Saturday Morning Rockpile:
With Brian Fuentes' arbitration case being settled yesterday, the Rockies 2008 player payroll settles right around the $67 million mark (very unofficial estimate) which is nearly 25% higher than the 2007 payroll and brings us right in line with where the payroll was in 2003. Let's hope our return on that investment is a little better this time around. The team's estimates heading into the winter were for $70 million in payroll, so I'm sure the beancounters are happy that we wound up on the low side there.
What does this all mean? From a midseason trade perspective, there is some positive potential here. The Rockies certainly seem able to keep Fuentes for the entire season if need be, either he or Atkins would have been at a much higher risk of being shipped out in a salary purge if the total was too far over that seventy figure. That keeps some leverage on our side should a trade happen, however that's something I'm seeing as less of a possibility after yesterday's ruling.
----------------
San Diego's team number-crunchers have decided they're the favorites, and this reporter goes into details why, which amount to solid pitching and a better than they look offense. The second part is mostly true, everybody who's not really paying attention underrates the Padres offensively. The first part is more dubious though
That veteran cast at the back of their rotation is where the Padres downfall will lie in 2008. Peavy will be one of baseball's best pitchers again; Young might not be as good as he's been the last two seasons but he'll still be well above average; but then you get to Maddux, who's seen his average IP/start drop from 6.42 in 2005 to 5.8 last season, and every indication suggests the downhill slide will continue this year. Randy Wolf is neither healthy or good and Mark Prior won't be pitching until late May at the earliest and isn't a very safe bet to be effective when he does return. The three of them combined could be lucky to get 300 IP this season, and that's where you start to get into some major issues.
If Peavy and Young can combine for 440 innings, and that's being very generous to Young in making that assumption, the Padres will still be left with a good 250 starter innings or so that they'll need to divvy up between Justin Germano, Clay Hensley, Jack Cassell and Wade LeBlanc. The first three are weak-stuff command specialists that get in trouble once MLB hitters get used to them. Germano hasn't been quite exposed like Cassell and Hensley have, but he will. LeBlanc's a bit different, he's better and a more legit MLB arm, but he might not be ready this year. In short, none of the four are safe bets to be league average in 2008.
Given the track records of Wolf and Prior and the decline of Maddux, I just see a lot of potential here for more than half of San Diego's starts to be below league average in quality, despite the presence of Peavy and Young at the top of their rotation. At that point, they'll have to rely on their offense and bullpen to save them, and unlike the Giants, the Padres offense certainly could, but there are several issues in the batting/fielding department as well, and once injuries start to take a toll, you'll see San Diego fall further off the pace of the other three NL West leaders.
One area where the Padres traditionally do very well, however, is in assessing their needs mid-season and getting the help they need without giving up anything of value. If that trend continues this year, maybe they will find a way to hang around all season, but right now I'm not a believer.
0 recs |
62 comments
Comments
Score!
150 freakin' dollars, but I had stashed year-end bonus money just for today so it's ok. Can't wait!
Anybody else get tickets?
by rockhead on
Feb 16, 2008 10:43 AM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
I Did
by jrockies on
Feb 16, 2008 11:02 AM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I am in Sec 130 for Opening Day
by Prospector on
Feb 16, 2008 4:00 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
No Opening Day tix for me :(
by free7694 on
Feb 16, 2008 12:39 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Bummer
by rockhead on
Feb 16, 2008 1:37 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I hate you all
by Silverblood on
Feb 16, 2008 1:42 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Think of it this way,
by Russ on
Feb 16, 2008 2:09 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm jealous too..
by Charlie77 on
Feb 16, 2008 4:00 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm definitely excited
by free7694 on
Feb 16, 2008 1:57 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
No Opening Day Tix
I was going to get a mini-plan..but no post season priority so not much point in that, and only 2 had opening day tickets in the plan (the 2 25 ticket packages)
No opening day...but I really don't care (much). That's a cluster f(*$ anyway, and way too much money. I'm just happy to have baseball tickets! I can almost smell spring!
by Redhawk on
Feb 16, 2008 4:04 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Holliday
by jrockies on
Feb 16, 2008 11:08 AM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
In the words of Ron Burgandy...
by jcd823 on
Feb 16, 2008 2:25 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Padres, looking towards 2009...
by Charlie77 on
Feb 16, 2008 4:08 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Padres
My guess is that the Padres, Rockies, D'Backs and Dodgers are within 4 games of each other when the season ends--you can speculate which one will come out on top, but let's face it, circumstances that cannot be predicted at this point (injurires, luck, midseason trades) will be enough to make up whatever little difference there is among the teams at this point. If nothing else, I predict another great divisional race.
by DenverBears on
Feb 16, 2008 12:31 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
This is a wise and level-headed response
by Roberbola on
Feb 16, 2008 2:30 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
funny....
by DenverBears on
Feb 16, 2008 2:33 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Barmes....
by DenverBears on
Feb 16, 2008 1:01 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
We know he can field
by Silverblood on
Feb 16, 2008 1:14 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
maybe we should
give him some bison meat to drop maybe that will reverse the curse on him
by roxfan4life on
Feb 16, 2008 1:55 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree that....
by DenverBears on
Feb 16, 2008 2:36 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Surprised?
by jrockies on
Feb 16, 2008 5:08 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
surprised...
that he comes out as the best fielder...yes.
Do we really believe that he is better than everybody else? I didn't think so, but it certainly is possible that I am wrong.
by DenverBears on
Feb 17, 2008 11:26 AM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Be careful with this
by Rox Girl on
Feb 17, 2008 11:35 AM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
THE WORLD CHAMPION A'S OF THE EARLY 70'S...
by 86 wins in 07 on
Feb 16, 2008 2:42 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
I like this....
You've got Barmes/Nix---good glove/questionable bats; a number of decent pinch hit possibilities and some potential stop-gap defensive fillers at 2B. You could bat the 2B 8th, which for home games, that gives you 2-3 innings of a stud fielder before you think about pinch hitting. If the 2B slot comes up in a key situation, you don't think twice about using a ph, since you have another stud fielder to replace him. Granted, this uses a lot of roster spots and bench flexibility, but it would be fun to see.
by DenverBears on
Feb 16, 2008 3:05 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
TIX
by rockiesfan4ever on
Feb 16, 2008 2:56 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
Ugh
Let's hope this one goes better than that one.
by Silverblood on
Feb 16, 2008 10:44 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm pretty lucky
by SlamDunkTheFunk on
Feb 16, 2008 7:50 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
Padres are pretty good
ZIPS 2008 Simulator likely win totals:
My simulator ran 25 seasons for each team based on 2008 schedule.
LAD: 85.88
SD: 82.70
ARI: 82.36
COL: 81.68
SF: 75.16
Of course if Juan Pierre and Nomar get lots of playing time then all bets are off. :)
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on
Feb 16, 2008 10:01 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
Hmm
by Silverblood on
Feb 16, 2008 10:05 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Well,
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on
Feb 16, 2008 10:14 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So basically...
by Charlie77 on
Feb 16, 2008 11:40 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
well, not quite
2008
NL West: LAD
NL Central: Cubs/Reds/Brewers (Toss up)
NL East: NYM
AL West: LAA
AL Central: DET
AL East: NYY
vr, Xeifrank
by Xeifrank on
Feb 16, 2008 11:53 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Just stop with the Red Sox
Pointing to that is just like me pointing to my 89-73 projection for the Rockies last year and saying how smart I am for getting it so close to being right (if it weren't for the play-in game) when in fact I know, and everybody else should know that it was just a lot of luck that the events of the season would unfold that way. There's so much that's variable that you me or nobody else can project for certain the position of any of these teams when they are that close to each other.
We'll see if you're luckier with your Rockies sim this year, but if we do wind up in fourth place like you say, it has little to do with the strength of your simulator.
by Rox Girl on
Feb 17, 2008 6:00 AM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Rockies 25 man roster
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on
Feb 16, 2008 10:16 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
Roster
- P Jeff Francis
- P Aaron Cook
- P Jason Hirsh
- P Ubaldo Jimenez
- P Franklin Morales
- P Manny Corpas
- P Brian Fuentes
- P Taylor Buchholz
- P Kip Wells
- P Ryan Speier
- P Josh Towers
- P Matt Herges
- C Yorvit Torrealba
- C Chris Iannetta
- 3B Garrett Atkins
- 2B Jayson Nix
- SS Troy Tulowitzki
- 1B Todd Helton
- RF Brad Hawpe
- CF Willy Taveras
- LF Matt Holliday
- OF Ryan Spilborghs
- IF/OF Jeff Baker
- OF Seth Smith (or Cory Sullivan/Scott Podsednik)
- IF Ian Stewart (or Clint Barmes)
by Silverblood on
Feb 16, 2008 10:40 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Middle infield spots
Quintanilla could be another option I suppose. Thoughts?
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on
Feb 16, 2008 11:35 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You forgot Vizcaino...
Otherwise, I think you've got it just about right.
by alexcolfax on
Feb 16, 2008 11:53 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
My Roster Picks
Francis
Cook
Jimenez
Hirsh
Towers
RP
Corpas CL
Fuentes
Viscaino
Herges
Bucholtz
Redman (or Wells)
Speier
Lineup
Taveras CF
Tulowitzki SS
Holliday LF
Helton 1B
Atkins 3B
Hawpe RF
Torrealba C
Nix 2B
Bench
Barmes (IF/OF)
Baker (IF/OF)
Spilborghs (OF)
Podsednik (Smith or Sullivan)
Iannetta (C)
Smith and Stewart go back to Colorado Springs to get consistent at bats and Morales will go to get a few more innings, and if an injury occurs, which is likely, they will be the first called up.
by jrockies on
Feb 17, 2008 12:16 AM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah this is about right
Last OF is a 3 way toss up between Smith, Sullivan, and Podsednick....I think Pods wins cause of the veteran factor, and the speed factor. Though I'd rather have Smith as a lefty PH off the bench. Pods has to hit in spring training or he's gone. (again, if I had to say, we break camp with 2 of these 3...then one goes down/or out when we need the 12th pitcher.
Last bench position player will be Barmes or Quintenilla. We have to have a back up SS. These are the only 2 we have. Barmes should get the nod over Q.
Stewart goes back to AAA, just no spot to play regularly in the show and that's what he needs now.
by Redhawk on
Feb 17, 2008 12:57 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
There's no way..
by malakian on
Feb 17, 2008 2:23 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
when are we gonna have tulo projections?
good article, sorry if it has been posted already
by roxfan4life on
Feb 16, 2008 10:40 PM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
Simulators
"Pointing to that is just like me pointing to my 89-73 projection for the Rockies last year and saying how smart I am for getting it so close to being right (if it weren't for the play-in game) when in fact I know, and everybody else should know that it was just a lot of luck that the events of the season would unfold that way. There's so much that's variable that you me or nobody else can project for certain the position of any of these teams when they are that close to each other."
Well said. At the very least, anyone pointing to past results to validate their system should have a semi-meaningful sample. I've got that - my 2007 projected standings turned out to be the best in the business, despite of course missing badly on our Rockies - but it's still nowhere near as strong as the method-based argument is.
Onto the more interesting topic here, the Padres' rotation:
"In short, none of the four are safe bets to be league average in 2008."
So what? The average team has only 2.5 starters who are "safe bets to be league average." The fact that the Padres #4-8 options on the SP depth chart aren't exciting doesn't mean that they're particularly vulnerable in that area, it just means that they shouldn't be expected to win 95 games or something similarly ridiculous.
Put another way, here's the average projected ERC for NL starting pitchers, by rotation slot:
#1: 3.45
#2: 4.03
#3: 4.36
#4: 4.59
#5: 4.97
The Padres are obviously likely to beat the NL averages in the #1 and 2 spots. Maddux will beat the #3 starter average unless he falls off a cliff, and while that's certainly possible, it goes without saying that falling off a cliff is never a "safe bet". As for the #4 and 5 spots: the Padres' options are the following (ERC projection in parentheses): Germano (4.62), Wolf (4.82), Enrique Gonzalez (4.53), and Wilfredo Ledezma (5.06). Is that ugly? Sure. But it's precisely what a normal back of the rotation looks like. And in a division with no really dominant team, getting merely average results out of the back of the rotation isn't going to knock them off the pace.
by Heltonfan on
Feb 17, 2008 8:53 AM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
Plainly I see the chances of that cliff
While I think the Padres will hang around all year even with these weaknesses -sort of like how I see the Rockies for 2008, actually- I don't currently see them having the legs for the stretch run right now. Once again, I like the profiles of the players we'll be adding as the season progresses a lot more, with the exception of Antonelli.
Like I said in the post though, if there's anything Kevin Towers has proven over the last five seasons is an ability to identify his team needs midstream and get what he needs for dirt cheap. For this alone I'm not counting them out but my main contention is that they certainly should not be considered the favorites in the division. That distinction has to go to LA or Arizona, depending on how for real you think the D-backs players are.
by Rox Girl on
Feb 17, 2008 10:41 AM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Maddux
Germano and Gonzalez's projections are right in line with their '05-'07 numbers. If you're expecting a couple 26-year-olds to fall well short of their three-year averages, that's just... weird.
by Heltonfan on
Feb 17, 2008 1:08 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Maddux collapsing?
by jrockies on
Feb 17, 2008 1:28 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Signs that a slow erosion with Maddux
Average 2 seam FB velocity:
Chicago Cubs 2004: 88 mph
Los Angeles Dodgers 2006: 86.5 mph
San Diego Padres 2007: 85.3 mph
I think Maddux threw just two or three pitches over ninety MPH last season, easily the lowest totals of his career.
which leads to...
BABIP:
- .291
- .288
- .286
- .290
- .294
- .296
- .311
Percentage of games started, 7 IP or more:
- 41.7%
- 39.4%
- 31.4%
- 32.4%
- 17.6%
- 27.8%
- 12.1%
- 22.9%
- 14.7%
- 26.5%
OPS allowed, innings 4-6
- .627
- .715
- .783
- .792
- .699
- .760
- .518
- .593
- .773
- 1.018
by Rox Girl on
Feb 17, 2008 4:34 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Germano and Gonzalez
by Rox Girl on
Feb 17, 2008 4:59 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Pads pitchers
Germano and Gonzalez: it's not just MLEs. It's the fact that Germano's MLEs are right in line with his big league performance, and Gonzalez's big league performance was actually better than his MLEs. You're up against every statistical indicator imaginable here.
by Heltonfan on
Feb 17, 2008 8:38 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Maddux
You've got signs that his slow erosion has been accelerating. Which is great. But your whole argument is based on the assumption that "has been accelerating" = "will continue to accelerate", and I don't see any way, logical or statistical, to support that assumption. It goes against everything we know about the value of multi-year weighted averages.
And that ugly situational split (OPS against in the 7th inning on) is based on a whopping 50 PA. Come on.
by Heltonfan on
Feb 17, 2008 9:08 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sample size
by Roberbola on
Feb 17, 2008 9:54 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Aging patterns
Of course. That's why we incorporate aging patterns. But that's very different from looking at trends.
by Heltonfan on
Feb 17, 2008 11:18 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Stathead argument...
Last year both Trevor Hoffman and Curt Schilling were affected by the velocity of their fastball dropping to levels too close to the speed of their changeups. Suddenly the Brad Hawpes of the world are jacking homers all over Fenway and Tony Gwynn JR's are slicing game winning triples because they can sit on the fastball and get a two for one pitch.
by Charlie77 on
Feb 17, 2008 9:55 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Strange examples
by Heltonfan on
Feb 17, 2008 11:20 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Haven't you heard..
by Charlie77 on
Feb 17, 2008 11:38 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Have you seen the lines of other 40+ year olds?
These numbers show that it's taking Greg every ounce of effort just to reach the mid-80's on his fastball and that he can only sustain that for about 75 pitches. You complain about the 50 PA sample, but the fact that the sample is so small compared to the rest of his career tells me that this is exactly what's happening. Do you think San Diego doesn't want more than 75 pitches per start from one of the greatest pitchers of all time? There were no stories of shoulder problems for him, nothing to indicate that this was due to anything other than age related deterioration of his pitching arm. There is absolutely nothing that your three year averages with a "normal aging pattern" will do to stop that deterioration from happening at the pace that it's going. The averages can't go against the laws of physiology and to suggest that they can, that's inane.
This is another one that we'll have to step aside and see how it comes out because we're clearly in a wide gulf of disagreement. I'm pretty confident in saying that he loses about a run from his 2007 FIP (3.56 according to THT) and I think he's capable of losing even more. I'll give you anything less than .8 as a sign that I don't know what I'm talking about.
by Rox Girl on
Feb 18, 2008 5:19 AM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sims
Simulations or Monte Carlo methods if done correctly can give you a more accurate measure of how strong baseball teams are. There is no mathematical equation (that i know of) that can determine the win expectancy of a game, there are just way too many variables. Metrics like WAR or Log5 can approximate it, but they also have flaws that you are railing against. WAR uses projections and assumptions about defense, base running and aging.
Why do some of the most respected sabermetricians use simulators? They must be important. Read the recent stuff at USSM or Book Blog for examples.
Thanks for the comments.
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on
Feb 17, 2008 10:19 AM MST
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Sims
Sure. But we don't need to work with win expectancy in order to determine team quality.
"Why do some of the most respected sabermetricians use simulators?"
Because they're fun, and because they're great for evaluating in-game strategy.
But they're not the right tool for what we're doing here. And (warning: elitist rant ahead) when used for this purpose, they dumb down the discourse within the sabermetric community. The typical sabermetrically-inclined fan would be much better served to be told "Player A is 20 runs per year better than Player B, and here is why, and that works out to 2 wins per year, and here is why" than to be told "When I replace Player B with Player A, for 25 simulated seasons, the team improves by an average of 2 games" (with no real explanation of why that is). Sort of a variation on the give a man a fish / teach a man to fish thing. A simulator is an opaque tool the likes of which hardly anyone has the time or knowledge to create. But any halfway intelligent person can put together a WAR spreadsheet in 10 minutes. Good sabermetrics is a hell of a lot simpler than most people think it is, and by hiding behind needlessly impenetrable methods, we do the community a disservice.
by Heltonfan on
Feb 17, 2008 1:09 PM MST
up
reply
actions
0 recs












