Phils score 20 for the second time this season (and they have another inning still). They're now just a single run behind the Cubs for the NL lead.

David McCarty in Boston (2004). I believe he even pitched twice in April alone. I know he made at least three appearances that year.

EDIT: The appearances were April 9, June 12, Oct 3 (last day of the season). He struck out 3 Orioles in 2 IP during that last appearance. Of course, this is in a span of 157 games.

I was at this game. Beer sales were up.

Mets and Braves might as well go ahead and concede the division.

I think Keith Osik mopped up twice for the Bucs a couple times one season. Maybe in a game he had a HR, Error, and a PB. Brent Mayne is, I think, last position player to get a decision and it was a W. Vaguely recall Derek Bell or Osik pitching the same night. That is one thing I loved/love about college baseball. Seeing dudes like Dennis Cook or Wieters come on in relief---from RF or Catcer like knothole or high school ball.

Mets and Braves might as well go ahead and concede the division.

Mets ain't conceding no nothing, not with Too Hot To Trot Nixon on the team.

Osik appearences were in May of 99 & 00. He faced Derek Bell & Keith Bogar in '99. The following season, Bogar pitched twice over a two week span in June for Houston. 2 months later, Bell made his toed the rubber for the Padres in a game that featured, at least 6 (Lenny Harris, Todd Zeile, Desi Relaford, Wiki Gonzalez, Robin Ventura, & John Mabry) other position players who threw a pitch in the big leagues.

Truth be told, the Mets and Braves should be rooting for the Phils. The Cards are the WC leaders.

I am definitely not ready to concede the division. The offense is fearsome, but I'm not impressed by that Phillies rotation. That rotation may drag them back to the pack in a long race.

If the Phillies can pick up at least a middle-of-the-rotation pitcher, I think they are heavy favorites to win the division. I don't think Kendrick, Moyer, and Eaton will continue putting up lots of quality starts. I don't know what to think of Brett Myers, though.

If the Phillies get C.C. Sabathia (highly unlikely, and as a Phillies fan thinking about more than just this season, I don't want them to get him), fold up the table, the NL East is wrapped up.

What do the Phillies have to trade for a starter? I thought their farm system is bare.

I can just see Kris Benson facing John Maine in a critical September matchup with Benson prevailing.

Keith Osik

Ah, but he had a career ERA of 40.5.

Aaron "66 MPH fastball" Miles now has a career ERA of 6. Not bad for someone that *literally* throws softer than I do.

*Seriously, I've got a little control and a 75MPH fastball. Teach me a curve and I could be the next mopup guy for the Cards.

and as a Phillies fan thinking about more than just this season, I don't want them to get him

But why look at more than one season? The Phillies stand to lose Burrell and Lidge next year, and this year the Phillies appear to be as talented as anyone in the NL. Adding Sabathia would make them the favorites.

Next year you are looking at Moyer gone, an older Jenkins and Feliz guaranteed spots because of their contracts, a possibly done Howard (though I doubt it), Madson and Romero as the only bullpen arms under control, and inevitable questions about Kendrick and Eaton. This is no longer a team on the rise; this is the peak!

Who in the Phillies system would you regret losing if they could get Sabathia? I can see quantity being a problem (no more 5-for-1 deals with the Tribe!), but there isn't a single untouchable in the system.

What do the Phillies have to trade for a starter? I thought their farm system is bare.

This is an example of why I don't really like Baseball America. They don't have any prospects that make a lot of noise, but a lot of them are Major League caliber either now or very soon. Greg Golson, if he could ever learn to walk, would be a super version of Michael Bourn. Carlos Carrasco is the best pitcher in the system and has averaged close to a strikeout per inning throughout his Minor League career. Adrian Cardenas is roadblocked at second base by Chase Utley, so a move to third or the outfield is probably in the cards unless the Phillies don't re-sign Burrell and end up trading Howard.

You may not have heard of him, but Jason Donald could be a pretty good shortstop if the Phillies were to capitalize on how overrated Jimmy Rollins is by trading him. He doesn't have all of the offensive skills Rollins has, but he gets on base at a decent clip and has power potential. Even better is that his defense appears to have improved.

Lou Marson, a catcher, is another under-the-radar guy. He's only 22 and has really picked it up starting last season. His .373 and .467 OBP in '07 and '08, respectively, are extremely impressive. He'd be a great lead-off hitter. How common is it that a catcher is a lead-off hitter (only Jason Kendall comes to mind)?

Jason Jaramillo is another catching prospect. I think he was expected to be better than Carlos Ruiz offensively (not that hard to do) but he's struggled this year. Defensively, though, he's a gem. He's thrown out 42% of attempted base-stealers so far this season and from all accounts, he calls a great game.

Don't forget about J.A. Happ, Josh Outman, and Fabio Castro, either. Or Joe Savery. Or Kyle Drabek.

But why look at more than one season? The Phillies stand to lose Burrell and Lidge next year, and this year the Phillies appear to be as talented as anyone in the NL. Adding Sabathia would make them the favorites.

No argument here about that. However, I don't think that you sell the farm because you might not keep Burrell and Lidge. I think it's a bad idea to operate on assumptions, especially when Burrell has expressed many times that he loves Philadelphia (despite the harsh treatment he was getting from fans up until recently) and Lidge has expressed the same sentiment?

I don't want Sabathia because he'd be expensive (more on this later) and because you really don't know what you're getting out of him. Sure, the last two seasons he's been really, really good, but for most of his career, he's been barely above average. The same story applies to this season, as evidenced by his 98 ERA+. I like his K and BB rates, but his .333 BABIP isn't terribly high and he's seen a steady decline in ground balls forced and subsequently a steady incline in fly balls and line drives hit against him.

Also, his conditioning is, clearly, a concern.

Next year you are looking at Moyer gone, an older Jenkins and Feliz guaranteed spots because of their contracts

Again, I don't think you can assume this. We don't know who the next GM of the Phillies will be after Pat Gillick leaves. Manuel will be back next year, though, and I think he's smart enough to use Jenkins in a platoon role -- as he's done this year with Jayson Werth -- since he can't hit lefties.

I don't think Moyer is definitely gone, unless I missed him saying otherwise. Unless he craps the bed over the next three and a half months, I don't see a reason why he'd hang up his spikes. From everything I've seen and heard -- and I have watched every single Phillies game, every one of his starts, heard or read most of what he's had to say publicly -- I think he still has a strong desire to play the game of baseball. And, frankly, I would welcome Moyer back into the rotation if he wanted to because, while I don't buy into the whole "intangibles" argument, I do think he has a positive effect on the rest of the team, especially the younger pitchers. He's mentored Kyle Kendrick and Cole Hamels along with some of the guys in the bullpen, and even a couple of the position players.

As for Feliz, I don't like him either, but he doesn't take wins away from the team by taking the field every day. His defense is so good and his offense is passable enough that he is actually a positive influence on his team's chance to win a game. I'd rather have Feliz than 75% of the guys that would be available.

a possibly done Howard (though I doubt it), Madson and Romero as the only bullpen arms under control, and inevitable questions about Kendrick and Eaton.

Why would Howard be "done"? Come back to this after the season. ;-)

As mentioned above, I don't think you can assume too much about how the bullpen will pan out. Sure, Lidge may leave, but it's not like the next GM is going to sit on his hands and do nothing. There's way too much pressure not to keep this team at the forefront of the NL East. Even if it's Ruben Amaro, Jr. (who I hope doesn't even come close to taking the job), I think the Phillies will do a good job of making sure their bullpen is comparable to this year's.

I haven't taken a long, hard look at what the free agent pool will look like, but even if no one's out there, the Phillies could move Myers back there. And you could do a lot worse than having Madson and Romero at the back of your bullpen, perhaps both sharing the role of setting up for whoever the Phillies' closer may be.

Who in the Phillies system would you regret losing if they could get Sabathia?

Everyone, if it's for two months of league-average pitching.

Specifically, I would like to see the Phillies keep Carrasco, Cardenas, Marson, and Outman.

I wouldn't mind trading any one of those Minor Leaguers I mentioned, though, if it's for one or more players from whom we'll be getting more than two months' service.

...to retire Geoff Jenkins on an infield pop-up.

For what Jenkins has left in the tank is this considered a home run?

My son took me to Reading last night for an early Father's Day present. I don't know squat about how to scout but here are my observations.

Marson looks like he has good bat control and a good eye. He looked decent and energetic behind the plate. There were two on and 1 out in the 1st and three straight times they tried a hit and run and Marson fouled the ball off but it looked like he knew what he was doing. He later didn't seem to hustle out a potential DP, the runner was safe at second and Marson was still out by a mile. I don't know if he slipped out of the batter's box though, as I was watching the play at second.
Golson looks clueless at the plate -- hacking at anything close. He's a fast dude though.
JD Durbin pitched -- I was hoping to see Carrasco or Bastardo. Durbin pitched okay, wiggling out of problems but he didn't seem to be able to put batters away ahead 0-2 or 1-2.
Outman pitched an effective inning but nothing stood out to me.
Javon Moran is overmatched at AA although he did outrun being picked off. I could see bringing him up in Sept. for pinchrunning only purposes.
Jason Donald looks like a scrappy Eckstein like player, although he throws normally. He's probably going to be more of a backup but has some higher potential.

On the Trenton side, the starter, Phil Coke (never heard of him before -- he's a 25yo in AA, maybe that's why) had Reading completely off balance for 6 innings. Of their 4 hits, 2 went for a combined 100'. Lots of dribblers and pop-ups, no walks. The RPhils got to him in the 7th though. It was a warm, summery night but not too hot.
Austin Jackson is impressive talent wise, although a bit of a chaser of pitches. He hit a homer well into the LF stands -- 1 armed. He's a day older than my oldest son.
For the Yankee fanboy manlove object, Jose Tabata, he looked clueless. He is only 19, they should drop him a notch or two in the system. They list him at 5'11', 160 -- he looked a lot thicker than that and it didn't look like it was all muscular.

Greg Golson, if he could ever learn to walk, would be a super version of Michael Bourn. Carlos Carrasco is the best pitcher in the system and has averaged close to a strikeout per inning throughout his Minor League career. Adrian Cardenas is roadblocked at second base by Chase Utley, so a move to third or the outfield is probably in the cards unless the Phillies don't re-sign Burrell and end up trading Howard.

Phillies fan?

Geez, talk about the rose colored glasses. So if Golson can do the one thing that he can't do at all now (walk, not to mention his inferior baserunning and fielding insticts!), he can become like Bourn, who had great discipline all throughout the minors and is still barely a major league player right now. Obviously someone is going to be the best pitcher in a system, so that barely registers as a point in favor of Carrasco (and there are about 100 minor league pitchers who average a k per inning.) That Cardenas is "blocked" by Utley is a point in favor of trading him.

As for the assumptions, you have to make these when looking at any potential move. As for facts, Moyer, Lidge, Gordon, and Burrell are free agents at the end of the year, Jenkins and Feliz are signed for next year at salaries that will command playing time, and Howard's production has decreased for three consecutive years.

Any decision, to trade or not, has to based on assumptions about what will happen in the future (you're making the same assumptions about Sabathia's conditioning or that, oddly, he will give only league average pitching). The question is how well those assumptions square with current realities. If you want to believe the Phils will resign Burrell, Lidge, AND Moyer, and sit Jenkins, Howard will return to his previous from, AND that they get similar production from castoffs like Seanez and Durbin in the years to come, then it makes sense to hold onto your prospects. Otherwise, you go for the championship this year.

Nice rundown Edmundo. Too bad to hear about Donald. When you only look at stats, it's difficult to get a sens of a player, but hearing that he is "Eckstein"-like is not good.

FWIW, based on just looking at numbers, I do think Marson is probably the best position player in the system.

So if Golson can do the one thing that he can't do at all now (walk, not to mention his inferior baserunning and fielding insticts!)

Players can't improve? Lots of prospects can't do everything and then add skills to their repertoire as they progress through the Minor Leagues.

There aren't too many Minor Leaguers who steal bases proficiently at the level you need to in the Major Leagues. Give him a few days of one-on-one coaching from Davey Lopes and watch him improve. Check out the Phillies (MLB) base running success since Lopes joined the team.

Obviously someone is going to be the best pitcher in a system, so that barely registers as a point in favor of Carrasco (and there are about 100 minor league pitchers who average a k per inning.)

There are a lot of Minor Leaguers, though, and yet he still leads the Eastern League (AA) in strikeouts.

That Cardenas is "blocked" by Utley is a point in favor of trading him.

Minor Leaguers change positions all the time.

As for facts, Moyer, Lidge, Gordon, and Burrell are free agents at the end of the year, Jenkins and Feliz are signed for next year at salaries that will command playing time, and Howard's production has decreased for three consecutive years.

You're not including the (high) probability that Burrell and/or Lidge are re-signed, or that there's a good chance they'll be replaced by players with similar production. Gordon won't be back in a Phillies uniform, I can guarantee you that, though.

As mentioned, that Jenkins and Feliz are going to be back isn't as bad as you made it out to be.

Howard's production has declined for two consecutive years. Did you notice that last season, en route to being "done," Howard put up a .976 OPS? You're basing your "done" claim on two and a half months of the 2008 season.

(you're making the same assumptions about Sabathia's conditioning or that, oddly, he will give only league average pitching)

You think it's odd to say that Sabathia will only give you league-average pitching? Check out his BBRef page:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/sabatc.01.shtml

Look at the ERA+ column. He is a middle-of-the-rotation type of guy at best. No doubt his last two seasons are good, but they appear to be aberrations, not trends.

As I said above, I like his K and BB rates and his WHIP is good, but I'd rather not sell a bunch of good Minor Leaguers for two months of 100-110 ERA+ from an overweight pitcher. Additionally, his increasing propensity for the fly ball doesn't match well with Citizens Bank Park.

Players can't improve?

Sure, but why pick Golson? If this is the defense, you might as well pick anyone and say, "hey, they could improve!" The point is that skin color and speed aside, Golson and Bourn are not even remotely similar players, and even the "upside" of Bourn that you point to is not much anyway.

You're not including the (high) probability that Burrell and/or Lidge are re-signed, or that there's a good chance they'll be replaced by players with similar production.

Talk about assumptions!!! How in the world there is a "good chance" the Phillies can find a 900-1000 OPS OF AND a 1.00 ERA closer if they don't sign those players. I'm hopeful they sign Lidge, but I really don't see Burrell coming back. In any event, a good season this year (which Sabathia would contribute to) would make those signings easier.

Look at the ERA+ column. He is a middle-of-the-rotation type of guy at best. No doubt his last two seasons are good, but they appear to be aberrations, not trends.

I'm going to assume you are a very big Phillies fan and simply don't pay attention to other teams, because otherwise you are just being disingenuous to suggest that you can only look at Sabathia's season totals from this year to determine his worth.

Maybe you do know this, but Sabathia was horrible for his first 4 starts, with a 13.50 ERA in 18 innings.
Since then, in 73 IP, he has a 2.09 ERA.

To claim that the last two seasons were the aberration and not the first four starts of this season makes me highly suspect that you hadn't gone beyond the front of his BRef page when declaring him a league average pitcher.

You're basing your "done" claim on two and a half months of the 2008 season.

My "done" claim was as follows:

a possibly done Howard (though I doubt it)

I think it's funny that Sabathia is being called a league average pitcher when he's been better than average in every season of his MLB career.

To get back to the really interesting part of this thread, Doug Dascenzo pitched three times for the Cubs within the space of a month in 1991, and didn't allow a run. In one of those games, he worked two innings, and it wasn't even a ridiculous blowout; the Cubs were losing 13-5 when he came in.

Overall, Dascenzo pitched four games and five innings in his career, and never allowed a run.

Overall, Dascenzo pitched four games and five innings in his career, and never allowed a run.

With a WHIP of 1!

I'd completely forgotten about him. Given what an atrocious hitter he was, you almost wonder why nobody gave a go at turning him into a pitcher.

I think it's funny that Sabathia is being called a league average pitcher when he's been better than average in every season of his MLB career.

100 is league-average, right?

His ERA+ starting in 2001:

102
100
122
106
104
140
143
98 (this year)

He has four seasons where his ERA+ is between 100 and 104, which is barely above the league average. And he one season where he was pretty good (122 ERA+) and two where he was incredible (140, 143 ERA+).

I still consider 105 league-average because it's not that much higher, but technically, you are right with what you said, though it's certainly not a strong argument in favor of Sabathia.

Sure, but why pick Golson?

I didn't just "pick" him; he has a lot of tools that, if he learns how to use them, could turn him into a pretty good player. He can hit for contact, he can hit for power (20 HR might be his cap, though), he can run, he can catch the ball well, and he can throw it well. He is the quintessential five-tool player, but those tools are all rough and need to be refined.

Even Baseball America, which I don't really like, is high on Golson:

“But he’s an 80 arm with 80 speed . . . those guys with those kind of tools . . . if he figures it out . . . wow. He could be a late bloomer.

“This is one of those guys that you don’t ever want to give up on despite what the numbers say. You fall in love with him. It’s hard not to. And this is a smart kid who just turned 22. If he leaves his brain in the clubhouse and just goes out there and reacts, he’s one of the best prospects in the game. I know that can be a pretty big if with some guys, but you can’t just throw this guy away.”

The point is that skin color and speed aside, Golson and Bourn are not even remotely similar players

How? The only difference is that Golson is a better overall hitter. Both are fast, both play great defense, and both have great arms.

even the "upside" of Bourn that you point to is not much anyway.

I didn't talk of any upside to Bourn. I said that Golson will be a "super version of Bourn." This is verified both by the statistics and by the scouts. I've never read anything from a scout that was not complimentary of Golson, even if they were criticizing him. They all think the sky's the limit for him.

Personally, I wouldn't mind if the Phillies shopped Victorino around used Golson in the outfield next season.

How in the world there is a "good chance" the Phillies can find a 900-1000 OPS OF AND a 1.00 ERA closer if they don't sign those players.

1) Pat Burrell has a career OPS of .858. Last season it was barely over .900. Calling him a .900-1.000 OPS hitter is misleading. And this isn't mean to denigrate Burrell, it's just really hard to put up a 1.000 OPS.

2) Lidge isn't a "1.00 ERA closer." His current 0.93 will undoubtedly go up. Only in one season of his career has he finished with an ERA under 2.29 and that was in 2004. Regardless, you don't need to get a "1.00 ERA closer." If you do, you're severely limiting your options unnecessarily.

With a quick glance at the list of available free agents, I know that I'm interested in Milton Bradley and Adam Dunn, both of whom I imagine would not be averse to signing with the Phillies.

As for closers, Brian Fuentes, Brandon Lyon, and Jason Isringhausen pique my interest.

I think Brett Myers, if his production as a closer in 2007 is reliable, would be a great way to replace Lidge.

but I really don't see Burrell coming back.

Why? There is absolutely nothing that would lead you to believe this, especially when Burrell has had only great things to say about Philadelphia. Neither he nor the Phillies have balked at the thought of seeing him in left field in 2009.

a good season this year (which Sabathia would contribute to) would make those signings easier.

Unless your line of thinking is, "the Phillies will sell more tickets and merchandise if they make the playoffs, therefore they will have more cap room," I don't see how this follows. Your argument above was that the Phillies' peak is this year and it's all downhill from here, so if that's true, why would they sign with a team that's going to slide backwards?

you are just being disingenuous to suggest that you can only look at Sabathia's season totals from this year to determine his worth.

Where did I say that? I've looked at all of his seasons.

Maybe you do know this, but Sabathia was horrible for his first 4 starts, with a 13.50 ERA in 18 innings.

Since then, in 73 IP, he has a 2.09 ERA.

So, we're cherry-picking?

To claim that the last two seasons were the aberration and not the first four starts of this season makes me highly suspect that you hadn't gone beyond the front of his BRef page when declaring him a league average pitcher.

I didn't say that the first four starts of this season were or were not aberrations.

I will thank you not to put words in my mouth in the future. :)

Point 1)

We simply disagree on Golson and Bourn.

Golson currently is 22, with 1926 at-bats in the minor league. During that time, he line is 265/307/406 with 570 strikeouts and 103 walks. His stolen bases rate is 78%, with 114 out of 147 successful.

Bourn made the majors at 23, and had 1552 at-bats in the minors. His minor league line was 284/377/392, with 339 strikeouts and 227 walks. His stolen base rate was 85%, with 164 out of of 192 successful.

To add context to these numbers, only 538 of Bourn's ABs came at A ball, while only 504 of Golson's have come ABOVE A ball.

Put simply, Golson has a long way to go in both his plate discipline and baserunning to even reach Bourn's level of talent, and much much much further to be "superior to him."

As for the scouts, you misrepresent the comment on Golson as being made by "Baseball America." The quoted material was from one scout who was simply quoted by Baseball America. Golson was ranked #7 in the system in November.

I said that Golson will be a "super version of Bourn." This is verified both by the statistics and by the scouts.

I would be very interested to see the statistical argument for how Golson projects to be a better player than Bourn. As for scouts:

Baseball prospectus does not list Golson among its top 11 Phillies prospects. For comparison's sake, Bourn was listed by B-Pro as the number 3 prospect in 2006.

John Sickels gives Golson a C+.

I have seen nothing whatsoever in his performance or from any scouting service that would support the idea that Golson could start next year in place of Victorino.

Point 2)
Yes, I overestimated Burrell and Lidge, but unless the Phillies open up the payroll a lot, it's difficult to see how they can afford premium players at LF and closer. On Burrell specifically, this is another jaw-dropper: "that nothing would lead you to believe" Burrell wasn't coming back. Again, I can't tell if you are being disingenuous because you want to argue, or if you are living in a bubble.

Here is Jayson stark last month summing up what (I thought) was conventional wisdom:

I think it's really really unlike Burrell is back. He's an AL player now. Can't run. Can barely move in the field. If he wants to take a really short deal at much less money, maybe. If he's the MVP, get back to me. But I'd be very surprised if he's back. Let's put it that way.

Burrell's season is obviously changing things, but the fact that the team has looked at trading him for three consecutive off-seasons is a pretty good indication they want him gone. FWIW, I really do hope they sign him.

Point 3)

If you are going to stand by the comment that C.C. Sabathia at this moment is a "is a middle-of-the-rotation type of guy at best" I don't think either one of us will can profit from much more discussion. It seems almost laughable to have to make this point, but here goes: he won the ####### motherfreakin CY Young last year!!!

On a more substative point, I think you misread what league average ERA+ is for a starter. It's about 95, so number 22 is absolutely right.

He pitched 242 innings, with 209 ks and 37 walks! And he was almost that good the year before. Those two excellent season, aside from the fact that they are the two most recent seasons were also his age 25 and 26 seasons, meaning it is highly unlikely that they are some fluke 450 innings in an otherwise average career.

ZiPS projects Sabathia this year to a 3.66 ERA, the same as Hamels.

Here are the two narratives to explain Sabthia's numbers:

Yours. At 27, Sabathia is a league average pitcher, who after experiencing a two year blip of dominance is likely to return to the level of suceess he had in his early 20s.

Mine. At 27, Sabathia is coming off a dominant two year stretch of pitching. After getting off to a slow start this year, he appears to have regained his form.

Again, did you know Sabathia had those four bad early starts or did you put together your analysis of his career based entirely on his ERA+ line?

Comparing Bourn to Golson like that is not a good idea. As I mentioned, Golson has been improving since 2006 and his tools still need to be refined. He spent the last off-season working with Charlie Manuel (a hitting guru) and his OBP and SLG are the highest they've ever been in his Minor League career. Give him the rest of this season, the off-season, and an invitation to Major League spring training, and I think you have a guy on the cusp of the Majors.

There's only a 7% difference in stolen base success, and in the Minor Leagues, that's not really all that big. Once he gets some guidance from Davey Lopes, I think he'll be better than Bourn in that department. Lopes doesn't stress simply stealing bases; he wants his players to steal them intelligently. Last season, the Phillies set a record for SB%.

Golson strikes out a lot, but I don't really care about strikeouts. And, as mentioned, he needs to learn to draw walks (plate discipline). If he ever does learn how to draw walks, I don't think you can keep him in the Minors for too much longer. I think that's his biggest obstacle.

Baserunning is NOT an issue with him. His 78% is above the 70-75% (forget which at the moment) "break even point."

Fair point on my misquoting of BA.

I would be very interested to see the statistical argument for how Golson projects to be a better player than Bourn.

I'm surprised it's even an issue. Bourn has never been a good hitter in any facet besides bunting; Golson has the ability to both hit for contact and for power.

John Sickels essentially said the same thing I've been saying, "tools out the wazoo but no polish." He also did not hand out any A's and only four B's, so his grade of a C+ isn't as mediocre as it seems. I think he's a bit harsh on the prospects unless I misunderstand the reason why A's are hard to come by.

There's really no excuse for BP leaving Golson off the list. I think they overrated D'Arnaud as well.

but unless the Phillies open up the payroll a lot, it's difficult to see how they can afford premium players at LF and closer.

Burrell isn't due for a pay increase, as far as I can see (unless he is MVP-caliber throughout the entire season). Lidge may be.

Again, I can't tell if you are being disingenuous because you want to argue, or if you are living in a bubble.

You cited Jayson Stark, who completely ignore's the player's perspective. Pat Burrell LOVES Philly. That is not hyperbole; he's said it himself. He likes the city and the nightlife.

If Pat Burrell wanted out of Philly, he would have waived his no-trade clause while "the team has looked at trading him for three consecutive off-seasons" (and to add to that, for three consecutive July 31sts).

the fact that the team has looked at trading him for three consecutive off-seasons is a pretty good indication they want him gone.

Context. Things are different than they were on July 31, 2006, or November '06 -- January '07, or July 31, 2007, or November '07 -- January '08.

he won the ####### motherfreakin CY Young last year!!!

One season does not a career make. You know who else has won a Cy Young Award? Barry Zito. Eric Gagne. Jack McDowell won it in 1993 and he was never particularly impressive. Mark Davis won it in 1989, check out how awesome he was.

The point: Awards are not great indicators of skill. The important ones are subjectively voted on by biased members of the BBWAA (this may not be true to some awards but I believe it's true for the Cy Young).

I think you misread what league average ERA+ is for a starter. It's about 95, so number 22 is absolutely right.

It doesn't make Sabathia's seasons that much more impressive. They're still nothing special the last two seasons and 2003 aside. 2003 was merely good, though... Brett Myers 2006-esque.

Those two excellent season, aside from the fact that they are the two most recent seasons were also his age 25 and 26 seasons, meaning it is highly unlikely that they are some fluke 450 innings in an otherwise average career.

Even though his batted ball tendencies are trending in the wrong direction? Even though his opponents' .333 BABIP isn't that much higher than average? Even though, between 2005-07, he pitched 631 innings -- in the shape he's in?

ZiPS projects Sabathia this year to a 3.66 ERA, the same as Hamels.

I am not too familiar with the projection systems so I can't really comment on how accurate they really are or are not, but I don't put too much stock into them as a rule of thumb.

Again, did you know Sabathia had those four bad early starts or did you put together your analysis of his career based entirely on his ERA+ line?

This question is insulting.

I would be very interested to see the statistical argument for how Golson projects to be a better player than Bourn.



I'm surprised it's even an issue. Bourn has never been a good hitter in any facet besides bunting; Golson has the ability to both hit for contact and for power.

This, simply, is not a statistical argument.

The fact that Sickles gave only a few B's (and no As) does not make Golson's C+ any better, it's simply an indication of the lack of top prospects in the Phillies organization, which, incidentally, was my initial point.

On Goslon, I think we do agree that his plate discipline is the major problem, and I agree that BPro was silly to completely leave him of of the top 11, but my general point is that Bourn makes for a poor comparison. Bourn isn't really a toolsy athlete at all. He is a fast player, but the majority of his offensive contribution comes from the fact that he has an excellent eye for the strike zone and can play small ball. These are skills that he had upon arrival in the Phillies system, and I think its little more than wishful thinking to believe Golson will develop those skills.

The difference in baserunning is not as great, but I certainly agree that with the help of Lopes Golson could become an excellent base stealer. His minor league SB record is much better than Victorino, and Lopes completely turned him around.

You cited Jayson Stark, who completely ignore's the player's perspective. Pat Burrell LOVES Philly.

Pat Burrell's love of the Old City night life is completely irrelevant. I don't think it's unlikely Burrell stays because he is unhappy, but because the team doesn't want/can't pay him. It is the the team's decision! I would have put the odds of him returning before this year at about 20-1. Now, I think its more like 10-1, and if continues to hit like this all season, it may even be even money. Nevertheless, Jayson Stark is one of the most connected people in baseball, especially when it comes to Philly. I wouldn't discount his opinion so easily.

Even though his opponents' .333 BABIP isn't that much higher than average?

I think you misunderstand how BABIP works. In general, it's a stat that is outside of a pitcher's control. The fact that it is so high is actually evidence that his increased ERA this year is due mostly to luck.

It doesn't make Sabathia's seasons that much more impressive.

No, but that wasn't the point. The point was that, as post #22 pointed out, it's somewhat comical to call a pitcher with (ALL) seven of his seasons above average (including several that were well above average) a "league average pitcher." It's simply an unsustainable point. You are really going to stick by the comments that he is "a league average pitcher" and "a middle-of-the-rotation pitcher at best?"

This question is insulting.

C'mon man. If you are any kind of a Phillies fan, you need to be tougher than this. I really can't see how you could know that Sabathia has basically been his good ole dominant self for the past two months and still argue that his 2006 AND 2007 seasons were aberrations. It just seems unreasonable to conclude that his 2008 campaign is a data point for his return to earth as league average pitcher.

The weight/conditioning and workload are all very important points, but for another discussion (i.e. signing him to a long-term deal). As to his current level of ability and his potential value to the Phillies this year, which is, again, what we were talking about, they are much less relevant.

I don't follow Phillies' prospects much, so I will leave the argument on Golson alone. As someone who tends to give an optimistic eye towards Mets' prospects, I can understand the optimism with Golson. But with each passing year, 22 is nearing that cusp, the expectation that a prospect will suddenly learn plate discipline becomes extremely unlikely.

The argument on Sabathia being average, however, is really stretching it. Why would anyone emphasize his developing years over his last two years when he's been among the best pitchers in the majors. As for his mediocre numbers this year, I think that can be attributed to sample size.

I am not too familiar with the projection systems so I can't really comment on how accurate they really are or are not, but I don't put too much stock into them as a rule of thumb.


I think Dan S. and Nate Silver just choked on their breakfast.

This, simply, is not a statistical argument.

Look at Bourn's hitting statistics compared to Golson's. It's not even close. Bourn was never heralded for his ability to hit the ball.

it's simply an indication of the lack of top prospects in the Phillies organization, which, incidentally, was my initial point.

That was my question: what are his standards for grades? It doesn't seem like his grades are really on par with school grades, so a C+ doesn't seem so mediocre. Regardless, he essentially said the same thing I was saying.

I think its little more than wishful thinking to believe Golson will develop those skills.

He doesn't need to develop them; he has them, he just needs to refine them.

Pat Burrell's love of the Old City night life is completely irrelevant.

If you don't think a player's location preference is a factor, see: Wolf, Randy.

He rejected a generous contract offer from the Phillies to go home to the West Coast and play for the Dodgers.

It is the the team's decision!

You haven't given any legitimate reasons why the Phillies wouldn't sign him. They have not indicated that they want him gone. They will have the cap room with a few names coming off the book, and even if they lose Lidge, they won't have to overpay since they can just move Myers into the closer's role.

Nevertheless, Jayson Stark is one of the most connected people in baseball, especially when it comes to Philly.

I like Stark as well, but he completely ignored Burrell's side of the coin.

In general, it's a stat that is outside of a pitcher's control.

I thought that was a hitter's BABIP. Pitchers can control it with their batted ball tendencies, if I recall correctly. It's certainly not something they're in complete control of but it's not just random.

The fact that it is so high is actually evidence that his increased ERA this year is due mostly to luck.

It's not "so high." It's only slightly above average, which I believe is somewhere around .300.

it's somewhat comical to call a pitcher with (ALL) seven of his seasons above average (including several that were well above average) a "league average pitcher."

We're playing semantics. He's mediocre, that was the point, not the specificity of whether or not he is actually at the league average. He's very close to it.

You are really going to stick by the comments that he is "a league average pitcher" and "a middle-of-the-rotation pitcher at best?"

There's no contrary evidence besides his last two seasons which are flukes as much as anything.

I really can't see how you could know that Sabathia has basically been his good ole dominant self for the past two months and still argue that his 2006 AND 2007 seasons were aberrations.

Because I happened to look at more than the past two seasons. I've been trying to trade for him in my fantasy league, by the way, but no dice.

the expectation that a prospect will suddenly learn plate discipline becomes extremely unlikely.

This will seem like a biased comment, but this is the Phillies we're talking about. The Phillies are an organization that breeds the idea of plate discipline. Furthermore, Golson will continue to work with Manuel in the off-season -- as far as I know -- and Manuel has a magic touch that has worked on so many players, including Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, and Pat Burrell (compare Burrell's stance and swing this year compared to 2005).

Why would anyone emphasize his developing years over his last two years when he's been among the best pitchers in the majors. As for his mediocre numbers this year, I think that can be attributed to sample size.

I'm not even really concerned about his mediocre numbers this year; it's that he's been mediocre for most of his career besides the last two seasons.

If the Phillies do end up trading for Sabathia, I really hope you guys are right, but I just don't see it, unless I put on those rose-colored glasses and only look at the past two seasons.

I also find it ironic because in a couple articles I had written that were linked here, I was ripped for not looking beyond a couple seasons, but that's exactly what you guys are doing. Obviously, I don't think it was you guys that criticized me before but I just find the irony striking.

I think Dan S. and Nate Silver just choked on their breakfast.

To each his own, I just haven't seen any projection system that ended up being that much more accurate than anything else. They seem to be wrong just as often as they are right.

I didn't just "pick" him; he has a lot of tools that, if he learns how to use them, could turn him into a pretty good player. He can hit for contact, he can hit for power (20 HR might be his cap, though), he can run, he can catch the ball well, and he can throw it well. He is the quintessential five-tool player, but those tools are all rough and need to be refined.

But you just compared him to Michael Bourn... Who is NOT a 5-tool player and does not seem to have the potential to be.
Golson's power makes all the difference there. A speedy player, without much offensive potential, struggling like Golson has is no prospect. The speed-only guys who make the bigs usually didn't struggle a whole lot in the minors.

Golson's 5-tool potential makes the comparison completely bunk.

[rant]
Okay, great, we can now add "mediocre" to the descriptions of Sabathia! Good grief, not one in ten of your points above addresses the substance of what I said. Just one example is the "skills" of Golson. He does not possess plate discipline now, the very skill I was talking about. You belief that he can add it is pure "wishful thinking."

And what statistics!!! Show the statistics you think support the claim that Golson has a better minor league hitting track record than Bourn! The only thing you've brought so far as evidence for anything this entire thread is one quote from a scout, some anecdotal evidence on Burrell's enjoyment of nightlife, and a line of ERA+ on Sabathia which completely contradict the point you are trying to make. I feel stupider just from having discussed this.[/rant]

We'll simply let stand the three points of disagreement and see how they turn out.

1) You think Golson can be the starter next year.
2) Burrell will be re-signed.
3) Sabathia is "mediocre," "a league average starter," and "a middle-of-the-rotation starter at best."

We'll talk in January.

Edit - I just can't resist. "There's no contrary evidence besides his last two seasons" is one that had me on the floor.

But you just compared him to Michael Bourn...

You guys are spinning my words. I said that he has the potential to be "a super version of Michael Bourn." I didn't compare the two; I clearly stated that Golson has the potential to be much better.

You belief that he can add it is pure "wishful thinking."

Not at all. Take a look at the Phillies the last few years: they breed the ideology of plate discipline, much more than a lot of other teams.

And why can't he add it? Players can't improve?

Show the statistics you think support the claim that Golson has a better minor league hitting track record than Bourn!

You have the Internet, go to http://minors.baseball-reference.com/

Bourn, career in Minors: .284/.377/.392
Golson, 2007: .273/.305/.426
[Golson works with Manuel in off-season]
Golson, 2008: .299/.335/.450

some anecdotal evidence on Burrell's enjoyment of nightlife

How is it anecdotal evidence if he said it himself?

a line of ERA+ on Sabathia which completely contradict the point you are trying to make

His ERA+ backs up what I've been saying. You're cherry-picking the last two seasons as if they are all Sabathia has done in his career. He's been mediocre and there's no denying that.

1) You think Golson can be the starter next year.
2) Burrell will be re-signed.
3) Sabathia is "mediocre," "a league average starter," and "a middle-of-the-rotation starter at best."

Let's not generalize what I've been saying.

1) Golson can be the starter next year if Burrell and Werth are not resigned, and/or if Victorino is traded.

2) Burrell will be re-signed assuming he has at least a decent second half and doesn't get injured, and assuming the Phillies don't make any trades that tie up their payroll.

3) My last comment "at best" is wrong and I'd like to retract that. Clearly, he's an ace "at best," but he is typically nothing special unless you like to cherry-pick 2 out of 8 seasons in his career.

"There's no contrary evidence besides his last two seasons" is one that had me on the floor.

Aren't you the one arguing about small sample sizes? You're cherry-picking.

You guys are spinning my words. I said that he has the potential to be "a super version of Michael Bourn." I didn't compare the two; I clearly stated that Golson has the potential to be much better.

That is like saying Grady Sizemore is a super version of Scott Podsednik. While it might be true that Sizmore is "super," especially in comparison to Pods that doesn't mean that it is apples and oranges to compare the two.

As for calling back-to-back great years from a talented pitcher a "small sample"... it is too ludicrous to honor with comment

Golson fails to make contact far too often, without the power stroke to compensate, to be even a decent major leaguer. Reading's a great hitter's park; on the road Golson's hitting .266/.293/.392 with 48 Ks in 143 ABs. You absolutely can't discount the strikeouts. A minor league hitter who is striking out once every 3 ABs has few prospects for major league success.

-- MWE

That is like saying Grady Sizemore is a super version of Scott Podsednik. While it might be true that Sizmore is "super," especially in comparison to Pods that doesn't mean that it is apples and oranges to compare the two.

Don't you get it? I didn't compare them!

Bourn and Golson came up through the Minor Leagues together; Bourn was a year ahead. They were referred to together, rarely separate. If you're not a Phillies fan who follows the Minor Leagues at all, you probably won't get it. They were supposed to be our outfielders of the future.

As for calling back-to-back great years from a talented pitcher a "small sample"... it is too ludicrous to honor with comment

When you ignore that nearly 75% of the rest of his career is average, it's ludicrous to honor the cherry-picking of these last two years with a comment.

A minor league hitter who is striking out once every 3 ABs has few prospects for major league success.

Strikeouts are a meaningless way to evaluate a hitter. There's no correlation between strikeouts and poor hitting.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2617

While it might not be overwhelming, there is a distinct, positive correlation between an individual's strikeout rate and a number of useful attributes: hitting for power—as represented in this case by isolated power (ISO, or slugging percentage minus batting average) and slugging percentage (SLG)—as well as drawing walks—as represented by walk-rate (BB/PA). Of course, causation is a sticky subject, so try not to misinterpret the above data as "proof" that increased strikeouts cause an improvement in a player's secondary skills. It's just that where one group shows up, often so does the other.

Strikeouts are a meaningless way to evaluate a hitter. There's no correlation between strikeouts and poor hitting.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2617

Good one, lecturing MWE on the proper way to evaluate minor league prospects.

They may be essentially meaningless for established MLB hitters. They are extremely important in evaluating a prospect's potential. the article you linked had nothing to do with minor league performance. What was it Pope wrote about a little knowledge?

I don't know who MWE is.

Regardless, I could care less how many times a hitter strikes out whether it's in the Minors or Majors. Unless he's swinging at balls in the dirt or four feet off the plate, it doesn't matter; it's a part of the approach.

There's a reason why the Major League leaders in least strikeouts are mediocre players like David Eckstein, while those that strike out the most are guys you'd die to have on your team.

I don't know who MWE is.

Regardless, I could care less how many times a hitter strikes out whether it's in the Minors or Majors. Unless he's swinging at balls in the dirt or four feet off the plate, it doesn't matter; it's a part of the approach.

There's a reason why the Major League leaders in least strikeouts are mediocre players like David Eckstein, while those that strike out the most are guys you'd die to have on your team.

Wow, where to begin?

1) MWE is Mike Emiegh, the guy you responded to in #36, and the most knowledgebile on this site on minor leagues and prospects.

2) There is a difference in talking about an Adam Dunn, who has established himself as a productive hitter despite his syrikeouts, and a minor league prospect who strikes out at the same rate as Dunn. For the latter, it may simply be approach, but it is far more likely he hasn't a clue and will never develop into a MLB hitter.

3) There is a limit as to how often a player can strike out and maintain production. Ryan Howard is the only player who has struck out once every three AB's and a long(ish) career, and he has been productive only because he has (until this year) had by far the highest on contact batting average in the history of baseball, far superior to Babe Ruth. Ruth for his career hit .406 on contact. Howard the last two years hit .430 and .455, which is very likely unsustainable. This year he's at a mere .333 and is batting .212 with a below average OPS.

There's a reason why the Major League leaders in least strikeouts are mediocre players like David Eckstein, while those that strike out the most are guys you'd die to have on your team.

4) This is simply not true. What you mean is the guys who strike out the most but are good enough to overcome the K's and thus amass playing time. Felix Pie this year has struck out just as often as Howard. Ever hear of Jim Fuller? No, neither had I until tonight. He struck out far more often than Howard, and had a career of only 107 games and an OPS+ of 71. Or how about Enrique Cruz, who struck out 30 times in his 71 AB career? The point is, you have a selection bias, in that not only are you looking at MLB hitters, but MLB hitters who succeed despite poor AB/K ratios.

2) There is a difference in talking about an Adam Dunn, who has established himself as a productive hitter despite his syrikeouts, and a minor league prospect who strikes out at the same rate as Dunn.

And Dunn the Minor Leaguer made better contact than Golson has in the minors, striking out about once per 4-4.5 ABs.

Crashburn, Sabathia's track record is not unusual for a star pitcher blossoming after years of trying to figure it out. I don't see why you think 2 years, especially the two most recent, would be "cherry-picking." Would you value Hamels at his 2006 stats rather than his 2007-2008 stats? Trying to argue that Sabathia is an average pitcher is really stretching it.

Don't you get it? I didn't compare them!

Sure you did. You said...

Greg Golson, if he could ever learn to walk, would be a super version of Michael Bourn.

Saying that (Item-X) is a (better/worse/different) version of (Item-Y) IS a comparison! You are implying that there are significant similarities between the two by calling one a "version" of the other while noting a difference.

Except for those last six years, Sandy Koufax was a mediocre middle of the rotation starter.

The late '70s Orioles broadcast team went on and on about what a great power hitter Jim Fuller was going to be. After seeing him play, I decided they were Fuller crap. They were so right about Baylor, Grich, DeCinces. . .

Good one, lecturing MWE on the proper way to evaluate minor league prospects.

Crashburn, pay #### like this no mind. I personally think you're wrong on the whole strikeout thing, but don't let these ############# try to intimidate with their ######## message board pecking order ####. No one on this site is above being lectured. Everyone, including myself, has said enough dumb #### on this site where anything you say can be questioned. I don't think you're right in this point but don't let this ############ try to put you in your place.

1) MWE is Mike Emiegh, the guy you responded to in #36, and the most knowledgebile on this site on minor leagues and prospects.

Okay, but he's not right just because he's Mike Emiegh; if he's right, it's because there's sound logic and facts behind it.

2) There is a difference in talking about an Adam Dunn, who has established himself as a productive hitter despite his syrikeouts, and a minor league prospect who strikes out at the same rate as Dunn. For the latter, it may simply be approach, but it is far more likely he hasn't a clue and will never develop into a MLB hitter.

I'm not just talking about Adam Dunn; I'm talking about everyone here:

http://tinyurl.com/6qysnw

The only ones on the top 15 or 20 on that list that I wouldn't want on my team are Jim Thome (age), Khalil Greene (no need for an explanation), and Richie Sexson (ditto).

3) There is a limit as to how often a player can strike out and maintain production.

Why do you differentiate between strikeouts and other outs? I'd much rather take the guy who strikes out once every three at-bats than the guy who is grounding out to shortstop every three at-bats.

If there's a cap to production, it doesn't make logical sense for it to be tied to strikeouts and not other types of outs, unless you are for some reason hinging the claim on reaching on errors and such.

Ryan Howard is the only player who has struck out once every three AB's and a long(ish) career

Interesting, but most players don't strike out once every three at-bats.

If you don't mind my asking, where did you find the contact averages?

What you mean is the guys who strike out the most but are good enough to overcome the K's and thus amass playing time.

They're not overcoming the strikeouts; the strikeouts come as a result of the approach. If a player is good and strikes out a lot, he is not succeeding despite his strikeouts; for a lot of players, they're succeeding because of the strikeouts. If they choke up on the bat, they'll make more contact, but that is likely not an approach they're comfortable or successful with, which is why they have longer swings.

Why isn't this ever said of players who perpetually ground out, or pop up? There's a misappropriated stigma attached to the strike out.

And Dunn the Minor Leaguer made better contact than Golson has in the minors, striking out about once per 4-4.5 ABs.

Again, this doesn't really mean much to me.

I don't see why you think 2 years, especially the two most recent, would be "cherry-picking.

Because it ignores the other six seasons of his career, which, besides 2003, aren't particularly impressive.

Would you value Hamels at his 2006 stats rather than his 2007-2008 stats?

There's a difference: Hamels has only been pitching since May 2006; Sabathia has been pitching since 2001.

Trying to argue that Sabathia is an average pitcher is really stretching it.

I don't see how. He has the potential to be really, really good and he has been the last two seasons, and again recently. But most of his career isn't anything special, it's something you can get from calling a guy up from AAA or AA. The Phillies did it with Kyle Kendrick last season. His 119 ERA+ last season is much better than four of Sabathia's seasons, or half of C.C.'s career.

Saying that (Item-X) is a (better/worse/different) version of (Item-Y) IS a comparison! You are implying that there are significant similarities between the two by calling one a "version" of the other while noting a difference.

I clarified above why I mentioned Golson along with Bourn.

Except for those last six years, Sandy Koufax was a mediocre middle of the rotation starter.

Funny, but a complete misrepresentation of my argument.

Koufax pitched 12 seasons. Setting aside six seasons would be more than half of his career (since he wasn't primarily a starter until about 1958). My argument with Sabathia is that, while 25% of his career is pretty damn good, the other 75% isn't anything to get worked up over.

If there's a cap to production, it doesn't make logical sense for it to be tied to strikeouts

The logic is, a strikeout is an out, all of the time. It cannot be a hit. Thus, every extra strikeout is one less chance for a hit. If you strike out as often as Ryan Howard, you have to be a better hitter than babe Ruth in the times you don't strike out to be a good hitter. That does not mean that strikeouts are worse than other outs (which was the point that the BPro article addressed), but that if you strike out A LOT, you have to be really super the other times, and thus it is less likely that a player who strikes out A LOT will have a long productive career.

>>> And Dunn the Minor Leaguer made better contact than Golson has in the minors, striking out about once per 4-4.5 ABs.

Again, this doesn't really mean much to me.

A player moving up from the minors to the majors is going to strike out more frequently, not less frequently.

Even those high-K players you point to, apart from the fact they do other unimportant things like draw walks and hit homers that Golson doesn't, generally weren't as whiff-erific in the minors as Golson. Mostly in the neighborhood of 1 K per 4-5 ABs generally in the minors.

In other words, unless he improves his K-rate, to avoid selling insurance in the near future, Golson is going to have to be freakishly productive on contact, like a Russ Branyan.

I'm not just talking about Adam Dunn; I'm talking about everyone here:

http://tinyurl.com/6qysnw

Again, selection bias. Are pitcher's walks bad things? The how do you explain this list?. 11 of the top 15 are Hall of Famers, and the other 4 were very good pitchers. How about GIDP? The top 5 are all HOFers, and #6 is likely to get in soon.

The guys in your list aren't the ones who strikeout most often this year. That would be Robert Andino, who has struck out 15 times in 23 AB, and Adam Melhuse who has K'd 11 times in 20 AB, and Jason Botts with 18 K's in 38 AB. Guys who strike out 1 time in 3 are far far more likely to turn out to be Jason Botts ( 108 K in 282 career AB, OPS+ 77) than Ryan Howard.

I agree with Temple: anyone can learn, and we all say dumb things. Having said that, I've found exactly one player who has had a K rate anywhere near Golson's in the minors and who has succeeded in the majors: Ryan Howard. And Howard, in the minors, (a) walked about twice as much as has Golson and (b) hit more than twice as many HRs as has Golson.

It is true that strikeouts don't matter that much in the majors. But the minors aren't the majors, and the more that I look at minor league data, the more that I am compelled to the conclusion that the two most important success factors for minor league hitters are (a) the rate at which contact is made and (b) what the hitter does when he makes contact. (This seems to hold for pitchers, as well). All of the other stuff - walk rate in particular - appears to be secondary.

-- MWE

I can't believe you're holding to this Sabathia argument. It's madness.

And you're discounting his previous 2 cy young type seasons while putting pretty much all your weight behind Golson's #s in 1/3 of a season this year. If only CC worked with Charlie Manuel in the offseason, then we'd know he's not just mediocre.

The logic is, a strikeout is an out, all of the time

When people look at strikeouts vs. other outs, they tend to simply look at the outcome and not the approach. As I mentioned, striking out is tied to the approach a hitter takes as much as anything. The longer a hitter's swing is, the more likely it is that he will fail to make contact; the shorter the swing, the more likely it is that he will make contact.

There are very few players who can combine low strikeouts with great offensive production. Albert Pujols is one. Generally, the players who can do this are legends.

As to the result, there are very few situations where a strikeout is clearly the worst possible outcome. Runners on second and third with one out comes to mind. For the most part, there aren't too many situations where you think, "It would just be awful if this guy didn't make contact."

thus it is less likely that a player who strikes out A LOT will have a long productive career.

I think there is a bit of a selection bias here as well. Because of the stigma associated with striking out, I don't think that players who did strike out a lot, but weren't great otherwise (a la Adam Dunn or Ryan Howard) -- I don't think that they were given a lot of chances to succeed. It holds true even today where managers would rather see you choke up on the bat and hit a ball on the ground even if it results in the same outcome despite the hitter being more uncomfortable and less mechanically sound.

A player moving up from the minors to the majors is going to strike out more frequently, not less frequently.

It still does not mean anything to me, since I don't buy into the argument that a strikeout is an unspeakable offense.

Even those high-K players you point to, apart from the fact they do other unimportant things like draw walks and hit homers that Golson doesn't

Why does everyone assume that Golson will never improve, and he is who he is? Dan Uggla struck out once every 5 at-bats in the Minors, and now strikes out once every 4 at-bats, yet he's much more productive.

I acknowledged that Golson needs to improve his ability to draw walks, and it's entirely possible that he will, especially considering the organization he's in.

Are pitcher's walks bad things?

The favorability of an outcome isn't inversely proportional to a pitcher as it is to a hitter. A strikeout is not equally bad for a hitter and equally good for a pitcher. Neither are walks.

Regardless, your BB list is a sum total, which is misleading -- it's inherently biased against pitchers who played a lot of seasons, like Nolan Ryan. Also consider that a lot of the pitchers on the list played in eras when the bullpen was not a necessity but an accessory, so these starters were throwing 250-300 innings every season of their careers almost. In that respect, it's also inherently biased in favor of pitchers of the "bullpen era."

The same thing applies to your GIDP list.

The irony is that, in your next paragraph, you use rates.

Guys who strike out 1 time in 3 are far far more likely to turn out to be Jason Botts ( 108 K in 282 career AB, OPS+ 77) than Ryan Howard.

One thing I think is going unmentioned here is the general approach to an at-bat. How do these guys strike out? A strikeout from Botts is different than a strikeout from Howard.

In all honesty, I don't think any of us can really comment on Golson's strikeouts unless we have a great idea of how he approaches his at-bats. If he's swinging at pitches four feet off the plate, then the strikeout criticisms are valid. But if he's managing the strike zone well and taking good hacks, then they are not valid. Unfortunately, I will probably never see Golson play until he comes to Philly because Reading is quite a drive and so is Allentown (Iron Pigs).

I've found exactly one player who has had a K rate anywhere near Golson's in the minors and who has succeeded in the majors: Ryan Howard.

Do you happen to have the data for this? I'd be interested in looking it over if you have it.

But still, it's not as if Golson can't improve.

I can't believe you're holding to this Sabathia argument. It's madness.

It's madness to gloss over how mediocre he was until 2006!

And you're discounting his previous 2 cy young type seasons while putting pretty much all your weight behind Golson's #s in 1/3 of a season this year.

The arguments aren't comparable.

A) Sabathia has been mediocre for 5 out of his 8 MLB seasons. He's been good in one, and great in the two others.

B) Golson has all of the tools you want in a prospect, they just need to be refined. I think that they can, in fact, be refined, especially his offense considering that he is a Phillies prospect, and the Phillies' prospects tend to find their niche offensively. It's not just by some fluke that the Phillies have home-grown 3/4 of their infielders, two of them have already won the NL MVP and the other (Utley) could win it this year.

In a lot of other teams' farm systems, I'd be reluctant to be this optimistic about Golson, but the Phillies are among the best in the Majors in refining a Minor Leaguer's offensive tools.

Are you familiar with the concept of an aging curve? Sabathia was above average for a starter at a very young age, then, when he entered his prime years, he became very good. That could be a fluke, but, to channel Yogi Berra for a moment, it would be a fluke if it was a fluke.

When people look at strikeouts vs. other outs, they tend to simply look at the outcome and not the approach. As I mentioned, striking out is tied to the approach a hitter takes as much as anything. The longer a hitter's swing is, the more likely it is that he will fail to make contact; the shorter the swing, the more likely it is that he will make contact.

There are very few players who can combine low strikeouts with great offensive production. Albert Pujols is one. Generally, the players who can do this are legends.

As to the result, there are very few situations where a strikeout is clearly the worst possible outcome. Runners on second and third with one out comes to mind. For the most part, there aren't too many situations where you think, "It would just be awful if this guy didn't make contact."

This is completely non-responsive. Saying a player's strikeout rate is too high is not the same thing as saying it has to be low. If a player takes himself out of any possible chance for a hit 1/3 of the time, he has to extremely, historically, productive in the other 2/3 to be successful. That does not bode well, to say the least. I don't understand why this concept is so difficult for you.

Regardless, your BB list is a sum total, which is misleading -- it's inherently biased against pitchers who played a lot of seasons, like Nolan Ryan. Also consider that a lot of the pitchers on the list played in eras when the bullpen was not a necessity but an accessory, so these starters were throwing 250-300 innings every season of their careers almost. In that respect, it's also inherently biased in favor of pitchers of the "bullpen era."

That's exactly the point! It's a sum total, the same as your list of high strikeout guys. It is a list of guys who were successful despite having a flaw in their game. Nolan Ryan aside, those guys were not the worst control pitchers in history. Steve Dalkowski did not make the list because his control was so bad he never had a career. If Golson continues to hit like Ryan Howard without the power and walks, he will have a career as long as Dalkowski's.

In all honesty, I don't think any of us can really comment on Golson's strikeouts unless we have a great idea of how he approaches his at-bats.

Yes we can. If he strikes out 1/3 of the time, he has to hit like Babe Ruth (.406 career on contact) to hit .270. If he's merely as good as Frank Thomas (.363), he hits .242. It doesn't matter what his approach is. There is a name for an outfielder who hits below .250 with medium range power and few walks. Unemployed.

In a lot of other teams' farm systems, I'd be reluctant to be this optimistic about Golson, but the Phillies are among the best in the Majors in refining a Minor Leaguer's offensive tools.

Who?

In the minors, Chase Utley was a high average hitter with ~ 2-1 BB/K ratio. In the majors he has been a high average hitter with ~ 2-1 BB/K ratio. His power has increased, but player's power increasing with age is not unique to the Phils.

Ryan Howard's minor league batting line was .299/.387/.550, with ~ 1K/2AB. His major league batting line is .280/.385/.550 with ~ 1K/3AB

Jimmy Rollins in the minors .262/.329/.384. His first 3 years in the majors ~.260/.315/.400

Pat Burrell in the minors .309/.421/.569. He's yet to match any of those numbers in the majors, but he's been a good hitter.

Shane Victorino in the minors .283/.343/.416. In the majors .275/.340/.404.

Looks like the Phils have a pretty good track record of having players perform in the majors pretty much as they did in the minors.

Yes we can. If he strikes out 1/3 of the time, he has to hit like Babe Ruth (.406 career on contact) to hit .270. If he's merely as good as Frank Thomas (.363), he hits .242. It doesn't matter what his approach is. There is a name for an outfielder who hits below .250 with medium range power and few walks. Unemployed.

I meant to add that Golson in his minor league career has hit .375 on contact. So he would have to improve a lot. He's at .427 so far this year. Howard BTW, hit .437 on contact in the minors, right in line with his MLB performance.

And comparing K/AB's isn't even really fair to Howard, because he drew a ton of walks. If you use K/PA's instead, Golson is actually worse than Howard: 1 K every 3.59 PA's for Golson, every 3.64 PA's for Howard.

Would you mind sharing with me where you get the contact statistics, Misirlou?

Quick-and-dirty - just subtract strikeouts from the ABs, and use the new total as you would ABs.

So (AB - K) / H ?

Regardless, your BB list is a sum total, which is misleading -- it's inherently biased against pitchers who played a lot of seasons, like Nolan Ryan.

I'm not sure Ryan's the best example to make this point with, since he holds the single-season record for walks.

And comparing K/AB's isn't even really fair to Howard, because he drew a ton of walks. If you use K/PA's instead, Golson is actually worse than Howard: 1 K every 3.59 PA's for Golson, every 3.64 PA's for Howard.

I think you have that reversed- Golson is at 1 per 3.64 and Howard was at 1 per 3.59

So (AB - K) / H ?

No. H/(AB-K). It's batting average when not striking out.

Just out of amusement at the Sabathia talk, I looked up someone else who was in the league at the age of 20. Here's how they did, age by age, given as ERA+:



If you want to take the glass half empty approach, you could point to the fact that mystery man seemed to have peaked at age 24 and his last two years represent a declining trend. And I'll admit that it's probably true that most pitchers with lines that look like that just keep going downhill and get mentioned among history's disappointments. But not everyone. Who is the mystery man? Let's just say that he between his age 26 season and his age 27 season, he got traded to the Phillies. And that age 27 season was pretty special. And he didn't leave the Phillies until he was 40.

This thread was awesome. How everyone managed to stay civil I'll never understand.