sep 6, 2009 11:50 AM MDT up reply actions

I want us to be just like the Mets

Spend ginormous annually, and suck like the wind.

Moderate money spent well leads to a team that will contend more often than not. At these spending levels and ticket prices, the Rox are not only well stocked for the future, but also one of the better ballpark bargains in the process. As long as we can retain our best, I see no reason to try to just start leapfrogging other teams in payroll for its own sake.

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

by Mondogarage on Sep 6, 2009 11:16 AM MDT up reply actions

RG, its hard

to argue with your comment about Yorvit being fools gold. Ride the hot player, work on the real talent to get him back to being a productive starter, so a quick hook on Yorvit is possible.

The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient.

by rockieprogress on Sep 6, 2009 10:57 AM MDT reply actions

Possible typo...

Cards instead of Cubs?

I agree with comment about Yorvit…

Oh well, I like watching him play anyway! :D

(my other car is a cdr)

by ejskater on Sep 6, 2009 11:16 AM MDT reply actions

2009 will be the only year in the last three seasons that the Cards

will have made the playoffs, Chicago made it in 2007 and 2008.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 11:25 AM MDT up reply actions

I will be shopping

At the dugout store when I make it to a game this week. I’m not one for buying team memorabilia – a hat or a shirt is enough for me – but if I can add to my humble collection and reward the front office for their willingness to win this year, I’ll do it.

Also, my wife needs a cap. With a space in the back for a pony tail. You fellas know what I’m talking about.

Talking about baseball, I agree that Yorvit’s on an uncharacteristic tear. But we have to ask if Ianetta was on an uncharacteristic slump, or if our offensive options at catcher are worse and worser. I’m not a big stats guy, so I don’t know the answer to that. But my gut says that we might have to stick with Yorvit not only as long as CDI’s slumping, but during the slumps of some of the other bats, as well (at 3rd or with Hawpe coming back into the lineup).

by Yokel on Sep 6, 2009 11:39 AM MDT reply actions

they way yorvit is consistently getting hits

i want him in the lineup. i don’t care if it’s luck, iannetta is a black hole in the lineup these days. neither of them can throw out a runner so start whoever’s hitting the ball, and yorvit is doing that. he deserves to start right now.

Popcorn chicken...with club sauce...

by lockeitup on Sep 6, 2009 11:56 AM MDT reply actions

I know that CDI has been blackhole-ish lately

But if I am not mistaken his last two ABs resulted in 7 total bases (HR, 3B). I think there is certainly more potential offense in CDI than there ever will be (even in the middle of a streak) from Yorvit

by Rock Oax on Sep 6, 2009 12:04 PM MDT up reply actions

I think they need to be platooned.

Renck keeps a key number out of his piece, Iannetta is hitting .293/.398/.587 vs. LHP’s this season. Torrealba doesn’t come close to that and actually hits right handers better. There should be no reason Torrealba starts over Iannetta vs. LHP’s at the very least.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 12:08 PM MDT up reply actions

To heck with stats

I’ve watched the games. I want Ianetta nowhere near home plate right now. Torrealba is the guy until he turns back into a pumpkin.

And he’s just fine defensively, too.

Really, having Torrealba behind the plate is quite literally the least of this team’s problems right now. He’s a plus.

by BroJB on Sep 6, 2009 1:54 PM MDT up reply actions

I think

Calling Yorvit “fools gold” is disingenuous. His productivity is, right now, legitimate. And CDI has been probably the definition of fools gold all year. Just enough HRs to make us try to forget the parade of outs.

There seems to be some confusion (or misrepresentation) about how Yorvit ended up starting. Tracy isn’t playing him because he sees fool’s gold, or because he speaks Spanish, or any other reason attributable to Yorvit. He’s starting because CDI LOST THE JOB THROUGH POOR PLAY and Yorvit was given, and is earning, additional PT.

I, like anyone else, hope sincerely that CDI gets it together, we need his potential impact to win this chase here. But acting like he’s somehow getting screwed here is silly. I know its too much to expect that the greater PR community can possibly come to grips with the fact that Yorvit might be the better option right now, but perhaps all the Yorvit haters should take a moment to think about what we’re trying to do here: win as a team. Tracy is not a fool, and he’s not self-destructive. He thinks Yorvit gives us a better chance to win RIGHT NOW, and thus far it’s hard to argue the results…

by Teekalong on Sep 6, 2009 2:08 PM MDT up reply actions

Yeah, this is why I was hesitant to bring it up at all.

People think it’s a full endorsement of one player if you say something negative about another. It’s not that case. It’s not even a case to sit Yorvit Torrealba right now or start him over Iannetta, if you actually read what I write rather than assuming you know what I think you might realize that. I say start him while he’s hot. I’m just pointing out that it’s not going to last and we as Rockies fans have to be ready for that.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 2:55 PM MDT up reply actions

I'm not sure that's quite accurate

I did read what you wrote, and I can also get the vibe of what you mean (even if you didn’t write it). Your point is that Yorvit’s production is false (unsustainable, whatever), that he’s not as good as he’s been playing, and that he’ll come crashing down to the detriment of the team etc. (the implication there is the obvious opinion that CDI will be better if he’s playing). The first point is false, the second is probably true, and the last is just conjecture — assuming CDI will somehow figure it out if we give him the job back, after being so bad for so long.

At any rate, your implication is obvious: that we shouldn’t “believe” in Yorvit. Maybe you’ll be proven right, time will tell. But calling out Tracy for his inability to recognize this “so obvious” point seems odd to me, couldn’t you just as easily say that there was a price paid by Tracy sticking with CDI too long?

Whether or not he is the reason, the team is 5-0 since Yorvit took over the primary C job. Thus, the upshot of my rant: perhaps it would be more appropriate to bang on Yorvit when his “inevitable” decline actually happens. And I, and most of the other non-Yorvit hating world will be fine with it, because I don’t think anyone disagrees that CDI is the more talented player and that ultimately the team will be better if CDI is playing and playing well. But until then, it seems odd (but predictable) to take shots at the guy that is providing key contributions every night lately.

I still don’t get the ferocious Yorvit hate here (and not blaming RG here for this, but in general). I know he wasn’t a Colo prospect so that’s a chip against him, and I know he’s not “that good” and all. But the guy was a vocal leader and key contributor to the best team in franchise history, and right now is playing a nice role in another really good team. He’s a positive guy, clearly well-liked, and an emotional leader. I could see the hate if he was a jerkoff, but he’s not. He took his demotion last year fairly well (how many teams bench their starting WC catcher for a guy that didn’t play at all during those same playoffs?). At the very least, it seems to me he deserves the respect of having the fanbase not actively root against him. A shame.

And as a final point, I still await (after prompting here and elsewhere) some real evidence of Yorvit’s defense costing us games. Maybe its true, but I haven’t seen it…

by Teekalong on Sep 6, 2009 5:07 PM MDT up reply actions

Okay...

I don’t know what you want as evidence, this study by Brian Joseph finds him to be one of the bottom ten backup catchers in the league in common catcher defense measures. Every study I’ve seen go into it has come to a similar conclusion, Torrealba’s defense is less than average, and thus costing us runs relative to what an average catcher (Iannetta this season, for instance) is able to bring. More runs allowed equals more games lost, I don’t know how hard that is to equate.

This isn’t hate and I don’t get why criticism of players is considered that way. This is saying that he’s a backup caliber catcher riding a hot streak, and that those relying on him for positive production for the rest of the season (which given that he’s the starter implies all of us Rockies fans) might be in for a let down. I don’t think your critique of Iannetta is hating on him, don’t think my critique of Torrealba is hating on Yorvit. I very much appreciate what he’s brought to the team, and I love his fire. He’s just not a starting caliber catcher for a contending team.

We need to move away from the polarizing characterizations. I’m not saying you or any other Yorvit supporter are implying he’s the second coming of Joe Mauer, so don’t say I’m not respecting him. Please, I’m trying to be neutral, and if I lean too far to Iannetta I’m okay being called out for it, but I’m not okay with getting words put into my mouth that I’m not saying, or thoughts put into my head that I’m not thinking.

Again, hopefully for the last time, and I’m going to put this in bold and in caps so it is clear this time: I WANT THE ROCKIES TO START YORVIT TORREALBA VS. RIGHT HANDED PITCHERS AS LONG AS HIS BAT CONTINUES TO BE HOT. REST HIM VS. LHP’s BECAUSE THEY’RE ALL IANNETTA CAN HIT LATELY.

I’m just saying that we’re all riding a lucky pair of dice here, and at some point it’s going to turn up snake-eyes on us, but until then no sense letting up with it.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 5:58 PM MDT up reply actions

Oops, forgot the link in the first paragraph

This is the recent defensive study I was talking about.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 5:59 PM MDT up reply actions

OK

I don’t take that as legitimate evidence of anything other than the fact that CDI is probably better, which I’ve never disputed. I would like somebody to point me to a particular play/game where Yorvit’s bad defense caused us to lose. All those aggregate metrics are interesting for looking at a player from 30,000 feet, but they don’t play the games on averages. From my view, I cannot recall a game that would have been won but for Yorvit’s defense.

by Teekalong on Sep 6, 2009 7:05 PM MDT up reply actions

You

may not be a true Yorvit hater, but there’s no doubt that this site is generally anti-Yorvit (and that’s putting it nicely). I don’t expect everyone to stand up and pledge alliegance to him as a starter, my problem comes when it seems that people are actively rooting against him/underselling him because to acknowledge that he isn’t the worst player on the team and a pariah would somehow be treasonous to the “very special boy” nonsense. So I’m standing up for the guy here. I agree with your comments in bold, not much else need be said.

by Teekalong on Sep 6, 2009 7:08 PM MDT up reply actions

I still think you're seeing Iannetta enthusiasm for Torrealba hate.

Whereas there are probably a couple of shades of gray on the subject for each member of Purple Row. Torrealba doesn’t get dissed on unless he’s doing stuff at either the plate or on defense that merits the dissing, or has done so in the recent past (and that could be anywhere up to a couple of years for some people who take long views). Iannetta’s easily more disliked in game threads lately, if you think otherwise, you haven’t been paying attention. Initial enthusiasm with his promise seems to be turning to disappointment with his performance, which should be expected given the performance he’s put up, and the enthusiasm for his promise should have been expected as well, as he did have a very promising rise through the minors and there were glowing reports of how he looked this Spring from several national sources.

I want to say also that I’m wary of DO’D and the F.O. overpaying Torrealba again based on a month long hot stretch as they did after 2007. I know it’s not his fault they gave him that kind of money, but he’s being paid to be the fourth best position player on the Rockies. I definitely don’t think he’s the worst we have, but there’s no way he’s living up to the value of his contract either.

Finally, now I’m really feeling like a cad for sticking to my guns so long given what he’s gone through in his personal life this year. He’s a fierce competitor and an all around great teammate from everything we’ve read, and seems a solid human too, but his current hot streak is just that.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 8:37 PM MDT up reply actions

I'm not too wary

about overpaying him this time around. Last time, I feel like it was almost a deal out of sympathy after the Mets stuff fell through. This time, the market will dictate, and if he gets a 1 year, 1M deal, I think that would be just fine. Anything more substantial would probably be unwarranted.

by Teekalong on Sep 6, 2009 8:54 PM MDT up reply actions

Oh, btw, Teekalong,

I don’t want this question to get taken the wrong way (as though it’s hostile), but I’m legitimately curious when you were won over by Tracy as manager. IIRC, you were one of the biggest skeptics when the Rockies named him as Hurdle’s replacement because of your proximity to Dodger fans who remembered him then. I mean, clearly he’s helped the Rockies get into the position they’re in, so I give him a lot of credit for that (even while I question some of his judgment calls) but I’m really interested what changed your mind about him, or if that’s not the right way to phrase it, what won you over to the point where you are so trusting of his decisions right now. I’m still not sure myself, obviously, but I’m definitely not arguing with the results.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 6:13 PM MDT up reply actions

In short...

winning.

I was basically a Tracy skeptic because of all the negative vibes he got in LA…and the general feeling that those LA teams didn’t finish as well as they should have. I was a Dodger season ticket holder during that time and I do recall thinking he tinkered way too much. But mostly, just how much my Dodgerfan friends were making fun of me.

So for sure I was negative about him. And I don’t care much for his demeanor in press conferences, something about it just bugs me. But the fact is that the team has been electric since he took over. My general view on managers is the notion that they should get the team to play better than the sum of its parts, and I think he has done so in spades. Its truly astonishing how far this team has come under his stewardship. Now, I don’t give him full credit for it, the players are still playing the games. But overall I rarely find myself thinking that his tinkering costs us games, and we just keep winning. (Worth noting, while I never loved Hurdle, I wasn’t a hater and I blamed the poor start more on the players than him. I don’t really feel the same way anymore.)

For what its worth, I was also a massive DOD basher and he’s won me over this year too. His moves have been almost universally strong, and his drafting/signing of Matzek was terrific. I hope both guys get 2 year deals at minimum after this year.

by Teekalong on Sep 6, 2009 7:03 PM MDT up reply actions

A question regarding Yorvit.

How do his offensive and defensive stats compare this year to 07? I was thinking he was pretty good in 07…and may actually be returning to that form. Just wondering…

Proudly SPILLYing all teams Colorado whilst residing in Sunny San Diego!

(the Broncos are sorely testing my Spillage)

by SDcat09 on Sep 6, 2009 12:00 PM MDT reply actions

His numbers in 2007 weren't that great either...

He has an aura that managers like Hurdle and Tracy like which makes them prefer him over CDI, and most casual fans too, actually, but skills-wise he’s the inferior player by a good margin.

by Rox Girl on Sep 6, 2009 12:10 PM MDT up reply actions