Purple Row

Tuesday Rockpile: The Waiting Game

2008-12-02T15:20:55Z

Brian Fuentes has until this Sunday to accept or decline the Colorado Rockies' offer of arbitration. Fuentes could make $10M on a one-year deal if he accepts and wins his arbitration case, but does anyone seriously believe Fuentes would accept that at this point? Though Dan O'Dowd has said nothing would surprise him with the state of the economy, Fuentes accept arbitration would be a surprise to me. Given the comments Fuentes' agent has made over the last month, Fuentes would need to have a serious change of heart this week to take himself off the free agent market.

Of course, the Rockies will get two picks for Fuentes when he does sign somewhere else. But the Arizona Diamondbacks will receive five draft picks all together after offering arbitration to Type A free agents Juan Cruz and Orlando Hudson and Type B free agent Brandon Lyon. The total would have been seven had they offered Adam Dunn, a Type A free agent, arbitration.

The Los Angeles Dodgers offered arbitration to Type A free agents Manny Ramirez and Derek Lowe and Type B free agent Casey Blake. The Dodgers did not offer arbitration to Type B free agent Joe Beimel, whom the Rockies have interest in. The blog entry incorrectly states Beimel (and a few other Dodger free agents) to be Type A. Thomas Harding also incorrectly writes that Beimel would have cost the signing team a draft pick had he been offered arbitration. So, the Dodgers not offering arbitration to Beimel really doesn't work in favor of the Rockies or any other team since he was never going to cost a draft pick in the first place.

Larry Walker turned 42 yesterday. Texas Rangers fans think about what they would have lost had Walker not vetoed a trade to there in 2004.

Monday Rockpile: Arbitration Deadline Day

2008-12-01T15:15:56Z

There isn't much news on the Colorado Rockies' end for arbitration. Brian Fuentes will receive an offer for arbitration before the deadline at midnight ET, ensuring the Rockies draft pick compensation should Fuentes not accept the offer. Still, Fuentes has scheduled a visit with the New York Mets. I wonder if Citi Field will be a big selling point. Or should I call it, as NYC councilmen from Staten Island want to, Citi/Taxpayer Field?

Anyway, the Rockies have a total of six free agents, and only Fuentes will receive an offer for arbitration. Matt Herges, Livan Hernandez, Adam Melhuse, Scott Podsednik, and Glendon Rusch won't recieve arbitration since they don't yield draft picks. However, Podsednik and Rusch remain of interest to the Rockies, as the first link reminds us.

And maybe the most important thing mentioned in the first link is that the Rockies want Ryan Spilborghs to play center field in Mexico so he can prepare for an everyday role in 2009.

Projecting NL West Defense 2009

2008-11-30T23:00:26Z

The numbers below come from Tango's Fans scouting reports and Sean Smith's forecasts linked yesterday. For the Tango numbers, I'm pretty sure 50 represents an average defender.

Arizona:

Chris Young 69 (-1)
Chris Snyder 64
Stephen Drew 62 (-9)
Augie Ojeda 61 (-2)
Justin Upton 53 (0)
Mark Reynolds 41 (-8)
Chad Tracy 39 (-2)
Conor Jackson 34 (-1)

There seems to be a considerable disconnect between what D-backs fans are seeing their defenders do and what the objective analysis says they've been doing. I think it might be a situation where excellent pitching is making a below average D look better than it really is. Contrast that to Colorado, where poor defense made the pitching look worse in 2008, but projects to turn that around in 2009. At any rate, losing their one true plus defender (besides, perhaps Snyder) in Orlando Hudson is going to inflict a heavy toll on the Diamondbacks in 2009. You all know my bias against Snakes, so take what I say about them with a grain of salt, but I'm hopeful that a further hit on the defense combined with regression to the mean in their pitching staff bumps their runs allowed up to at least the 730 run range for the season (they allowed just 706 in 2008), preferably as much as 750. This would put a lot of pressure on an offense that's probably incapable of scoring 750 themselves, and leave a door open for the Rockies to step up as the main challengers to the Dodgers next year.

Colorado:

Troy Tulowitzki 77 (+11)
Carlos Gonzalez 76 (+9)
Ian Stewart 64 (+2)
Todd Helton 63 (+8)
Clint Barmes 59 (+7)
Ryan Spilborghs 57 (0)
Chris Iannetta 54
Brad Hawpe 41 (-15)
Jeff Baker 41 (-4 2B, -6 OF)

I think Barmes is a little underrated here. Meanwhile, Hawpe could be getting a little too much credit for his arm by the voters, particularly in his accuracy, while for some reason there were too many who thought Willy Taveras threw like Juan Pierre. Tulowitzki is a major factor for the Rockies in 2009, as last season his offense wasn't the only part of his play to suffer through a sophomore slump. The Rockies absolutely need him to rebound to be the defender the fans and numbers say he will be. Without Gonzalez the Fans average score is 57, with him we obviously go up from there.

Los Angeles:

Matt Kemp 72 (0 corner, -10 CF)
Russell Martin 71
Andre Ethier 68 (0)
Andruw Jones 64 (+1 CF)
James Loney 62 (+1)
Blake DeWitt 61 (+5 2B)
Manny Ramirez 32 (-15)

Call LA the Lake Wobegone of defense, where everybody's above average, at least according to the fans. Their two dynamic young outfielders seem to be the only visible overrates, however. The bad news for the Dodgers is that without re-signing Rafael Furcal, their team defense will be taking a hit in 2009. Similarly to the Rockies 2007, defense was an important part of Los Angeles' run, albeit without as much publicity. There have been signs that Kemp and Ethier have been slipping, Orlando Cabrera projects as a +1 at short, Edgar Renteria as a -6. The Dodgers have been talking to the Pirates about Jack Wilson, who would be an asset (+7) on the field, but he'd be only a marginal player in the lineup. Similarly to the D-backs situation with Orlando Hudson, it seems like there's no way around a downgrade at this position for the Dodgers. Speaking of Hudson, the Dodgers aren't going after Furcal, it could probably be safely assumed that they'll forego the cost of an upgrade at second as well. I'm getting the sense that they're saving their pennies for Manny and a pitcher. Ramirez's bat still more than makes up for his inability to defend, by the way.

San Francisco:

Randy Winn 69 (+7)
Emmanuel Burriss 65 (-2 SS, +4 2B)
Aaron Rowand 65 (0)
Fred Lewis 52 (1)
Bengie Molina 51
Eugenio Velez 38 (-12)
John Bowker 37 (-1)
Pablo Sandoval (-3 3B)

I'm starting to see the imperative for San Francisco to sign either Hudson or Furcal, as their projected middle infield's just ugly brutal both offensively and defensively, and you'll note that despite their minor league depth, there's just not a really high quality talent at second or short. They've got a quality defensive outfield, but given how far behind they are offensively from the other three clubs, they could have used a defensive advantage to make up ground. Unfortunately, that advantage is just not there.

****************************

Right now, depending on LA's offseason moves and who wins the Rockies centerfield and second base jobs, it looks like the Rockies or Dodgers will project to be best defensively in the division in 2009. Both will be a good bit ahead of Arizona and San Francisco in this category, but currently neither has the starting pitching of those latter two clubs, so run prevention could still turn out to be very tight among these four. The Rockies actually need it to be, compare the last two seasons:

2008 Runs Allowed:

Los Angeles 648
Arizona 706
San Francisco 759
Colorado 822

2007 Runs Allowed:

San Francisco 720
Los Angeles 727
Arizona 732
Colorado 758

I think the recipe for a successful Rockies team in the current NL West is to be in that 750 RA range, while scoring about 850 or so on offense, much like the 2007 squad. If LA only allows 650 again, however, we could be in trouble. I think currently that the Dodgers are a 700 plus allowed team, but there's a lot of offseason left to change that.

Sunday Rockpile: Tulowitzki Recovers, Embree still on the radar

2008-11-30T16:25:23Z

Troy Tulowitzki's leg appears to be finally fully recovered after his early season quadriceps tear according to an update from Troy E. Renck. While Renck mentions how important this is for Tulo's offense, his defense also suffered pretty badly and the Rockies need both sides to be at full strength to compete in 2009. I'll have an NL West defensive preview up later today, but it should be no surprise that Tulo's a vital cog for the Rockies on that end.

Other notes by Renck include the report out of Oakland that the A's are considering offering arbitration to Alan Embree, who the Rockies have interest in. Since Embree's a type B free agent, there's no risk of losing a draft pick for the Rockies in signing him, all the risk would be for the A's if he accepts and they're burdened with an overpriced reliever. Embree on the free agent market is likely to come in well below the $3 million he made in 2008 but he still might be too expensive for such a limited role, as he's likely to require a two year deal, particularly if the A's do offer arbitration. I really wonder if there's not a better, cheaper option to fill our left handed reliever role out there.

Renck's notes also allude to this New York Times piece about the Mets looking to fill their bullpen via trade before offering contracts to K-Rod or Brian Fuentes, with one of their targets being Huston Street. I don't buy that this is anything more than a leverage play on the part of the Mets GM. The fact is that New York probably needs two late inning relievers, and they can only sign one and keep any sort of bargaining strength. They will have to eventually trade for another one. That Minaya turned down a fairly safe trade with the Rockies for Street leads me to suspect that his real intent is just the opposite of what the report says, he'll sign the first of the free agent pair to crack, and then trade for his other guy by the Spring.

Finally, Renck attempts to connect Yorvit Torrealba to Boston's search for a catcher, but that's sort of ridiculous knowing what type of player Yorvit is and what types of players Boston's actually been targetting for the slot. It's not going to happen, even as a stopgap.

Saturday Rockpile: Projecting the Rockies 2009 Defense

2008-11-29T16:33:20Z

The other day while writing about our left handed starters, I pointed out how costly the Rockies defense was to their competitiveness in 2008. In 2009, if we are to have any chance at all, this has to change. Using defensive projections from Sean Smith (infielders, outfielders) let's look at some of the possible alignments for 2009. This is one I think would be the Rockies ideal situation, with part of that ideal being Carlos Gonzalez' bat maturing quickly, so you could probably substitute Dexter Fowler's name if he does the same:

1B Helton +8
2B Baker -4
SS Tulowitzki +11
3B Stewart +2
LF Spilborghs 0
CF Gonzalez +9
RF Hawpe -15

I think Ian is a little underrated here defensively, but this arrangement already projects the Rockies a net positive of eleven runs (one win) on defense. If you believe that a porous defense cost the team fifty runs to the average in 2008, which I do, this change would be a six game swing from last season, meaning a close to .500 team without upgrades to our lineup or pitching staff.

Okay, here's what we look like keeping Atkins at third and moving Stewart to left, Spilborghs to center. I'm going to put Barmes in for Baker at second to make up for some of the defensive hit we'd take at other positions while upgrading offensively:

1B Helton +8
2B Barmes +7
SS Tulowitzki +11
Atkins -7
LF Stewart ?
CF Spilborghs -9
RF Hawpe -15

We go from a plus 11 in the top example to a negative 11 here. Smith doesn't project either Stewart or Atkins in the outfield, but I'm going to assume Stewart plays around a Jeff Baker (-6) level and Atkins around a Manny Ramirez (-14) level. I've been suggesting that I'd rather move Atkins to left, keeping Stewart at third, which would amount to only a one run difference. That said, like I said in the first alignment, I think Stewart's capable of being a better than +2 third baseman, so it could be that the separation will be bigger than that. There's a pretty realistic variation on this Barmes as principal 2B, Spilly in center theme in the event of an Atkins trade, which looks like this:

1B Helton +8
2B Barmes +7
SS Tulowitzki +11
3B Stewart +2
LF Baker(-6)/Seth Smith (0)
CF Spilborghs -9
RF Hawpe -15

This would be a decently potent lineup, but we'd praying for groundballs all the time. Speaking of which, here's an alignment that Aaron Cook would probably love if he could hit like Micah Owings:

1B Helton +8
2B Barmes +7
SS Tulowitzki +11
3B Stewart +2
LF Smith +2
CF Taveras +3
RF Gonzalez +14

The Rockies would have a +47 in the field, but obviously it would not be worth it to lose Hawpe, Spilly and Baker's bats. Conversely, Cook would probably call his agent demanding a trade to Newark as long as it got him out of Denver if we settled on this arrangement as it's both an offensive and defensive sinkhole:

C: Torrealba
1B: Baker -2
2B: Stewart +4
SS: Quintanilla +5
3B: Atkins -7
LF: Seth Smith +2
CF: Ryan Spilborghs -9
RF: Brad Hawpe -15

I added the catcher there just to emphasize how brutal things could get. There are a couple of anomalies thanks to small sample sizes in the projections so take a few of them with a grain of salt. The Stewart as a positive at second base projection is one of these. You can pretty much assume that over a full season that the number would tilt somewhere into the negative side of things. Similarly, Chris Iannetta is not going to be neutral at third base, and Dexter Fowler should be considerably better than the minus nine he's projected at in center.

Friday Rockpile: Rockies bumping salary in 2009, but is it enough?

2008-11-28T16:45:50Z

Tracy Ringolsby, after awarding some turkey to figures around the league who haven't exhibited the best judgment or integrity this season, notes that even without Matt Holliday's contract, the Rockies are in line for a $5 million plus rise in their player payroll for 2009 from the 2008 season.

So where we're at is that the Rockies will pay more for players in 2009 than they did in 2008, but less than they would have had they retained Holliday. So strictly speaking, this isn't going to be a downsizing, but certainly a scaling back. Fans obviously would like the payroll to be closer to or above that Holliday level of payroll, but articles like this make it pretty clear that this is not what we're going to be getting. Ringolsby's projection includes Garrett Atkins and Willy Taveras, two players that may not be with the team on opening day given the amount of rumors surrounding them, and there is a strong possibility that whoever's left in place of them will come at a lower salary, so how the team ultimately winds up relative to last year remains to be seen.

Compared to the rest of the division, the Rockies might actually be gaining on three of their rivals in player payroll if the $5 million increase estimate holds. The Padres are cutting back drastically, the Diamondbacks figure to settle between $70 million and $72 million, which at the top range is a slightly smaller increase than what the Rockies would be seeing, and recent statements by the Dodgers owners make it seem almost certain that LA's going to be paring back from last season's $118 million spent on players. The Giants seem eager to spend more after a year without Barry Bonds brought their salary close to Colorado, San Diego and Arizona's level, so I'd expect them to see a bump closer to the $90 million they were spending in 2007, perhaps more if they land CC Sabathia.

Of course, keep in mind that payroll's only valuable as a rough gauge of veteran talent, and by itself doesn't really say much about the overall talent level of the team.

Happy Thanksgiving!

2008-11-27T15:01:35Z

via lbcpastor.files.wordpress.com

Happy Thanksgiving!

via www.greendealsdaily.com

Russ beat me to the punch, but I wanted to add my Holiday well wishes. I just don't want to know what a Tofurky giblet is, or how that's even possible. Happy Thanksgiving all.

Updated 2009 MLB Draft Order

2008-11-26T15:00:53Z

With the free agent market (somewhat) active, let's look at how the draft order is shaping up.

First Round

1. Nationals
2. Mariners
3. Padres
4. Pirates
5. Orioles
6. Giants
7. Braves
8. Reds
9. Tigers
10. Nationals (did not sign first-rounder Aaron Crow)
11. Rockies
12. Royals
13. Athletics
14. Rangers
15. Indians
16. Diamondbacks
17. Dodgers
18. Marlins
19. Cardinals
20. Blue Jays
21. Mariners (have yet to sign first-rounder Joshua Fields (being a senior, the Aug. 15 deadline does not apply))
22. Astros
23. Twins
24. White Sox
25. Mets
26. Yankees
27. Brewers
28. Phillies
29. Yankees (did not sign first-rounder Gerrit Cole)
30. Red Sox
31. Rays
32. Cubs
33. Angels

Supplemental First Round

34. Reds (SF signed Jeremy Affeldt, a "B" FA)

The Reds won't actually have the 34th pick come the time of the draft since all the higher-ranked "A" and "B" free agents will move that pick down. Remember, the Rockies will receive compensation for Brian Fuentes when he signs with another team. Well, and after the Rockies offer him arbitration, which should happen before Monday.

If a team with a 16-30 pick signs Fuentes, the Rockies will receive that team's first round pick and a supplemental first-round pick. A team in the bottom half of the standings will not yield their first-round pick, but rather their second round pick. If any team signs multiple "A" free agents, the compensated pick from the signing team will be based on Elias' rankings. So, the higher Elias rating, the better the compensated pick.

David plans on having a 2009 draft article up in a few days. We'll be looking at the draft as part of our offseason coverage.

Mets turned down Street for Heilman plus Feliciano

2008-11-26T01:52:03Z

Mets turned down Street for Heilman plus Feliciano

MetsBlog links to a Joel Sherman post which says that the Rockies would have traded Huston Street to the Mets for Aaron Heilman and Pedro Feliciano, but that Omar Minaya wouldn't pull the trigger. I'm not sure which GM looks worse in this scenario.

Tuesday Rockpile: Are the Colorado Rockies ready to Dye?

2008-11-25T15:23:24Z

ESPN's Phil Rogers has an article on Chicago White Sox GM Kenny Williams' interest in trading basically anyone on the roster. Rogers brings up Williams' already-known interest in Willy Taveras, but he also mentions that the Rockies (and the Dodgers) may be interested in Jermaine Dye. Dye has a limited no-trade clause, allowing him to block a trade to 6 teams.

Jermaine Dye

#23 / Right Field / Chicago White Sox

Height: 6-5

Weight: 245

Bats: R

Throws: R

Born: Jan 28, 1974

	G	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	K	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG
2008 - Jermaine Dye	154	590	96	172	41	2	34	96	44	104	3	2	.292	.344	.541

Now as Rox Girl brought up tangentially almost two weeks ago, Jermaine Dye was a Rockie for a short time in 2001 before being traded the same day for . . . let's not drudge up bad memories of the past.

First up, Dye's contract status: Dye is due $11.5M in 2009 and has a $12M mutual option for 2010 (with a $1M buyout).

After a severe dropoff from his 2006 season performance in 2007, Jermaine Dye bounced back in 2008. He'll be 35 in 2009.

**Jermaine Dye, 2005-2008**
Year	PA	R	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	SO	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG	EqA	VORP
2005	579	74	29	2	31	86	39	99	11	4	0.274	0.333	0.512	0.289	27.7
2006	611	103	27	3	44	120	59	118	7	3	0.315	0.385	0.622	0.326	64.6
2007	561	68	34	0	28	78	45	107	2	1	0.254	0.317	0.486	0.277	12.2
2008	645	96	41	2	34	96	44	104	3	2	0.292	0.344	0.541	0.293	37.7

Now, trading Dye won't be a sell low situation for Williams as it was in the Nick Swisher trade from a couple of weeks ago. However, Dye is an aging veteran who regressed after a strong season in 2006. While he came back strong in 2008, can Dye continue that level of production? And what about his legs? Reading over at South Side Sox, I get the sense that many of the fans over there expect Dye to wind up with a leg injury soon.

Ken Rosenthal has a new report out that the asking price for Dye is a young starting pitcher and more.

Vote in the poll.

-----

At the end of the last link, Rosenthal writes that the Rockies are inclined to keep Garrett Atkins, "at least for the moment." Or to put it another way, they haven't found the right deal yet.

-----

The Denver Post adds another name to the lefty reliever list: Brian Shouse.

	W-L	G	GS	CG	SHO	SV	BS	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	K	ERA	WHIP
2008 - Brian Shouse	5-1	69	0	0	0	2	2	51.1	46	19	16	5	14	33	2.81	1.17

He was the third best reliever on the Brewers last year with a 0.922 WXRL, behind Salomon Torres (2.930) and Carlos Villanueva (1.497). He'll be 41 at the end of the 2009 season.

And while Clint Hurdle, at the end of the article, said the Rockies internally discussed Will Ohman, Ohman's agent has yet to receive a call from the Rockies.

-----

Don Baylor on what he plans to do as hitting coach:

"What I like to preach a lot is the mental part of the game. We have to be more selective," Baylor said. "You don't have more than one sac fly (by mid-April), that says there's not a lot of thinking going on at the plate. That's a lot of freelancing."

Baylor talked of having a game plan, of inflating pitch counts.

But will he be able to reduce the number of strikeouts at the same time?

Poll

Jermaine Dye on the Rockies in 2009?

Don Baylor returns to the Colorado Rockies as hitting coach

2008-11-25T02:20:53Z

Don Baylor returns to the Colorado Rockies as hitting coach

An original Rockie back in the fold!

Left-handed comebacks: How good will Francis, De La Rosa, Smith and Morales be?

2008-11-24T19:06:11Z

So the direction my NL West preview posts have been taking me leads me to believe that a good part of the Rockies fate in 2009 lies largely in four left arms, namely those of starters Jeff Francis, Jorge De La Rosa, Greg Smith and Franklin Morales and how well they are able to fill three slots in the rotation. The question is what needs to be expected of them to make the Rockies competitive? My assumptions that have led me to this point are that:

The Rockies will lose ground in their rotation to the D-backs and Dodgers
The Rockies will gain ground on the Dodgers and Diamondbacks on offense
The Rockies bullpen will gain ground on the Diamondbacks, but lose ground to the Dodgers
The Rockies have no need to worry about the Padres, and should only worry about the Giants conditionally, so for the moment we won't focus on them.
Ubaldo Jimenez and Aaron Cook are likely to be positive contributors to keeping our total rotation loss to a minimum.
There is uncertainty with the other three rotation slots, but an opportunity exists to make further cuts into our two primary rivals' advantage.

Follow me after the break for a long dissection of the why's and how's that could make these four southpaws crucial components to our 2009 playoff hopes.

The goal is to be as close as possible in contribution from the pitching staff, so the offense has a relatively easy task of clearing the bar to the divisional title (later this week we'll review the dirty secret that it was actually Rockies hitters that were their bigger impediments to success in 2008). With Arizona, we have a pretty good idea of what their rotation will be like in 2009, with Los Angeles, we have an idea minus one, possibly two, major additions, but we know that their added pitchers are not likely to meet the Diamondbacks standard as far as the rotation is concerned. We also know that if the Rockies had the Diamondbacks starters, they would easily be the favorites in the division. Finally, we know if the Rockies get starting pitching like they had last season again, they'll lose. So let's set up a spectrum:

Rockies 2008 rotation --------------------------------------- Diamondbacks 2009 rotation

The closer the Rockies 2009 rotation is to the right side of this line, the more chance the team has to win the NL West, somewhere along that line is a point that tips the balance in the division in our favor. So I guess the first, most basic question I should ask is, will the Rockies rotation be better in 2009 than it was in 2008? Because if the answer to that question is no, we might as well bail out on this post right now.

This is a trickier standard to reach than you might realize. Last season the Rockies rotation had a tRA of 4.79, which was just slightly below league average, believe it or not, and actually better than the 4.89 tRA the team had in 2007. I know this doesn't exactly jive with our actual ERA of 5.14, but that discrepancy indicates how bad the Rockies defense was last season, and the adjusted stat is a better indicator of our rotation's true talent level. Of course, scoring was down everywhere last year, so while 2008's tRA was just below average, 2007's was just a little above. The main thing is that our rotation looks pretty bad in comparison to our divisional rivals in Phoenix, who had some scary good contributions from their starters last season (a tRA of 3.67). So let's look at the Rockies projections for 2009 and see if we're likely to have a better rotation than we did in 2008.

Projected 2009 ERA (M = Marcel; Ja= Bill James, Z = ZiPS

Ubaldo Jimenez: M 3.96 Ja 4.49
Aaron Cook: M 4.10 Ja 4.34
Jeff Francis: M 4.41 Ja 4.56
Jorge De La Rosa: M 4.92 Ja 5.26
Greg Smith: M 4.06 Ja 4.32 Z 5.03
Franklin Morales: M 4.21

It's interesting how comparatively low the Marcel projections are for our pitchers, given that there is no park adjustment made to the figures that are input or that subsequently come out. Despite this, I'm actually inclined to trust them a little more for the pitchers that have spent their entire careers in Denver who shouldn't really require a park adjustment in the first place. I don't have last season's Marcel projections for Colorado, but I can see the discrepancy between Cook's (3.96 vs 4.43) and Jimenez's (3.99 vs 5.45) actual 2008 seasons to what my park adjusted THT Season Preview Book projected, so I'm leaning to the idea that keeping things simple is best. With Smith, I hate to say it, but the ZiPS projection that has him clocking 5.03 will probably be the most accurate, or may even be optimistic, since the other two projections were based on where he was a month ago. If you remember the role that Josh Fogg played a couple of seasons ago, you'll know that's still decent for the bottom of the rotation in Denver provided we get enough production from the other four slots (BTW, I've got to differ with Russ on signing Fogg, that's too much money to be spent for too little purpose, Smith has enough competition to keep motivated as is).

So, in a sense, you could use the Marcel projection as a sort of optimistic lean for what to expect from the rotation in 2009. If we take the Marcel projections for U-ball, Cook, Francis and JDLR, with the ZiPS projection for Smith, that gives a rotational average of 4.49. Coversely, the Bill James projections might be seen as a realistic glass half-empty look, not as pessimistic as they could be, however, and certainly reasonable given what we've seen of these pitchers in the past. Using the James projection for the four holdouts from last season and the ZiPS projection for Smith gives a rotational average of 4.76, which is disturbingly close to our 2008 tRA. 4.49 to 4.76, that seems to me to be a decent starting range of expectations for the staff next season, and which will put us over that first necessary threshold of "better than 2008".

Okay, let's do the same exercise with the D-backs, to try and figure out where the other side of that spectrum sits:

Diamondbacks Projected 2009 ERA:

Brandon Webb: M 3.34 Ja 3.37 Z 3.08
Dan Haren: M 3.59 Ja 3.60 Z 3.41
Max Scherzer: M 3.84 Z 3.70
Doug Davis: M 4.41 Ja 4.62 Z 4.58
Yusmeiro Petit: M 4.32 Ja 4.05 Z 5.07

While for four of Arizona's starters there seems to be some general consensus, that Yusmeiro Petit range shows real disagreement. The Hardball Times preview will agree with ZiPS and have him at 5.08 for 2009, so that's not exactly an outlier. Still a lot of 3's on that board compared to the 4's we saw for Colorado. ZiPS' ERA for D-backs starters averages 3.97, Marcel averages 3.90, the Diamondbacks tRA in 2008 was 3.67, so there is some regression seen in the 2009 projections back towards league average, which should probably be expected.Still, it's going to be a challenge for the Rockies when their best single projected starter's ERA is higher than the projected rotational average for the D-backs. Where is the opportunity to make some inroads that I spoke of above? In order for the Rockies to really be competitive here, it's clear to me, as I'm sure it is to most of you, that there needs to be some contribution above what's currently projected from our rotation. It looks like we could stand to lose one of our two five-ish ERA starters and replace them with another Cook or Jimenez level starter to be close enough for the offense to bridge that last gap (three 4.00 ERA starters, a 4.50 ERA starter and a 5.00 ERA starter would . I, and many others, have said before that the easiest way to accomplish this would be to sign an upgrade, but we all know that the Rockies are taking the trickier route and the upgrade has to come from the hand that's already been dealt.

That finally brings me to my titular question, as we have four LHP's who are each, in some way or another, capable of being a third high grade, sub-4.00 RA, starter on the staff or at least otherwise beating their projections. Let's break down how each might accomplish this:

Jeff Francis

Reason to expect he could: Because in 2007 he was that grade of a pitcher, or at least near it given the leaguewide scoring, compiling a 117 tRA+. From August on in 2008, he seemed to have recaptured that level of performance.
Pitfalls: For a start, Francis rebounding by himself won't address the two expected subpar performers in the rotation and may not be enough to get the Rockies close enough. It would likely have to happen in conjunction with a Smith or De La Rosa rise to at least Francis' projected 4.50 RA level at the same time, or Jimenez or Cook becoming an ace level pitcher. The reasons behind Francis' struggles early in 2008 were never fully elucidated and that worries me. It became clear he was pitching sore, and the second stint on the DL preceded his rebound, but what was done to address how he got sore to begin with? Who's to say that problem won't recur?
How we'd know, one way or the other: Watch Francis' early K/BB numbers in 2009, at his best, he will have close to a 3:1 ratio (in 2007 it was 2.62:1), early last season, he was well under a 2:1 rate before turning it around late in the year.

Jorge De La Rosa

Reason to expect he could: Because he's essentially already there. De La Rosa's 112 tRA+ in 2008 was equal to Aaron Cook's, and a large reason the team's rotational performance was so close to average overall. A 7-3, 3.08 ERA second half to 2008.
Pitfalls: 2008's second half is such a small sample when compared to the rest of De La Rosa's MLB career that it's easy to see why so many of these projections call for skepticism. De La Rosa's walk rate didn't really go down in the second half, instead it went up, and his K rate was what dropped. This isn't exactly what you'd expect to see in a guy who had a breakthrough moment.
How we'd know, one way or the other: Given the backwards rate stats, to persuade me that JDLR's 2nd half performance was more than a fluke, I'd have to see some other verifiable measure that there was something different going on. Luckily, we have pitch data that shows just that for JDLR, as 2008 saw a sharp spike in his fastball velocity from 90.8 m.p.h. in May (.347 BABIP), to 93.7 m.p.h. in September (.266 BABIP). August and September showed the highest velocities on his FB as a starter that De La Rosa has seen in his career, and match what he was getting out of the pen for Milwaukee in 2005, the last time he had been nearly as effective as a major league pitcher. Another key difference is an increased use of his slider that along with the harder to track fastball seems to be resulting in many more chased pitches outside the strike zone, despite the fact that he was throwing slightly fewer strikes with the Rockies than he did in 2007 with Kansas City. I think I see a parallel with De la Rosa and the Pirates Ian Snell, who also saw a dip in his velocity early in 2008 which had devastating results. Snell didn't see quite the dramatic improvement if FB velocity as De La Rosa, but then again, he didn't see quite as dramatic an improvement in his effectiveness, either. There seems to be a thin line for this type of pitcher a bit above the 92.0 m.p.h. mark that takes them from bottom of the rotation innings eater to top of the rotation stud. I think the key to look for with JDLR will be that his fastball comes out of Spring training as lively as it was last summer. Also, if he's still getting around a 25% chase rate for pitches outside the strike zone, it will be a very good sign.

Greg Smith:

Reason to expect he could: Although the numbers and scouting reports we use to anticipate these things say that Smith's 2007 wasn't at all typical of what to expect from him on the run prevention front, the fact at the end of the day was that he was able to make it through the season with some pretty decent results. Sometimes pitchers come along who can do that consistently. Smith's got somewhat of a track record of doing the same in the minor leagues, however, which is encouraging. Anybody who knows the California League can tell you how impressive his 9-0, 1.63 ERA mark at Lancaster in 2006 was, and he put up a sub 4.00 ERA at Tucson in 2007, which is also nothing to be sneezed at.
Pitfalls: Those pitchers are extremely rare, and the odds are very much against Smith. Walking nearly eleven percent of the hitters he faced in Oakland last season does not bode well for a Colorado starter, where in order to keep our bullpen fresh, a necessity if we want to make a late season run, we need starters who consistently go deep into games. Walking a lot of batters isn't really conducive to this goal. Smith had a few starts like this one against the Giants, where he'd barely make it through five innings, if that, even if he was successful at keeping runs from crossing the plate. Smith isn't a stranger to deep games, though, 19 of his 32 starts last season were six innings or longer. There was a little too much predictability to Smith in 2008, if he was ahead in the count, he'd use the slider as his main secondary pitch, if he was behind, it would be the changeup. Being able to sit on FB/SL or FB/CH gave opponents a bit of an advantage beyond just getting used to his pitching in general, and you can see it in his 1st half/2nd half splits. It will be up to Smith and Iannetta or Torrealba to keep batters guessing more this season.
How we'd know, one way or the other: I really doubt we should expect, or even hope for, Smith to become our third #2 level starter this season, but a combo of Francis rising to that level and Smith rising to a 4.50 RA (a #3/#4) starter would do just as well, and I can envision this scenario with the right breaks. For Smith, don't look at all at the K numbers or you'll be disappointed, and may be missing what he is accomplishing. Do look at his BB/PA rate, less than eight percent seems to be a good target for him, and as long as he keeps his HR's in check, he should be alright. I know that 8% still seems high, but with his stuff, he's going to have to pick where he's most likely to find his outs, and there will be cases that letting a guy on here and there will be pretty much inevitable. Jamie Moyer comes to mind here, his best work on the season came after he started walking more hitters than the 5% he averaged in April and May. Here's something else to look for, if Smith can generate over 42% GB's on balls in play, he's a much more effective pitcher. If he does this consistently, it would be the only way he himself rises to that #2 level.

GB% and ERA by Month in 2008:

April: 43% 2.73
May: 46% 2.97
June: 33% 4.50
July: 29% 6.18
August: 29% 4.96
September: 42% 3.81

Franklin Morales

Reason to expect he could: Morales has the tools and the stuff and has shown glimpses of the performance needed to be our rotation saviour this season. There's some reason to expect a strong rebound by him toward his 2007 level of performance, and that 4.21 Marcel projected ERA is indicative of this.
Pitfalls: Morales is a Jekyll and Hyde pitcher, where it's just hard to say what we should expect this season. Reports out of Venezuela are good, but his performance record has been somewhat less than awe-inspiring, including a fairly brutal start last Wednesday. Like Smith, Morales is at his best when he's keeping the ball on the ground, but that hasn't been happening for a year now and his numbers in this regard in Venezuela have been pretty bad. Regaining some lost velocity seems a necessity for Morales to be a successful top of the rotation pitcher, I would expect a sign of this to be manifest in an increased K/PA rate, which just hasn't materialized yet.
How we'd know, one way or the other: Since Morales is likely to start the season in AAA, getting data on the velocity of his pitches won't be easy until we get some reports back from eyes on the ground there. Although as I said, the signs to look for that he has gotten his stuff back would be spikes in his K/PA and GB rates. Until this happens, I wouldn't count on much from Frankie Mo', despite any optimistic projections.

I guess if I had to lay odds on the likelihood of each of these pitchers stepping up to a Cook/Jimenez level of performance for the Rockies in 2009, I would give JDLR the greatest chance since he has done it most recently. Even though velocity isn't necessarily a constant, and he could about as easily lose his added heat next season as keep it, I like the odds of him keeping it just a little better than what Francis or Smith have to do, although I've come out of this more sanguine about the chances of those two than I was before I started writing this.

The direct correlation between Smith's GB rates and his effectiveness was probably the biggest surprise I encountered while writing, as a running theme in the Holliday trade commentary was how brutal it would be for a FB pitcher like him to come to Coors. While Smith has some tendency the FB direction, there's a clear delineation in his statistical record of how many flyballs are too many for him and he's shown an ability to stay on the right side of that line. This is encouraging to me, because it's the first indication I've seen that his success last season had a component of skill involved besides his highly touted pick-off move, and he isn't just the "stone fluke" some analysts would have us believe . With Francis, I think he's probably the second most likely to outperform his expectations behind JDLR, but there's a combination of things that have to stay in place there rather than the simple, "keep your velocity" step for De La Rosa. I've got a hunch that Morales may be the least likely of these four to come into 2009 with a pleasant surprise. I'm just not liking how many flyballs he's been giving up lately, and until I see a turnaround in that, I'm not trusting that he'll be a reliable contributor.

The real conclusion I've been coming to, however, is that while the Rockies (as is the same with any team) could benefit from a sure upgrade in the rotation, pitching for the team is hardly the concern that it's made out to be. Instead, I'd look at the eight guys besides the one on the mound. A fifty or more run swing in our favor over 2008 could be made just by getting league average defense next season. This is a bigger shift than any one starter dropping a run off their ERA, and along with potential hidden upgrades on the offense, where I'm going to be focusing my attention with my posts later in the week.

Monday Rockpile: Oh, man! or The Rockies are interested in Will Ohman and we may have announcers who will say something like that when he comes into a game (if he's signed, and this title has gone on for way too long).

2008-11-24T14:07:10Z

As has been hinted at for some time, the Rockies do have interest in left-hander Will Ohman, formerly of the Atlanta Braves.

Will Ohman

#13 / Pitcher / Atlanta Braves

Height: 6-2

Weight: 210

Bats: L

Throws: L

Born: Aug 13, 1977

	W-L	G	GS	CG	SHO	SV	BS	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	K	ERA	WHIP
2008 - Will Ohman	4-1	83	0	0	0	1	3	58.2	51	27	24	3	22	53	3.68	1.24

Ohman was the second best reliever on a 90-loss Atlanta Braves team, according to WXRL. His 1.644 WXRL was second only to Jeff Bennett's at 1.761. 2008 was a bounceback season for Ohman, as 2007 saw him post a 4.95 ERA, a 1.596 WHIP, and a -0.7 WXRL.

Brian Fuentes had a 3.619 WXRL last season, third in the NL. Really, there's going to be a drop-off with any lefty brought in. The WXRLs of those lefties also mentioned in the article:

Joe Beimel - 1.315
Darren Oliver - 2.122
Dennys Reyes - 0.570
Alan Embree - 0.262
Eddie Guardado - 3.189 (led team)

And there's always Glendon Rusch out there (-0.224 WXRL), whom the Rockies keep at the back of their mind.

With the exceptions of Taylor Buchholz and the recently acquired Huston Street, no other reliever currently on the roster had a WXRL above 0.730 last season (Ryan Speier).

Rules and Regulations

2008-11-24T05:28:12Z

[Russ's Note]: From time to time, it is good to review the rules here at Purple Row. I'm not bringing any of this up because the rules have been violated; since the Matt Holliday trade, new members have signed up for the site, and this seems like a good time for everyone to have a refresher course on the rules. These rules have been re-written, but they capture the essentials from the rules you may or may not have read when you signed up.

There are a few rules here at Purple Row.

First/Golden Rule: Practice civil discourse.

Second Rule: Rox Girl and I (Russ) are each a judge, jury, and executioner combined into one role. We do have other moderators and they have similar authority. While their decisions will be reviewed by the two of us, we will likely side with their decisions. As one former incarnation of these rules stated: "Same as in baseball, you can't argue balls and strikes with the umpires or you could get ejected." We reserve the right to delete comments without notice or comment as to why.

Third Rule: Do be a Rockies fan. That's why we are all here: because we are fans of the Rockies. We all have different views about the Rockies, so just remember the first rule.

Fourth Rule: Fans of opposing teams are welcome. Just remember to follow the rules.

Fifth Rule: Game threads are for discussing the game. Ocassional off-topic comments are acceptable, but they should not go on for long.

Sixth Rule: Religion, sex, and politics are topics best left to other blogs. This is a blog about a sports team. So, those three topics are only acceptable discussion points if they are somehow related to the Rockies or an important baseball issue.

How to use FanPosts:

The only Community Guidelines for posting a FanPost are:

* A FanPost must be a minimum of 300 characters in order to be published.

* A FanPost must in some way belong on PR--in other words, it must relate to the Rockies, or to baseball, or to PR, or to an existing thread or FanPost, etc.

Tips on writing good FanPosts:

Some of the qualities that the most popular FanPosts often have in common are:

* They expand upon the main idea with supporting examples, or statistical data, or a link to a relevant article, or a "thinking question" for others to consider, etc.--something beyond just the main idea itself.

* They explore a topic, idea, or question that has not been explored recently, or at all, on PR.

Keep in mind that if your FanPost contains only one point or idea that is not developed, expanded on, or supported with arguments or data, it is really not a FanPost--it is a comment that should be posted in an existing thread, FanPost, or FanShot.

FanShots:

Here is a link to learn how to use FanShots.

Sunday Rockpile: Blurg

2008-11-23T19:52:01Z

Once again, what I wanted to write and post by this morning is turning out to be a much more in depth project than I initially thought, so expect a post about what to expect from our left-handed starters in 2009 later tonight or early tomorrow, but for a preliminary discussion on the topic in the meantime, a common theme in KC threads about this week's Ramon Ramirez for Coco Crisp trade, was that the Royals basically got a steal by turning Jorge De La Rosa into Crisp with a year of effective relief in between. The point of any trade is to be better going forward, past performance quickly becomes irrelevant after the deal's been done, but here is what the three provided in 2008:

	W-L	ERA	WHIP	K	BB
2008 - Jorge De La Rosa	10-8	4.92	1.46	128	62

	AVG	OBP	SLG
2008 - Coco Crisp	.283	.344	.407

	W-L	ERA	WHIP	K	BB
2008 - Ramon Ramirez	3-2	2.64	1.24	70	31

Given that, who do you see as most valuable to their team in 2009?

Poll

Who will be the most valuable to their team in 2009?

Ranking the NL West's young cores...

2008-11-22T20:34:22Z

A couple of seasons ago, I was cautiously optimistic that the Rockies could keep up with Arizona's highly thought of youth movement. I analyzed every move the Rockies made by highlighting how it might or might not allow us to compete with the D-backs. 2008 saw a shift in my focus, however, as the D-backs no longer appear to me to be the most dangerous threat in the division for the next three seasons. They will be a major nuisance, and competitive, but I'm no longer viewing them as the primary objective. I wonder if I'm right in seeing Los Angeles as the bearer of the title of most respected rival now, or if LA's 2008 success is just pushing my long term vision temporarily out of focus. So up for discussion is the youth of the division, who has the best, who needs to play some catch-up.

For each team I've listed the players 27 and under that I consider "core" players, players each team is counting on to play a part in their contention over the next two to three seasons and would be hesitant to part with unless offered an equally valuable young player at a position of need. I'm going to differentiate between an outer and inner core, the players in bold are the most important, and seem to be almost completely off limits for trades. For offensive players, where applicable, I've listed their Marcel projected wOBA for 2009, and for the pitchers their Marcel projected ERA. Some prospects won't have projections, simply because I don't do them myself and can't find them online. Young players that are successful in very small samples of experience tend to get overrated (or conversely, underrated if the opposite is true) by this simple projection tool, so before you think the Giants' Conor Gillaspie (.349 wOBA for 2009) is on his way to the Hall of Fame, just temper your expectations a bit. For players like Blake DeWitt, Dexter Fowler and a few of the Giants like Gillaspie, I would trust other projection systems more.

Los Angeles:

C Russell Martin .356
1B James Loney .355
2B/3B Blake DeWitt .331 (ZiPS says .255/.312/.401)
SS Ivan DeJesus
LF/CF Matt Kemp .354
RF Andre Ethier .360
RHP Chad Billingsley 3.60
LHP Clayton Kershaw 4.14
RHP James McDonald
LHP Scott Elbert
RHP Jonathan Broxton 3.31
RHP Cory Wade 3.32

Arizona:

C/3B Miguel Montero .323
C Chris Snyder .340
1B/LF Conor Jackson .359
3B Mark Reynolds .346
SS Stephen Drew .339
CF Chris Young .336
RF Justin Upton .347
RHP Dan Haren 3.58
RHP Max Scherzer 3.84
RHP Yusmeiro Petit
RHP Daniel Schlereth
RHP Billy Buckner
RHP Tony Pena

Brandon Webb's rumored extension from Arizona has failed to materialize and the current implication is that the Diamondbacks will lose him after his current deal expires after the 2010 season if they don't trade him beforehand. It's another indication that their GM went all in for 2008-2010 after their NLCS appearance in 2007, and yet here we are going to be at the nadir of that period with the Snakes' offensive core still not developing the way it was supposed to. The starting pitching goes a long way to make up for that, and with a few breaks Arizona could win a playoff spot in either of the next two seasons. Still, that offense doesn't look nearly as tricky to get through as LA's anymore.

Colorado:

C Chris Iannetta .358
C Mike McKenry
2B Chris Nelson
2B/UT Eric Young Jr.
3B Ian Stewart .346
SS Troy Tulowitzki .345
LF Seth Smith .344
CF/RF Carlos Gonzalez .306
CF Dexter Fowler .329
RHP Ubaldo Jimenez 3.96
LHP Jeff Francis
LHP Jorge De La Rosa
LHP Greg Smith 4.06 (I wouldn't trust this)
RHP Greg Reynolds
LHP Franklin Morales
RHP Manny Corpas 3.82
RHP Taylor Buchholz 3.81
RHP Huston Street 3.60

Don't read too much into the fact that I put more names for Colorado than I did the other two clubs, the Rockies have more near-ready MLB talent right now, but they also are more reliant on their internal talent stream than Los Angeles is, and while our front office seems to view certain bench positions as core parts (actions speak louder than words here), the other teams see them as mostly fungible. Competitively, the output of the players in bold are what's most important to the teams' chances over the next couple of seasons.

Before you despair that the Rockies are behind in projected wOBA compared to the Dodgers' central offensive four (Martin, Loney, Kemp and Ethier) keep in mind the relative value of the positions involved. Kemp's defensive abilities in center are already in a danger zone, so in effect, the Dodgers have Martin and three corners while the Rockies have three of their key four (Iannetta, Tulo, Stewart and Fowler) young players as true up the middle talents. Additionally, third base is typically considered the most important corner position defensively, so there is a little added benefit with Stewart there. Still, while the Rockies have a premium position and defensive advantage, they are using the help of their "old core", Todd Helton, Brad Hawpe and Ryan Spilborghs, to make up some offensive gap. If Los Angeles buys enough of an old core of their own this winter (it's doubtful, but certainly possible), Stewart and Tulo and Fowler may have to outproduce their projections to keep the Rox offense ahead.

San Francisco:

C Pablo Sandoval .355
Buster Posey
1B Travis Ishikawa .339
1B John Bowker .325 (I know, not really what I had in mind, but let's humor Giants fans, here)
SS Emmanuel Burriss .334
3B Conor Gillaspie .349
OF Nate Schierholz
RHP Tim Lincecum 3.25
RHP Matt Cain 3.69
LHP Jonathan Sanchez
LHP Alex Hinshaw
RHP Sergio Romo 3.43

Basically the Giants will have to combine considerable good luck on their part over the next two seasons with bad luck from the other three teams to be competitive. Reading McCovey Chronicles since we traded Matt Holliday tells me that many Giants fans are operating under the delusion that they will have a better team than the Rockies next season by default, which is typical of their myopic style. If you want to make some money during the recession, I would strongly suggest befriending as many gambling addicted Giants fans as possible. I'm keeping a close eye on their farm system, however. Come 2011, when Buster Posey, Madison Bumgarner and others start making up a real core for the team, the story will be different and they could well be the Rockies primary competition.

Now let's look at the average 2009 ages of the above players in bold, because I think this is an important point to highlight:

ARI:

Hitters (5): 24.8 (.3454)

Pitchers (2): 25

LAD:

Hitters (4): 25.5 (.3563)

Pitchers (2): 22.5

Colorado:

Hitters (4): 24.25 (.3445)

Pitchers (2): 25

The picture that I'm seeing emerging is that the Dodgers are nearing their offensive peak, and might not have much room for further improvement from their core after this season. Arizona's last real chance for an upside on offense is resting almost entirely on Justin Upton's shoulders (without Upton, AZ's other central four average 25.75 y.o.). Their potential offensive peak now seems lower than Colorado's and they are certainly lagging LA, despite most of their young core players being in the same relative age range as the Dodgers. While Arizona has the best rotation currently, Los Angeles has moved to the front in pitching potential (of the three real contenders, I should say, I'd probably take Cain/Lincecum over Billingsley/Kershaw). The Rockies really need quality output from Jorge De La Rosa right now, and either Franklin Morales or Jhoulys Chacin in coming seasons to keep the gap from getting too far out of range for their offense to make up.

Either the Rockies (Chris Nelson, Carlos Gonzalez) or Dodgers (Blake DeWitt, Ivan DeJesus) could benefit from breakout performances from young position players currently projected to be outside their central cores, the Diamondbacks don't really have players that are as capable of this. On the pitching prospect front, the D-backs and Rockies have more potential for players capable of shifting the balance of power in Jarrod Parker and Chacin, while the Dodgers and Rockies have control-challenged but potential-filled LHP's in Scott Elbert and Morales who could conceivably do the same.

If everything I'm seeing is true, there is some reason to think that Arizona might start breaking their team up after the 2009 season if they fail to perform again. Stephen Drew, Miguel Montero, Doug Slaten and Tony Pena will all be arbitration eligible for the first time, Conor Jackson his second, and Chad Qualls and Chris Snyder their third. That is a firestorm of significant raises to deal with all at once, and even though Doug Davis, Jon Rauch and Chad Tracy will be having contracts coming off the books, the D-backs will unlikely be able to maintain this team without a bump in payroll.

The Rockies will have a similar challenge with Chris Iannetta, Jeff Baker, Ryan Spilborghs and Taylor Buchholz among their first time arbitration eligible players a year from now, Clint Barmes, Jorge De La Rosa and Huston Street are already in that career stage and would be in line for further arbitration level raises if they remain with the club. Luis Vizcaino and Yorvit Torrealba have contracts that expire after the 2009 season for the Rockies.

The Rockies are already rumored to be shopping Street, I would think it in the team's best interest to consider doing the same with Baker and/or Barmes starting with the July deadline if Nelson or Young are performing adequately enough to project as viable replacements at second. This would cut out some of the anticipated burden on payroll without as dramatic an impact on the talent level of the team as say losing Iannetta or Spilborghs. The D-backs have been shopping either of their catchers, I would look for their efforts to deal one of them to become more urgent as the next year progresses. Josh Byrnes has no loyalty to relievers, Qualls, Slaten and Pena seem expendable to help keep CoJack and Drew, but at this point I'm wondering if it might not be in AZ's best interest to trade one of those latter two for a better chance at a talent upgrade given the lower projected ceiling I'm seeing for them right now.

Los Angeles has a bit more freedom currently, but hefty outlays to free agents this winter could bind Frank McCourt's hands sooner than a lot of people seem to think. Despite a couple of stupid big contracts to center fielders, he's not exactly a free spender, and seems genuinely concerned about the bottom line in LA (the Dodgers got the Red Sox to pick up Manny's 2008 salary, remember). Ethier and Martin are already in arbitration, Kemp, Loney and Billingsley enter next season, so the Dodgers will be facing some crucial decisions of their own if they aren't careful with their money, even if they have considerably more of it than the Rockies and D-backs.

I think right now, because of that financial flexibility, I have to say that Los Angeles still has a bit of an advantage over the Rockies and D-backs for the 2009-2011 period, but the Rockies talent could help them catch up in the overlapping three seasons that start in 2010 or 2011. For both the Rockies and Diamondbacks, the monetary gains of another deep playoff run in the next two seasons could be the difference between staying genuinely competitive with the Dodgers or just bouncing beneath them and hoping to catch a break.

Saturday Rockpile: Wynegar possible for hitting coach vacancy, D-backs downgrading at second

2008-11-22T16:36:43Z

I'm working on a longer piece looking at the development of the young cores for the NL West teams, but it's taking longer than I thought it would, so I'll post this for now.

The Rockies have received permission from the Yankees to talk to Butch Wynegar for their vacant hitting coach position. Wynegar joins Don Baylor and Greg Colbrunn as interviewees for the position.

The Snakes have offered Ramon Vazquez a contract. Vazquez will be a clear downgrade from Orlando Hudson, both offensively and defensively, and might not be much of an upgrade from Chris Burke or Augie Ojeda. Clearly Arizona is hoping Vazquez is able to repeat his production with Texas from last season, but an anomalous BABIP to his career leaves considerable doubt this will be the case. While the Rockies now currently project to have the division's best second baseman (so long as they don't choose to give the job to Clint Barmes), they are not out of the woods yet with both the Dodgers and Giants pursuing Hudson to some degree.

2009 Marcel Projected wOBA for NL West second basemen:

Jeff Baker .335
Blake DeWitt .331
Matt Antonelli .328
Ramon Vazquez .320
Kevin Frandsen .316

Orlando Hudson .346
Clint Barmes .307

Friday Rockpile: Six added to 40 man roster, Bellorin taken off

2008-11-21T15:13:33Z

We started discussing this in a thread last evening, but the Rockies have made their moves to protect players from the Rule 5 draft coming up in December. Players added to the roster include RHP's Shane Lindsay, Ryan Mattheus and Samuel Deduno, as well as infielders Chris Nelson, Hector Gomez and Eric Young Jr. (who can also be used in the OF). The Rockies had space on their roster for all but one of these six, which necessitated outrighting catcher Edwin Bellorin to Colorado Springs to open the final spot.

I had speculated in August that Bellorin's stock had fallen when the team chose to call up Adam Melhuse instead of him to back-up Chris Iannetta after Yorvit Torrealba got injured. Yesterday's move was the confirmation that I was right. With Michael McKenry ascending the depth chart rapidly, it seems that Bellorin, Rick Guarno and Neil Wilson are having to get out of the way.

As for the six who were protected, there really weren't any surprises given strong fall performances from at least four of them (with the exceptions of Deduno and Gomez), and solid MLB level tools for all six.

Have the Rockies left any critical players exposed to the Rule 5? The team has excelled at identifying who is really of interest to teams around the league, safely letting EY2 and Lindsay go exposed last year at this time without seeing them drafted. This season, there are three players, right-hander Aneury Rodriguez, left-hander Xavier Cedeno (update, these two are ineligible, see comments), and infielder Daniel Mayora, that I could see as possibly desirable, and none of them are of the caliber or have the advanced skills of the six we did protect, so I think the Rockies will probably be safe with that trio. Right-hander Andrew Johnston might be an interesting wildcard, however. He's got some hallmarks of a typical Rule 5 pick (bullpen friendly, one MLB caliber pitch) that could entice a team, much like Steven Register did last season with the Mets. Similarly to Register, I wouldn't be surprised to see Johnston drafted, let's hope it's to another contender that can't afford to keep him all year.

The guy in the suit is supposed to be Dan O'Dowd?

2008-11-21T14:10:05Z

The guy in the suit is supposed to be Dan O'Dowd?

Final statistics for the AFL and HWL

2008-11-21T04:43:52Z

Here are the final stats for those Rockies who were on rosters at the conclusion of AFL and HWL play. First the position players:

**Final Batting Statistics for AFL and HWL**
Player	League	G	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	TB	BB	SO	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS
Lars Davis	HWL	20	63	5	14	2	0	1	7	19	4	19	0	0	0.222	0.286	0.302	0.588
Darin Holcomb	HWL	30	92	9	15	4	0	1	7	22	11	13	0	1	0.163	0.291	0.239	0.530
Mike Mitchell	HWL	27	86	9	15	6	1	0	5	23	4	24	8	1	0.174	0.217	0.267	0.484
Michael McKenry	AFL	28	84	16	31	8	0	9*	25	66	6	22	0	1	0.369	0.430	0.786	1.216
Chris Nelson	AFL	29	84	22	27	3	1	6	17	50	11	15	2	2	0.321	0.392	0.595	0.987
Eric Young Jr.	AFL	31	100	37	43	4	1	5	20	64	12	14	20!	1	.430#	0.504	0.640	1.144

* - Second in the league
! - First in the league
# - First in the league

The pitchers:

**Final Pitching Statistics for AFL and HWL**
Player	League	W	L	ERA	G	GS	SV	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	SO	GO/AO	BAA
Austin Chambliss	HWL	0	1	16.79	9	0	0	7	14	13	13	0	6	5	0.88	0.212
Andy Graham	HWL	2	0	1.17	8	0	3	7 2/3	5	2	1	0	2	7	0.60	0.172
Connor Graham	HWL	1	1	6.62	7	7	0	17 2/3	14	14	13	1	20	24	1.00	0.215
Shane Lindsay	AFL	2	2	5.48	7	4	0	21 1/3	22	16	13	3	11	25	0.62	0.272
David Patton	HWL	0	0	2.57	6	0	0	7	2	2	2	0	7	9	3.33	0.095
David Patton	AFL	0	0	9.24	9	0	0	12 2/3	22	18	13	2	5	12	0.92	0.355
David Patton	Total	0	0	6.86	15	0	0	19 2/3	24	20	15	2	12	21	N/A	N/A
Chaz Roe	AFL	1	4	11.48	8	8	0	26 2/3	38	36	34	9	21	27	0.72	0.330

An aesthetic question: Do you prefer the purple highlight when your pointer goes over the table or would a different color be better?

Also, either click into the post or go to wide view for the complete table (since the tables are cut off in the narrow view).