But he's not. He's 21. He was ripping up the minor leagues at age 18. I think a lot of people are underappreciating how hard that is to do, and how often people who can handle MLB pitching at age 21 end up being stars at age 27.

There are a lot more than 102 Hall of Famers, meaning that there were lots who weren't even good enough to play at age 21.

There are a lot of HOFers who didn't get 500 PA in a season by age 21. A fair number of them have legit excuses like color/minor league barrier, pitching (Ruth), military service, college.

Who is the best player in the trade? Delmon.
Who's getting him? Minnesota.
Ergo, who wins? Minnesota.

I understand why Tampa's making this deal - it addresses their three biggest needs (infield defense, starting pitching depth, and bullpen help). I have a great deal of respect for their current management team. But I think they're pulling the trigger on Delmon too soon.

-- MWE

I think there's a 50% chance that Delmon turns in Gary Sheffield, in which case this deal looks pretty bad

note: Jose Reyes deserves to be an HM for the age 25 group. One of many oversights, I'm guessing.

Garza's very good, but he was never in the Lincecum/Hughes/Chamberlain/Bucholz/Gallardo/Bailey category IMO.

I can see an argument that the Rays should have gotten more for Young, but you have to find a dance partner. Garza and Bartlett are a nice fit. They help fix what needs to be fixed. If Garza pitches 150 innings with a 90 ERA+ next year and Bartlett fields his position, thats a massive upgrade.

Baseball America last February ranked Garza #21 among MLB prospects behind Hughes (#4), Bailey (#5), Lincecum (#11), and Gallardo (#16) from your list. Buchholz was ranked #51 and Chamberlain #75.

They ranked Young #3 (behind Matsuzaka and Gordon).

Young is a lot safer than

player  Garza   Young
&#xre;gular  50%  75%
&#xst;ar  25%  35%
&#xsu;perstar 5%  15%

A lot of people in this thread are apparently unfamiliar with the fact that as of last offseason Matt Garza was universally lauded as one of the very best pitching prospects in baseball. Hughes and Bailey were 1A and 1B and Garza and Gallardo were 1C and 1D, in some order.

I like this trade. Young needs quiet surroundings. And if you were ever going to get an African-American kid used to the fast pace a real turn of events is sticking him in the upper Midwest d*mn close to Canada. That oughta take the starch out of his shorts if you know what I mean.

what's the pitching equivalent of Joe Carter (which is what Delmon's stat line from last year brings to mind)?

The Cubs traded him for Rick Sutcliffe. Actually, in retrospect they probably had similar career value (BP agrees - WARP3 for Carter of 65.4, for Sutcliffe of 61.2).

Even in his first major league season as a 21 year old, he had 51 extra base hits. It is disconcerting to see him swinging at so many pitches, but the fact that he still gets the results he does has to be encouraging to some extent. He has a .293 BA in the majors so far, swinging at far too many bad pitches.

I am no stathead but isn't it the case that BABIP does not vary much among established big league pitchers but that pitchers in general DO have significant variations in their abilities on balls in play?

Its actually not that hard to figure out how almost any team will go .500, if you look at things just right.

As noted previously, even Gaelan's doomsday prediction of 150 IP of 90+ ERA from Garza would be an improvement on what 3/5ths of the starting rotation gave TBA last year - Jae Seo & Casey Fossum gave them 140+ innings last year of a combined ERA+ under 60.

Essex, it would behoove you to look @ the actual makeup of the team that was supposed to take the field last April, after which lost 96 games, and looks a lot like the makeup of the team that will take the field next year.

However, the most important question to me is why the bullpen and defense and 3/5 of the starting rotation were of double A quality. Good organizations find ways to avoid this happening.

He is also the first rookie to lead the league in Outs.

I like the complex narrative that's been created in hindsight to explain the 66-96 Devil Rays. I don't agree with it, but its fun to read anyway.

In the offseason of 2006/2007, it was obvious to everyone - except me - that they were working on exactly those things, and were likely to be a .500 team in 2007. Oops

I'd be willing to bet JP Howell puts up a better ERA than Gilga Meche.

but that pitchers in general DO have significant variations in their abilities on balls in play?

No, while this is possible there's no evidence for this theory whatsoever.

Cleveland's not a surprise?
It's right on Lake Erie isn't it?

I think the point about Minneapolis is that it's closer to Canada than it is to most major cities in the US. Sure Boston is close to Canada, but it's also close to New York.

(Although as a resident of Regina, Saskatchewan I can say Minneapolis isn't near close enough. Would be nice to see a major league game every now and then but it's quite a hike)

if he's going to be a valuable corner outfielder, he's going to have to show his natural power, and to do that he's going to have to be more selective.

No, while this is possible there's no evidence for this theory whatsoever.

Just like it worked for keeping Randy Moss and the Vikings well behaved. Remember that "love boat" cruise? Actually sarcasm aside. I was curious and discovered that.........

Moss wasn't even on the team when the Love Boat occurred, but nice try...

There's a ton of evidence for it:

1. Clay Davenport has shown that there is a measureable relationship between hBIP prevention and promotion through the minors. Pitchers with good hBIP get promoted; pitchers without good hBIP don't.

2. Various other studies (Tom Tippett's and my own, to name two) have shown that there is a measureable relationship between hBIP prevention and longevity in the majors; the longer you pitch, the better your hBIP.

I guarantee that if you bet someone that Florence, Kentucky was closer to Canada than Minneapolis, you would win every time.

For every other pitching statistic, there is a wide variance in performance - among major league pitchers. Some strike out a lot, some don't. Some have great control, some don't. Some give up lots of home runs, some hardly give up any. Having problems in any one of these areas does not, in and of itself disqualify a pitcher from pitching in the majors. And here we have a statistic (BABIP) where almost every single pitcher who makes the majors has a similar ability.

I am sold on the fact that MLB pitcher have only a small effect on BABIP but not none and not an insignificant amount.