I believe there was a running chat on BBTF of this draft. I know the Prince pick took a beating here and elsewhere.

The lad could still eat himself out of baseball. But so far he has performed exactly as hoped. And that's saying something.

I believe there was a running chat on BBTF of this draft. I know the Prince pick took a beating here and elsewhere.

The Brewers were mocked in "Moneyball" for picking Prince Fielder. I believe the phrase was "too fat even for the A's".

When Love Was the Law in Los Angeles...uhh, Seattle y Houston?...not so much.

Well, naturally. Love is the Law only works in the suburbs.

odd that he doesn't mention Loewen anywhere in the article.

Dismissing Joe Saunders as an "up-and-down" guy is only accurate inasmuch as he is the 6th arm of the deepest staff in the majors and would be a #2 starter for 20 clubs today.

why isn't the a's drafting papelbon mentioned in the "What might have been" section?

The Brewers were mocked in "Moneyball" for picking Prince Fielder. I believe the phrase was "too fat even for the A's".

The Brewers aren't selling jeans here.

Dismissing Joe Saunders as an "up-and-down" guy is only accurate inasmuch as he is the 6th arm of the deepest staff in the majors and would be a #2 starter for 20 clubs today.

And it will be to the Angel's benefit 6 years from now, he'll be our #3-4 starter and not yet eligible for free agency.

you have a point, but #2 starter for 20 clubs? which 20?

um, saunders has a nice era this year but a terrible k/bb ratio. his 4.50 *edit* career ERA seems like a better estimation of his true talent. that wouldn't be "a #2 starter for 20 clubs today". essentially, that's the 40th best starting pitcher in baseball - do you think saunders is that good?

my fantasy league's scoring approximates linear weights, such that rankings in the league are a decent proxy for actual value. the 40th best SP thus far, by our point values, is justin verlander. above him are daisuke matsuzaka, scott kazmir, jeff suppan, and andy pettite. right below him are matt belisle, tom glavine, livan hernandez, and matt cain. would you put joe saunders in that group? i sure wouldn't.

Leaving the A's out of the top five is criminal. It's a joke really. I'm not sure what point Law is trying to make here, but this looks ridiculous.

nd in the second round, they took a player named Womack, which is never a good idea.

The Seahawks would object.

Fourth round: Josh Johnson (Florida), the 2006 NL ERA champ, and Rich Hill (Cubs) are the only regulars here...

If Keith's around, where did this come from? Even if Johnson had enough innings to qualify, which he didn't, his ERA wasn't as good as Oswalt's.

I would have liked to have read this article and contribute to the discussion... but upon following the link, I was mercileslly hunted by pop-ups, some silly floating bonds update crap, sound effects, and the general suckiness of the site.

Gads... How can something which once upon a time was so GOOD for sports have turned into something so rotten and evil? Is this penance for those of that really did, once-upon-a-time, think Chris Berman's schtick was cute?

darren, i'm not sure if i agree or not, but i would presume that law arrived at that conclusion based on the number of picks the A's had. The Dodgers haul is more impressive when you consider where they were picking.

What does this mean?:

Fourth round: Josh Johnson (Florida), the 2006 NL ERA champ,

Johnson didn't qualify for the title, and even if he had, he would have come in tied for 3rd.

If you're going to go by where people picked, then the D-Rays are completely out of the picture.

And although the A's had a lot of 1st and supplemental picks, they had them between 16 and 37, right after you see the big dropoff (in the studies that I've seen). To get 3 above average major leaguers is a great draft by any reasonable standard. His dismissive comments about them are not well-thought-out either. I say this as someone who's liked his writing in the past.

darren, i'm not sure if i agree or not, but i would presume that law arrived at that conclusion based on the number of picks the A's had. The Dodgers haul is more impressive when you consider where they were picking.

Perhaps, but that doesn't explain the A's behind the Giants. Yes, you'd take Cain over Blanton, but you'd certainly take Blanton, Swisher, and Teahen over Cain, Lewis, Ortmeier, and Correia given that those latter three are all pretty marginal in the long run at best.

Kyle's right.

Agree or disagree, at least Law has a reason for not putting the A's in the top 5. He also puts the Cubs as the worst draft because of a lot of wasted picks.

Personally, I wouldn't complain about any draft that got me Rich Hill.

Is this penance for those of that really did, once-upon-a-time, think Chris Berman's schtick was cute?

And slow pitch softball, and Aussie Rules Football were cute too. Berman's schtick was something different at the time; schtick has a limited shelf life so I'm amazed that he still can get away with it 25 years later. I hope we don't get 25 years of Kruk's, Screamin' A's or Stuart Scott's schtick

Dustin Nippert was a 15th rounder in 2002; he still has plenty of promise, despite being delayed by a Tommy John surgery. Brian Barden was a 6th rounder. And if you ask Mike Rizzo, Santos was ruined by an ugly shoulder injury.

Fwiw, the 2002 draft might end up being the worst draft in Rizzo's career in AZ. IIRC, his first draft was in 2001, and it yielded Scott Hairston, Chad Tracy, Brandon Medders and Dan Uggla.

In 2003, he took Conor Jackson, Carlos Quentin and Matt Chico (and D'Antona in the 3rd round, who's been hitting very well in AAA this year)

In 2004, he took Stephen Drew in the first and Mark Reynolds in the 16th round. Chris Carter was thought to be a steal in the 17th round. Also, three pitchers from the 2004 draft were used in trades (Garret Mock, Ross Ohlendorf, Stephen Jackson).

In 2005, he took Upton 1st overall; Micah Owings was a third round pick, so was Neighborgall. 2006 was Rizzo's last draft in AZ, but it's too early to tell what will happen with it.

dodgers 2002 draft

james loney- should be pretty good, maybe adrian gonzalez lite.

greg miller- was going to be amazing, too bad he cant find the strike zone at the moment, still only 22 yrs old.

zach hammes- i believe he will make the majors as a reliever. hes not a starter and has shown he excels at a relieving but sucks at starting.

broxton-one of the best setup men in the NL, future closer.

delwyn young- will probably be a 4th OFer somewhere, hitting 289/355/474 in AAA

James McDonald- Breaking out in the California league as a 22 yr old. just started pitching full time two years ago, hes 6'5 195lb and still projectible and will catapult up prospect charts by the end of the year. one of the top right handed SP in the dodgers system at the moment.

eric stults- should be a 5th starter in the majors somewhere. excelled in the PCL last year and some team should give him his shot. BUT, he has played and started and won a game in the majors.

russ martin- golden god.

Agree or disagree, at least Law has a reason for not putting the A's in the top 5. He also puts the Cubs as the worst draft because of a lot of wasted picks.

He has a reason, but it's not a very good one. It's also not consistent as he doesn't penalize the D-Rays for picking #2 and he doesn't acknowledge that the Marlins got Hermida at #11.

And he assesses the A's draft by looking at the value they got in return for Teahan, but assesses the Mets' draft by looking at the value of Kazmir (not what he was traded for).

But four of the A's other seven picks in the first and sandwich rounds returned zero value, and only third-rounder Bill Murphy (traded to Florida for pitcher Mark Redman) had any value at all of anyone else the A's took from the second round on.

3/7 of picks in this part of the draft being good major leaguers is a great ratio, and this makes it sound like its middling at best.

In 2005, he took Upton 1st overall; Micah Owings was a third round pick, so was Neighborgall. 2006 was Rizzo's last draft in AZ, but it's too early to tell what will happen with it.

wild thing... you make my heart sing...

oh, how i love neighborgall. in five appearances this year, he only got at least one out in two of them. he has a 108.00 ERA. he has a 15.00 WHIP. he has a K/BB ratio of .167:1. and his performance was terrible in college! he must have just absolutely filthy stuff to get drafted, given his track record.

Kyle, going into the draft, Neighborgall had 80 fastball and 80 curveball...

Also, he was a first round talent coming out of high school. The Red Sox drafted him but couldn't sign him.

Neighborgall does have filthy stuff. I saw him pitch in college, and his results were exactly like his professional results thus far. He will never amount to anything.

24

and a negative 80 for control.

In 2005, he took Upton 1st overall; Micah Owings was a third round pick, so was Neighborgall. 2006 was Rizzo's last draft in AZ, but it's too early to tell what will happen with it.


wild thing... you make my heart sing...

oh, how i love neighborgall. in five appearances this year, he only got at least one out in two of them. he has a 108.00 ERA. he has a 15.00 WHIP. he has a K/BB ratio of .167:1. and his performance was terrible in college! he must have just absolutely filthy stuff to get drafted, given his track record.

speaking of neighborgall, it seems he was drafted in the 7th round in '02 by the red sox ... but didn't sign.

... damnit levski!

The White Sox, understandably not listed among the top 5 drafts that year, have placed 6 players from that draft in the majors, which I believe is the most of any team.

Those players are Royce Ring, Jeremy Reed, Sean Tracey, Brandon McCarthy, Boone Logan, and Jay Marshall.
Lots of fringe talent, but a noteworthy number considering the limited number of major leaguers listed in the top drafts.

24

and a negative 80 for control.

that makes him the right handed greg miller then...

that makes him the right handed greg miller then...

basically except miller use to have it before and that track record gives a slim hope he could snap out of this funk.

as for neighborgall....there is no hope. there is humor every time he takes the mound. but there is no hope.

rizzo said after the draft that neighborgall was a lottery ticket (a really expensive one, granted). the odds against them hitting the jackpot were long, but they decided to gamble...

upton and owings alone make the '05 draft a very good one. everything else is gravy...

The White Sox, understandably not listed among the top 5 drafts that year, have placed 6 players from that draft in the majors, which I believe is the most of any team.

A's had Swisher, Blanton, Teahen, Jeremy Brown, Mark Kiger (in LCS last year), Shane Komine, and Jared Burton, making 7 so far. Brad Knox will make it at some point for sure, Fritz might get a cup of coffee. Unsigned Papelbon was also drafted by them that year, as was Brad Ziegler who was then picked by the Phillies in '03 before signing with the A's again and is on a fast track to do the Chad Bradford thing.

The Braves produced Francoeur, McCann, Chuck James, and used Dan Meyer as the main piece to acquire Tim Hudson. Isn't that top-5?

I won't even include a couple fringy guys like Charlie Morton and Wes Timmons who still have an opportunity to make the bigs at some point.

um, saunders has a nice era this year but a terrible k/bb ratio. his 4.50 *edit* career ERA seems like a better estimation of his true talent. that wouldn't be "a #2 starter for 20 clubs today". essentially, that's the 40th best starting pitcher in baseball - do you think saunders is that good?

Are you nuts? Seriously? His career minor league 2.40 K/BB ratio isn't good enough for you? He even improved on that in his last full season at Salt Lake (2.55). I'll agree with you that he's been less-than-impressive at the major league level in that regard, but Shredder and AROM are right in that he'd be at least in the starting rotation of 20 major league clubs, and probably a number two on most of those.

31

i definately agree the dbacks 05 draft was tremendous; based on upton alone because anytime you pick a superstar and that player is the only player to make a significant impact at the big league level it becomes a tremendous draft. That said, i wished my team sucked so much ass that they were able to acquire the #1 pick in a draft that so happened to have a superstar prospect waiting to be picked.

35

give colletti a couple of years...

Are you nuts? Seriously? His career minor league 2.40 K/BB ratio isn't good enough for you? He even improved on that in his last full season at Salt Lake (2.55). I'll agree with you that he's been less-than-impressive at the major league level in that regard, but Shredder and AROM are right in that he'd be at least in the starting rotation of 20 major league clubs, and probably a number two on most of those.

Not wanting to get into a spitting match, but are you?

Saunders minor league resume is decent- but every team has 1-2 pitching "propsects" at any one time like that-
His best minor league season was 2006 in Salt Lake- but 117 hits in 135 IP against only 97 Ks fairly screams BABIP fluke
His career minor league ERA of 3.47 is decent, but not terrific, his carer minor league K rate is decidedly below average for a PROSPECT.
As for his 2007 ERA? Eventually all thsoe runners he's stranding are going to start to score- his peripherals are not mediocre- they're bad. His upside looks to be a 3 or 4- saying he'd be a #2 on 20 teams right now is nuts

Are you nuts? Seriously? His career minor league 2.40 K/BB ratio isn't good enough for you? He even improved on that in his last full season at Salt Lake (2.55). I'll agree with you that he's been less-than-impressive at the major league level in that regard, but Shredder and AROM are right in that he'd be at least in the starting rotation of 20 major league clubs, and probably a number two on most of those.

I'm sorry, this whole paragraph doesn't make sense to me. I don't think Saunders sucks. I just don't think he's the 40th best starting pitcher in the majors, like your friend halofan does.

There is a huge difference in the opinions "he'd be 'in the starting rotation' for 20 clubs" and "he'd be the #2 starter for 20 clubs". Someone who is only good enough to be a 5th starter for most teams is pretty crappy indeed - this is a ramon ortiz, kyle davies, or tony armas type guy you're envisioning, 5.00 ERAish. I think Saunders is a little better than that - he's probably good enough to be a 4th starter on almost every team. But for every club you find that he'd be their #2 guy, I can find a club where he'd be at best their 5th starter. We can try this experiment if you like, although I'm sure it will devolve into semantic arguments as to if saunders is better than Zach Duke, so I'd rather not if that's okay with you.

36

the dodgers under colletti will never become the worst team in baseball (which is what it will take to land a consensus once in a decade type talent like upton) because Colletti is over obsessed with acquiring and having extreme depth. hence, having 15 shortstops on the team and 20 pitchers who could start a big league game between the majors and AAA.

what will happen under colletti is that the dodgers will always be average or marginally above or below average. Never good enough to do something special, never bad enough to acquire someone special.

Are you nuts? Seriously? His career minor league 2.40 K/BB ratio isn't good enough for you? He even improved on that in his last full season at Salt Lake (2.55). I'll agree with you that he's been less-than-impressive at the major league level in that regard, but Shredder and AROM are right in that he'd be at least in the starting rotation of 20 major league clubs, and probably a number two on most of those.

A career minor league k/BB ratio of 2.40 doesn't seem all that impressive.

I think The Cheat is right - the White Sox seem to be the leaders. I didn't realize it was the same Jay Marshall, and I just flat-out missed Logan. They also drafted but didn't sign Tony Sipp, who's now in the Cleveland system.

And yes, thanks Kyle, the reason I didn't put the A's in the top five was that they had all those extra picks and didn't get extra value from them. It's somewhat subjective, of course.

As of today, the Reds need to be mentioned somewhere. The only guy from their draft who's even played in the majors is Chris Denorfia. However, that's going to change very soon; Joey Votto is knocking on the door and Camilo Vasquez will probably see some time as well.

And if Keith is going to mention the Cubs, what about the Indians? They had five picks in the first two rounds, and the only ones who have seen major league time are Jeremy Guthrie (who is way behind Rich Hill, at this stage) and Brian Slocum.

-- MWE

I think you have to consider how good Swisher has become if you're evaluating the A's draft. He's probably one of the top 25 hitters in all of baseball, and if you need it he can play center to boot. Blanton, too, seems to have developed into a really reliable starter.

Brownlie is in the independents, not out of baseball as Sickels asserts. It's not like he is in a beer league.

And yes, thanks Kyle, the reason I didn't put the A's in the top five was that they had all those extra picks and didn't get extra value from them. It's somewhat subjective, of course.

But, they did get extra value from them. Picks in the 20s have a 75% washout chance, much higher than picks at the top of the draft. Multiple good major leaguers is a great haul from a bunch of late 1st and supplemental picks.

As I understand it, the typical haul from the picks in 2002 was 1 or 2 good major leaguers. One can perhaps make the case that the A's should have gone for players with a better shot at being superstars, but I don't see how you can argue that they didn't get extra value in the end.

Philly's Draft Slot Study from SoSH.

A career minor league k/BB ratio of 2.40 doesn't seem all that impressive.

How many guys in the PCL and Texas League are better, though? He's operating in some very pitcher-hostile environments. Slack needs to be cut, and so if you've got some actual data to back up this assertion that 2.40 is inconsequential, by all means present it.

Saunders minor league resume is decent- but every team has 1-2 pitching "propsects" at any one time like that

Do tell. The Yankees would like their phone numbers. Joe Saunderses aren't nearly as commonplace as you paint them.

D'Antona in the 3rd round, who's been hitting very well in AAA this year

I read a book about the Cape Cod league where he was a key feature...is D'Antona very high on the prospect list for Arizona? Are they planning on keeping him at 3rd base or moving him to catcher like I read somewhere?

How many guys in the PCL and Texas League are better, though? He's operating in some very pitcher-hostile environments. Slack needs to be cut, and so if you've got some actual data to back up this assertion that 2.40 is inconsequential, by all means present it.

I'm not sure why the burden is on me to find the data, but, in any event, how Anthoney Reyes?: he had a better than 4.0 ratio in the PCL.

Brownlie is in the independents, not out of baseball as Sickels asserts. It's not like he is in a beer league.

I would classify any player in an indy league as "out of baseball," meaning out of organized baseball.

But, they did get extra value from them. Picks in the 20s have a 75% washout chance, much higher than picks at the top of the draft. Multiple good major leaguers is a great haul from a bunch of late 1st and supplemental picks.

The A's had FOUR first round picks and hit on two of them, then hit on one of three supplemental picks. That's okay, but IMO not one of the five best hauls in the draft relative to their picks, and I don't think arguing that they spent less money on those picks is any defense. It's almost - I'm know I'm exaggerating here - like arguing that it's OK that they failed because they pursued a strategy that was likely to fail anyway.

A couple more points need making in defense of Saunders. First, Saunders already has more value in terms of VORP than (9.8) than he had all last year. A lot of that was because he was pitching longer than he ever had in his life, and so his second half value tailed off as the season rolled along. But that 9.8 VORP is better than two of the Angels' starters, including their putative ace, Bartolo Colon, and Ervin "Home Games Only" Santana. It's also better than double what he accomplished last year in about 2/3rds of a full season.

I'm not sure why the burden is on me to find the data

Because you were the one who dismissed it. Guys sporting 2:1 ratios in the majors are generally considered to be solid strike-throwers.

Or Jered Weaver? ~4.5 ratio in the Texas league and PCL.

I do think saying that Saunders would be the #2 on 20 teams is an exaggeration, but without looking at it systematically, I'm confident in saying that there are a number of teams for which he would be in the rotation.

Responding directly to these comments:

His best minor league season was 2006 in Salt Lake- but 117 hits in 135 IP against only 97 Ks fairly screams BABIP fluke
His career minor league ERA of 3.47 is decent, but not terrific, his carer minor league K rate is decidedly below average for a PROSPECT.

First of all, do we know that there is such a thing as a BABIP fluke in the minor leagues?

Second of all, a 3.47 ERA in the kind of parks the Angel farm teams play in is rather impressive.

Third of all, I agree that his minor league K rate isn't outstanding.

A few more points on Saunders generally:

1. Last year, he was dynamite in his first game against teams, and mincemeat in the second game. Will this trend continue? Can he continue to get guys out once they know what's coming?

2. That point notwithstanding, if he can getting his breaking ball over for strikes, he should be at least adequate. An LHP in the high 80s/low 90s, with movement on his fastball, and the ability to locate the off-speed? That guy can pitch. (Pretty controversial, huh?)

3. Remember, he missed all of 2003 to injury. There are indications that he has improved steadily each season since coming back from his surgery:

a) In 2004, he had .137 strikeouts per batter faced at AA; the next year, he had it up to .175, and got promoted mid-season.

b) In 2005, he had .116 strikeouts per batter faced at AAA; the next year, he had it up to .173. This year, it's up to .222.

c) Strikeouts per batter faced in the majors: .098 in 2005, .169 in 2006, and .107 thus far in 2007. These are pretty small samples, but if he gets enough innings, he may well continue the improvement he's shown at other levels.

He's 26 in twelve days already; he's not going to be a star. But there's a strong likelihood that he'll be the Angels' fifth starter next year, and he's got a reasonable shot at being the best #5 starter in The Show, if that happens.

I'll agree with you that he's been less-than-impressive at the major league level in that regard, but Shredder and AROM are right in that he'd be at least in the starting rotation of 20 major league clubs, and probably a number two on most of those.

Once again, name the teams.

Saunders is an ok starter, but the exaggeration of his abilities going on here is far more impressive than Saunders himself is.

Because you were the one who dismissed it. Guys sporting 2:1 ratios in the majors are generally considered to be solid strike-throwers.

But you made the argument, so you have the burden of backing up your assertion. Plus, 2:1 is solid in the majors. In the minors it's nothing special AFAICT.

The A's had FOUR first round picks

But all late first round picks.

Incidentally, this year the SO/BB rate in the PCL is 1.93 and in the Texas League is 2.00.

I don't understand listing Crain and Neshek as better than Blanton, Hill, and Bush.

I don't think arguing that they spent less money on those picks is any defense. It's almost - I'm know I'm exaggerating here - like arguing that it's OK that they failed because they pursued a strategy that was likely to fail anyway.

If two drafts produced the exact same haul from the same slots, would you consider the one that cost less to be better?

Because you were the one who dismissed it. Guys sporting 2:1 ratios in the majors are generally considered to be solid strike-throwers.

In the AL this year, the overal K/BB ratio is 1.82. Saunders is slightly above average.

If two drafts produced the exact same haul from the same slots, would you consider the one that cost less to be better?

Sure - but consider how the A's spent less. The four first-rounders all got slot. Brown got WAY under slot; Obenchain and Teahen were each around $150-200K below slot. The A's saved by punting much/most of the draft after that - for example, paying about 2/3 of slot to Steve Stanley, a clear non-prospect, in the second round.

I'm confident in saying that there are a number of teams for which he would be in the rotation.

This is probably true. It's a long, long way from being the number two starter for 20, or even 10, teams though.

Joe Saunders, right now, at this moment in time, has a career ERA+ of 99. Maybe that overstates his true talent. Maybe he's more likely a 90.

How many teams could do with a 90 guy in their rotation? Who could Saunders replace?

Boston (Tavarez)
Toronto (possibly McGowan or Ohka)
Yankees (pick 'em)
Tampa Bay (probably anyone but Kazmir or Shields)
Cleveland (arguably Sowers)
Detroit (probably Durbin)
Minnesota (Ortiz or Ponson)
Kansas City (everyone but Meche and maybe Bannister)
Seattle (Jeff Weaver, amongst others)
Oakland (the five spot)
Texas (they're all a mess right now)
Atlanta (Redman, maybe Davies in the short term)
Philadelphia (possibly Eaton)
Florida (Obermuller)
Washington (Simontacchi, to start with)
St. Louis (almost anyone)
Pittsburgh (Armas, at this point)
Cubs (possibly five spot)
Houston (Albers)
Los Angeles of Chavez Ravine (Tomko)
Colorado (Buccholz)

Some of those are debateable, but there are 21 teams on which you can at least make the argument. You can dismiss some, and he'd still help 50% of the rotations in the game.

Last year, he was dynamite in his first game against teams, and mincemeat in the second game. Will this trend continue? Can he continue to get guys out once they know what's coming?

Waterloo, I have a feeling you're asking the wrong question here. It's not so much the "second game" as "late in the season". Oakland has faced him three times in his career, and his first outing of 2007 came against that team; he was within an out of a quality start.

Last year, he was dynamite in his first game against teams, and mincemeat in the second game. Will this trend continue? Can he continue to get guys out once they know what's coming?

Waterloo, I have a feeling you're asking the wrong question here. It's not so much the "second game" as "late in the season". Oakland has faced him three times in his career, and his first outing of 2007 came against that team; he was within an out of a quality start.

Looking at his game logs last year:

He faced Oakland on August 1 and pitched very well (2 R, 7 IP), but fared very poorly against them on September 30 (5 R, .7 IP). That may have been a late-season thing, to some extent.

But he faced Texas on August 6, and pitched well (0 R, 7 IP), and two starts later got blown out by them for 8 R (7 ER) in 2.7 IP (August 16). He followed that latter start with a decent showing against Boston.

In between the two Texas starts, he faced the Yankees and did pretty well (3 R, 2 ER, 6 IP); facing them again right after the Red Sox, and got beat up (8 R, 2.3 IP).

It's too early to know what any of that means, if it means anything. It's just something I'm on the lookout for.

Sure - but consider how the A's spent less. The four first-rounders all got slot. Brown got WAY under slot; Obenchain and Teahen were each around $150-200K below slot. The A's saved by punting much/most of the draft after that - for example, paying about 2/3 of slot to Steve Stanley, a clear non-prospect, in the second round.

I'm not arguing the A's made smart decisions in their cheapness, just that using fewer resources to extract equal talent is usally good.

An LHP in the high 80s/low 90s, with movement on his fastball, and the ability to locate the off-speed? That guy can pitch.

Sounds like the kind of guy who always owns the Red Sox.

Boston (Tavarez)
Toronto (possibly McGowan or Ohka)
Yankees (pick 'em)
Tampa Bay (probably anyone but Kazmir or Shields)
Cleveland (arguably Sowers)
Detroit (probably Durbin)
Minnesota (Ortiz or Ponson)
Kansas City (everyone but Meche and maybe Bannister)
Seattle (Jeff Weaver, amongst others)
Oakland (the five spot)
Texas (they're all a mess right now)
Atlanta (Redman, maybe Davies in the short term)
Philadelphia (possibly Eaton)
Florida (Obermuller)
Washington (Simontacchi, to start with)
St. Louis (almost anyone)
Pittsburgh (Armas, at this point)
Cubs (possibly five spot)
Houston (Albers)
Los Angeles of Chavez Ravine (Tomko)
Colorado (Buccholz)

That's fairly misleading, though, because a lot of different things are going on with those teams.

There's a bunch of teams who have talented MLB-ready guys who they are choosing not to bring up or have start (Boston, Detroit, TB, Cleveland, Minnesota, Dodgers, Colorado sort of, KC sort of). Plus teams with injury issues (Yankees, Oakland, sort of Atlanta, St Louis, Cubs). So, for half or so of the teams you list Saunders would be the same as he is with the Angels--- a depth starter who isn't really in the top 5.

I guess I see him as a slightly better than league-average depth guy who wouldn't be a top-two starter on any decent team and who wouldn't be in the rotation on many, if any, contenders with average health. Of course, as I noted earlier I do think he'd be in the rotation on a number of other teams, but that's true of 6th or 7th starters on a bunch of teams. This doesn't change that he's an asset, but not like has been implied.

Looking back at my earlier comments, they were probably unnecessarily confrontational. My apologies to Keith.

the #62 list is just for making the rotation, isn't it?
i'd still like to see halofan's list of the 20 teams saunders could be a #2 starter for.

otherwise, are you just arguing saunders could be in the rotation for many teams right now, given injuries and other problems? sure, and he could be for the angels if/when colon or escobar get injured again.

There's a bunch of teams who have talented MLB-ready guys who they are choosing not to bring up or have start (Boston, Detroit, TB, Cleveland, Minnesota, Dodgers, Colorado sort of, KC sort of). Plus teams with injury issues (Yankees, Oakland, sort of Atlanta, St Louis, Cubs). So, for half or so of the teams you list Saunders would be the same as he is with the Angels--- a depth starter who isn't really in the top 5.

Sure, maybe so, the list was all the teams where you could make an argument.

But the Yankees would probably be glad to have him in their system now, wouldn't they? That's all I'm saying.

A career minor league k/BB ratio of 2.40 doesn't seem all that impressive.

How many guys in the PCL and Texas League are better, though? He's operating in some very pitcher-hostile environments. Slack needs to be cut, and so if you've got some actual data to back up this assertion that 2.40 is inconsequential, by all means present it.

SP in the PCL 40+ ip (2007) with a K/BB ratio better than 2.4 and an ERA under 4.00:
Yovani Gallardo
Colby Lewis
Patrick Misch
Mike Wood
Matt Wright
Jack Cassel
Blake Hawksworth
Kasey Olenberger
Carlos Marmol

Sp in the Tex League 40+ip (2007) with a K/BB ratio better than 2.4 and an ERA under 4.00:
Greg Reynolds
Daniel Davidson
Michael Madsen
Eric Hurley
Andy Shipman
Joshua Geer
Chance Douglass
Ryan Mattheus
Roger Deago


Almost every team has someone like Brian Bannister- career minor league ERA 3.29, K/bb better than 3

Saunders in 104 major league innings has an ERA+ of 99 and an unimpressive K/BB of 66/45

sure he could start for most teams, but if he's a #2 your team has serious issues