Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Friday, April 02, 2004

Atlanta Braves

Released OF Gary Matthews Jr.

Do decisions based on spring training statistics that contradict a player’s entire career ever work out?  Little Sarge is no great shakes, but he’s a suitable 4th outfielder, something the Braves don’t feel they need.

Dan Szymborski Posted: April 02, 2004 at 04:39 AM | 9 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 
   101. Alan Posted: November 18, 2002 at 09:20 PM (#559508)
Oh, Colin, we all know how long it took you to finally sit down and write your dissertation. I'd have had it done it a couple of hours and it would have been so good, I wouldn't even have had to defend it.
   102. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: November 18, 2002 at 09:20 PM (#559509)
DLF: I've never heard of Ryan Baker, for what it's worth. He's certainly not a "name" prospect, even in the second or third tier of Atlanta's system. Seems to me to be a lot like that third guy that Schuerholtz shipped to LA in the Sheffield deal.

You know, "Brian Jordan, Odalis Perez and That Other Guy." Adam Baker is "that other guy" in relation to Tim Spooneybarger, of all people. I'd be shocked if he ever suited up in an MLB game.

Wait, no, this is a team being Loria-ed. Ryan Baker may very well start for them at some point.

s/
   103. Alan Posted: November 18, 2002 at 09:21 PM (#559510)
Damn, I forgot the spelling thing. That would have put me over the top.
   104. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: November 18, 2002 at 09:22 PM (#559511)
Yeah, what Alan said! I had like, five or six jobs in three distinct industries in the time it took you to jot down a few pages of psycho-babble.

Lazy European slackasses.

s/
   105. Ephus Posted: November 18, 2002 at 09:25 PM (#559512)
If Hampton makes a comeback, expect to hear a lot of people sing the praises of Leo Mazzone. I do not know whether there is something structurally wrong with Hampton or if his mechanics were screwed up, but he does seem to have been more effected by his time in Coors Field than most pitchers.

I do not know if Hampton will adjust well to Mazzone theory. Hampton simply has not thrown strikes and does not work quickly. If he does start throwing the ball in the strike zone more often, he should be good for at least 13 wins and 200 innings per season. Even at his reduced price, I do not think that is a good buy.
   106. Darren Posted: November 18, 2002 at 09:56 PM (#559515)
Darren--

Jim, I read that they saved about $15 mil. That's pretty good and they get a nice reliever and an decent CF (I still think Pierre can have some value). I think they did the right thing.

I am not a major league pitcher, so I guess I can't walk in these guys' shoes. However, if I were a pitcher of any stature, there is no way I would take the money and go to Coors Field. I can't think of a pitcher who has prospered there for more than a year or two.

Well, as driven as these guys are, it's not surprising that they want to take on the biggest challenge. Imagine if you were THE guy who could tame Coors? You'd have to go down as one of the all-time greats.

First Darryl Kile and now Mike Hampton have crashed and burned in Denver. Kile was able to make a pertial comeback in St. Louis. It will be interesting to see how well Hampton pitches away from the thin air.

Kile did more than make a partial comeback. He was as good or better after Coors than he was before it. I'd expect Hampton to get back near where he was, at least.
   107. Colin Posted: November 18, 2002 at 11:23 PM (#559518)
It's very very good for the first three years, but beyond that and for the big picture, i cannot fathom why Atlanta would commit $48million to a guy like Hampton now.
   108. Colin Posted: November 19, 2002 at 03:40 PM (#559525)
I do not know if Hampton will adjust well to Mazzone theory. Hampton simply has not thrown strikes and does not work quickly

I think in those respects he is in fact Mazzone-compatible. That is, check out some of Tom Glavine's seasonal walk numbers. He's hit as high as 97 walks allowed in a season, and is consistently in that 70+ range. Not quite as up there as Hampton, but not far below.

In Atlanta it's called "not giving in to the hitter", and is seen as a Good Thing. As a fan, it's one of the things that drives me nuts about Glavine. Sometimes I just yell at the TV, "Throw a strike, dammit!"

and expecting it to reappear might be like Waiting for Godot. And by that I mean a bit confusing and not terribly fun to watch. ;)

Damned snooty academics!
   109. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: November 19, 2002 at 03:59 PM (#559526)
Dr. K says: "Atlanta is indicating that it would rather have Hampton than Glavine. Age and salary differences aside, why would they think that's a good idea? "

The first set of $ numbers, when Atlanta was paying everything up front but nothing on the back end, did insinuate that. But the revised numbers, where Atlanta pays $2 mil in 2003, $2 mil in 2004 and $1.5 mil in 2005 but everything in the final three years suggests the exact opposite.

$2 mil is *half* of what they paid for Albie Lopez last year. It's only a half mil more than they (or their insurance) paid Dave Martinez last year. It's only a mil more than they paid Keith Lockhart.

The new numbers suggest, rather strongly I think, that the Braves plan on going out and getting at least one of the big FA pitchers, be it Glavine or Maddux. Regardless, the money they're paying Hampton over the next three years is already recouped by not paying Albie Lopez and Dave Martinez. They have every dollar they had last week to persue Glavine and Maddux.
   110. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 19, 2002 at 04:34 PM (#559528)
Any info on the throw-in? Ryan Baker, 24 year old reliever. I can't recall seeing his name on any lists of Braves top prospects.

That's because he isn't one. He spent most of this season in high-A ball at Myrtle Beach as a setup reliever (he did get a few innings at AA Greenville). He was old for the level, and posted a 3.72 ERA in one of the most pitcher-friendly environments in the minor leagues.

-- MWE
   111. Colin Posted: November 20, 2002 at 04:56 PM (#559532)
Brave should not trade Kevin millwood. Yeah, he's been erratic, but he's shown promise, has performed atthe MLB level, and he's an actual Braves starter under 37!
   112. MM1f Posted: November 23, 2002 at 05:02 AM (#559534)
Zut!

Relievers are far less valuable than starters and all but couldn't the Braves have given up someone in AA or AAA. I mean, why would Loria give a damn? Spoonybarger showed some nasty, NASTY stuff at times.
   113. Mr. Crowley Posted: December 16, 2002 at 11:13 PM (#560955)
It's a .... aw, dammit.
   114. ColonelTom Posted: December 16, 2002 at 11:41 PM (#560963)
If the Braves have any clue at all, they'll sign David Ortiz, who was just released by the Twins to make room for their Rule 5 pick. He's a huge upgrade over last year's options, and certainly over Helms.

What was the point of this for the Brewers? And for that matter, what is the point of the Brewers themselves?
   115. VegasRobb Posted: December 17, 2002 at 12:00 AM (#560965)
I go back even farther.

"Larry Doby is black?"
   116. Jason Posted: December 17, 2002 at 12:09 AM (#560970)
All the comments about why do the Brewers exist following the signing of Royce were over blown, but the Brewers had exactly 3 major league assets Sexson, Sheets, and a surprisingly effective bullpen with the knack for replacing guys. Only one out of that trio was likely to be dealt for help. We got and blow it on Wes freakin Helms! I here Montreal has a pretty good team. As someone else said Colorado got Cust for Mike Myers.
   117. ColonelTom Posted: December 17, 2002 at 12:12 AM (#560971)
Ray King would have had a fair amount of value in July, when a contending team needed to add a LOOGY down the stretch. Instead, the Brewers dealt King when there were plenty of relievers on the market during the offseason, and got less than nothing in return. Blech.
   118. Mr. Crowley Posted: December 17, 2002 at 12:38 AM (#560976)
General Madine.
   119. Greg Franklin Posted: December 17, 2002 at 01:51 AM (#560982)
Kevin Jordan, in my case.

Isn't King's rep (besides his pitching) that of being a fat guy?
   120. Joel Barrett Posted: December 17, 2002 at 02:11 AM (#560983)
"However, take a look at Fred's performance at the TED. He doesn't have the juice to reach the bleachers in the power alleys. He does just fine in bandboxes like Tropicana, Wrigley and the old "Launching Pad" but at the TED he sends majestic flies to the warning track with regularity."

1) Over the last 3 years, McGriff has hit 4 HRs in 37 ABs at Turner Field, with a .622 SLG and a .979 OPS. There are obviously sample size issues, but overall I'd have to disagree with your observations about his power.

2) PLEASE don't call Turner Field "the TED". It's a pathetic and embarrasing ripoff of the nickname of Bank One Ballpark coined by some of the less bright members of the media in Atlanta. Please don't humor them.
   121. DCW3_ Posted: December 17, 2002 at 02:14 AM (#560984)
For me, oddly enough, it was Luther Hackman.
   122. Bob T Posted: December 17, 2002 at 02:33 AM (#560985)
I always thought Larry Harlow was black.
   123. MM1f Posted: December 17, 2002 at 02:34 AM (#560987)
Couple things...

One, what good does moving Castilla to first do them, he was fine defensively. It's his bat that was the problem

Two, sad to see Helms go. It looks to be a good trade, and Helms needs some regular at bats to develop...But i've always liked for some reason. He's from my home state, always appeared to be a good kid and all.
   124. Edmundo Posted: December 17, 2002 at 03:47 AM (#560993)
Jacko wrote: <I>Frank Thomas, Ken Harvey.
   125. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 17, 2002 at 05:44 AM (#560995)
I thought that Daryle Ward was white for the longest time, though in fairness ESPN used to have some random AAAA white guy's photo on his bio page.
   126. sean gilman Posted: December 17, 2002 at 06:44 AM (#560999)
I thought Joe Mays and Eric Milton were black until I saw them in the playoffs last year.
   127. Ned Garvin: Male Prostitute Posted: December 17, 2002 at 08:14 AM (#561002)
I've never had a baseball "Whoa, he's black/white" moment, but I was quite shocked when I learned that Harriet Beecher Stowe was white.
   128. Floyd Thursby Posted: December 17, 2002 at 08:43 PM (#561037)
Ortiz and Moss are both very tradable commodities. I think Sabean took the cheaper, similar pitcher now because he didn't want to be stuck with unacceptable offers for Ortiz. If he can't flip Moss for cheap outfield help, he's rid of Ortiz' salary. But teams like the Expos/Reds/etc..., should be more interested in what Moss is making, and can offer low-salary in return.
   129. Colin Posted: December 17, 2002 at 08:57 PM (#561047)
I've wondered if Marquis may not be better off for a few years in the bullpen, anyway. He just hasn't been able to consistently go deep into games, and I want to think his splits are stronger in the early innings.

It's all up to Maddux and Boras now as to whether Maddux accepts arbitration. Boras may well look at the rest of the rotation and presume that he won't be able to leverage arbitration into a longer term deal, though.
   130. Bill Posted: December 17, 2002 at 09:29 PM (#561051)
Any possibility that they may try to deal Millwood and/or Marquis and/or a pitching prospect for a corner infielder? To the Red Sox or Rangers perhaps?
   131. Bill Posted: December 17, 2002 at 10:18 PM (#561039)
I know people rarely pay attention to the hitting ability of pitchers, but with Ortiz and Hampton in the rotation the Braves have a subtle little offensive edge. The Sabermetric Encyclopedia shows them combining for 16 RCAP in 2002. Of course, they need every edge they can get on offense.
   132. Brian Posted: December 17, 2002 at 10:25 PM (#561058)
It strikes me as odd that the Phillies, who so pubilicly announced their search for another pitcher have been unable to land just one. Yet, the Braves, whose two best pitchers, and for that matter two of the games best pitchers, go on the market. And while some of the moves my be a tad risky, they have managed to set up another good veteran rotation, getting byrd, ortiz, and hampton. If they retain maddux, they potentially have one of the best rotations in baseball (again).
   133. Brian Posted: December 17, 2002 at 11:04 PM (#561061)
The next albie lopez?
   134. Mikαεl Posted: December 17, 2002 at 11:16 PM (#561064)
Eric R,

I think the upshot to this signing is that Kevin Millwood will find a new home in the next week. Maddux could come in at 20 million, and they'd be way over budget - they'll need cheap alternatives like Marquis.
   135. Christian (ruz) Posted: December 17, 2002 at 11:25 PM (#561065)
What I find interesting about this is that it raises the very real possibility that neither Maddux nor Glavine will return to the Braves.

I'd say it's more than a possibility that Glavine won't return to the Braves. At least, I bet the Mets think so.
   136. MM1f Posted: December 18, 2002 at 03:06 AM (#561041)
Nah, he's too short for 1B, and you don't need much athleticsim for first (see: Mo Vaughn).

But he could play second or third is Giles is traded, he seems quick enough.

His hitting #s last year: .344/.354/.516
   137. MM1f Posted: December 18, 2002 at 03:08 AM (#561042)
"is Giles is traded"

Blah, that should say IF

...IF Giles is traded....
   138. Swedish Chef Posted: December 18, 2002 at 03:28 AM (#561043)
The peripherals sported by Ortiz aren't much more exciting than Moss'
   139. Cris E Posted: December 18, 2002 at 05:56 PM (#561029)
I'm a radio guy (too cheap to pay for cable) with a family (no free time for Sat afternoon games) so my mind's eye view of guys I've never seen is often wrong: Peter Bergeron, Brad Wilkerson, Garrett Anderson, Troy OLeary, Marcus Giles, Dave Roberts, Aaron Boone (joking, joking...)
   140. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 04:10 AM (#561071)
"How could the Royals not match that offer? 2/$10 isn't that much to pay even for a potential flameout."
   141. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 05:09 AM (#561335)
I'd rather say goodbye to Maddux than Millwood (Assuming Millwood can be signed to a long-term deal at a semi-reasonable price).

I wouldn't mind Ortiz or Marquis going if they get good under-30ish value in return though...

As a side note, is there any chance Castilla can be dumped?
   142. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: December 20, 2002 at 03:54 PM (#561342)
New Guy:

Aside from the rules against trading Byrd, I don't really see the logic in moving Giles/Pitcher for Hill/Karros if the money's a wash. If you're not dumping salary (i.e. Millwood for Nick Johnson, which I would do in a heartbeat) then just stick with the rotation as is, stick Marquis in long relief/RH setup and find Matt Franco's number again.

Or just sign Fred McGriff to something not-too-stupid and be done with it.
   143. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 20, 2002 at 06:39 PM (#561346)
From scattered comments made in interviews, I think Dave Littlefield might be getting ready to shop Craig Wilson. Would the Braves possibly be interested in giving up Marquis for him?
   144. ColonelTom Posted: December 20, 2002 at 07:24 PM (#561350)
Millwood just went to the Phillies for catcher Johnny Estrada.

ESPN link
   145. Bill Posted: December 20, 2002 at 08:01 PM (#561351)
Can anyone explain why the Braves would give a top-flight starter away? And to their division rival? Surely they could have gotten one of the players (Nick Johnson, Shea Hillenbrand, whoever) bandied about in the Colon talks?
   146. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 08:10 PM (#561352)
WHAT THE GOD DAMN HELL!?!?!

JOHNNY F-ing ESTRADA!?!???

From espn.com---
   147. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 08:10 PM (#561353)
WHAT THE GOD DAMN HELL!?!?!

JOHNNY F-ing ESTRADA!?!???

From espn.com---
   148. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 08:10 PM (#561354)
WHAT THE GOD DAMN HELL!?!?!

JOHNNY F-ing ESTRADA!?!???

From espn.com---
   149. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 11:49 PM (#561035)
My little racial surprise was Karl Durrell, the former UCLA wideout and Denver Broncos WRs coach who UCLA just hired to replace Bob Toledo as head coach.
   150. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 11:59 PM (#561355)
Oh, I thought that didn't post

oh well...
   151. MM1f Posted: December 20, 2002 at 11:59 PM (#561356)
Oh, I thought that didn't post

oh well...
   152. Bill Posted: January 06, 2003 at 08:53 PM (#562371)
I have no recollection at all about Fick's defensive capabilities behind the plate. I'm sure someone will enlighten us on that. If he's not awful, he'd be a big help to the Braves if (when?) Javy gets hurt.
   153. User unknown in local recipient table (Craig B) Posted: January 06, 2003 at 09:10 PM (#562372)
You know, we should give serious consideration to this actually being some sort of trap.
   154. Bill Posted: January 06, 2003 at 10:50 PM (#562382)
I don't know, Russ. I thought Maddux insists on pitching only to catchers who don't hit as well as he does.

As for the all-star musing, just remember it wasn't that long ago when Ron Coomer was the Twins representative.
   155. True Blue n/k/a "DeJesusFreak" Posted: January 06, 2003 at 11:01 PM (#562383)
"What puzzles me is the Braves spending over a million extra bucks on a guy like Fick right after dumping their 2nd-best pitcher in a panic due to alleged money concerns."

My thoughts, exactly (not to mention taking on Byrd and a part of Hampton).
   156. MM1f Posted: January 06, 2003 at 11:38 PM (#562387)
Decent pickup, but I don't get the idea of dumping Millwood to clear money for 10 Robert Ficks...

These next two things are off topic but since this is the most recent post, I figured I could get an answer

One, any word on how bad the injury the Mets' Reyes suffered?

Also from ESPN.com
   157. MM1f Posted: January 06, 2003 at 11:38 PM (#562388)
Decent pickup, but I don't get the idea of dumping Millwood to clear money for 10 Robert Ficks...

These next two things are off topic but since this is the most recent post, I figured I could get an answer

One, any word on how bad the injury the Mets' Reyes suffered?

Also from ESPN.com
   158. Bill Posted: January 06, 2003 at 11:52 PM (#562389)
Who gets their baseball news from the Times? Murray Chass is generally referred to here as "Mattress Murray" since it's rumored that he never actually gets out of bed.

The report I saw said Reyes was day-to-day.
   159. NTNgod Posted: January 07, 2003 at 01:41 AM (#562392)
In other breaking transaction news, Chris Truby signed a minor league deal with the DEVIL Rays.

Is this confirmation of what has rumored for many years? :)
   160. Greg Franklin Posted: January 07, 2003 at 02:34 AM (#562394)
Hell's bells! Since the God squad didn't turn out as expected (Russ Johnson), they must be turning to the dark side.
   161. Brian Posted: January 23, 2003 at 04:45 PM (#564142)
If that happens, Hernandez becomes the closer because of his "pedigree" and the Braves run is over.

Why is that? If Smoltz can handle starting, I'd take 200 innings from Smoltz over 80 in nominally high-leverage situations. The Braves bullpen is made up of a few situational lefties and a bunch of 'them guys', and I see no reason why Hernandez would be a better or worse choice for closer than anybody else, except maybe Darren Holmes.
   162. ColonelTom Posted: January 23, 2003 at 06:09 PM (#564149)
Jose Cabrera was going along quite nicely last year until the Brewers started playing with him as a starter. After two starts (including 5 shutout innings against the Cubs on May 18), things went downhill fast. The Brewers had him face one batter on two days' rest after that start, then ran him out there the next day in a rout to take a beating (6 runs in 1 2/3 IP, including 4 HR). He wasn't the same after that, and really got worse after he was left to take another beating as a starter (Aug. 24 vs. Pittsburgh -- 11 ER, 11 H in 5 1/3 IP, 116 pitches). I think that qualifies as pitcher abuse!

Don't forget that Cabrera posted a 153 ERA+ in 2001 with Atlanta. He's worth a shot for the Twins.
   163. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: January 23, 2003 at 08:41 PM (#564155)
General consensus seems to be that this is 1) another St. Leo Reclamation Project (tm), and 2) Hampton/Byrd/Ortiz insurance via the Smoltz-back-to-rotation route.

I agree wholeheartedly on #1. I promised myself, after the Holmes/Hammond miracle, that I would never question the acquisition of reasonably priced bullpen arms, no matter who they were. Question the offensive moves? Yes, certainly. All the time. But when it comes to the pen, In Leo We Trust.

As for #2, I see the logic quite clearly, and I understand the "if Smoltz has to start then that's a problem" argument. But isn't it just as likely that Smoltz is Jason Marquis insurance? Fifth starter workload for Smoltz' arm? Marquis to the bullpen where (if he falters again in 2003) his two pitch repitiore and "fastball fastball fastball" mentality might be more successful?

And doesn't the fact that we can all easily put together these contingency plans suggest that the Braves' staff, top to bottom, is once again strong via replaceability? Smoltz goes down? Hernandez and Holmes are there. Problems with the rotation? Give the ball to the former CYA winner every fifth day. Ray King getting crap for being a former Brewer? "Hey, the 40 year old was a Royal!"

For $600,000 and with the St. Leo Experience behind him, this is not a bad signing.
   164. bob mong Posted: January 23, 2003 at 09:46 PM (#564160)
I second Arthur's question: How did you come up with that projection?

And here is another question: Many of you are speculating about Smoltz returning to the rotation - is there any other case, in MLB history, of a successful starter moving to the bullpen, being extremely successful there, and then being moved back to the rotation (and succeeding?)?

Lots of pitchers have moved from rotation to bullpen (Eck, for one) and been very successful in both places, and I imagine a few have moved from bullpen to rotation (Lowe) and been successful in both places, but has anyone ever made two moves and been successful in all three places?

I would be mostly interested in pitchers who, when they were in the bullpen, were the closer (had majority of team's saves).
   165. John Posted: January 23, 2003 at 10:52 PM (#564161)
Has anyone ever made two moves and been successful in all three places? I would be mostly interested in pitchers who, when they were in the bullpen, were the closer (had majority of team's saves).

Cool question.

Hoyt Wilhelm, aged 35, only managed an ERA+ of 173 in a season of (mostly) full-time SP duties. No wonder they sent him back to the 'pen.

Rick Aguilera moved from decent starter, to good closer, back to one season as a league-average starter, and then back to being a pretty good closer.

Jeff Russell, though not a closer, was an effective long reliever for the Rangers in 86-87, an All-Star SP for them in 88, and Rolaids Fireman of the Year (tm) in 89.

Dave Righetti, a starter at the beginning of his career, returned to the rotation his final season and was OK. That's pushing the bounds of the question.
   166. bob mong Posted: January 23, 2003 at 11:02 PM (#564162)
For example, if Derek Lowe was someday converted back to a closer, he would be the kind of player I am talking about (closer-starter-closer).

Al McBean made two switches (starter-closer-starter) but wasn't especially successful on his second go-round as a starter. In 1962 he won 15 games for the Pirates, in 1964 and 1965 he saved 40 games (combined), and in 1968 he returned to the rotation, winning 9 games in 28 starts. Those two starting years (1962 & 1968) were the only two years, in his career, in which he got more than 8 starts.

Bobby Shantz also made two switches (starter-closer-starter). Between 1952 and 1953 he went 42-17 as a starter; in 1956 he was the "closer" for the Kansas City As (he saved 9 games; the team had 18). In 1957 he went 11-5 in 21 starts, with a 147 ERA+. Thereafter he mostly relieved, though never as the closer.

Bob Shaw made two switches as well (starter-closer-starter). Between 1959 and 1962 he went 58-42 as a starter (with his ERA+ ranging from 93 to 139); in 1963 he saved 13 games (out of 25 team saves); in 1965 he went 16-9 with an ERA+ of 137 as a starter.

Hoyt Wilhelm makes the list as well (closer-starter-closer). In 1953 he saved 15 games for the Giants; in 1959 he won 16 games for the Orioles as a starter; this was his only year with 20 or more starts; in 1961, 1963-1965, and 1970 (at age 46!) he was his team's closer, being credited with at least 50% of his team's saves in each year.

Here are the list of (post 1949) players who were closers (had >= 50% of team saves) at least once in their careers and were also "successful" starters (>= 20 starts and >= 15 wins) at least once in their careers:

Year(s) as a closer and year(s) as a "successful" starter are given.

Dennis Eckersely (closer: 1988-1997, successful starter: 1978-1979)
   167. Dan Szymborski Posted: January 23, 2003 at 11:10 PM (#564163)
The projection is from a DIPS-based projection system that I've been working with.
   168. dlf Posted: January 23, 2003 at 11:16 PM (#564164)
Dan,

If you are using a DIPS-type system, shouldn't that *improve* Hernandez's ratings? The Royals allowed a BA on BIP of .296, the Braves .270. Similarly, Hernandez' own $H of .323 was significantly worse than his own team's figure. So Hernandez benefits twice: (1) better defenders AND (2) likelihood of reverting back towards team norm.
   169. Dan Szymborski Posted: January 24, 2003 at 12:18 AM (#564168)
I haven't incorporated team defensive predictions yet. That's down the road. There has to be some study of defensive age curves first.

Hernandez' DIPS ERA for 2002 is significantly lower than his real ERA. It was higher in 2001, however and almost a full run higher than his real numbers in 2000.

There's also the real issue of aging. While I've gone through enough data to know that there's really very little decline in pitching performance through the 30s, that changes when you look at 37-40 year olds. Hernandez losing some of his fastball is pretty dangerous for him; without the plus fastball, batters are going to be able to watch the splitter miss the strike zone.

Lastly, there's the problem that I did a ton of work on the spreadsheet yesterday in the middle of the night (just to make projections, there are some 50 columns) and I dropped a very important digit off of dSO which boosted Hernandez' ERA by about 3-tenths of a run.
   170. bob mong Posted: January 24, 2003 at 01:27 AM (#564169)
...and I dropped a very important digit off of dSO which boosted Hernandez' ERA by about 3-tenths of a run.

So...the ERA you listed should be 4.35, not 4.65?
   171. Dan Szymborski Posted: January 24, 2003 at 01:46 AM (#564170)
Actually, even more.

5-4, 4.13 ERA, 61 innings, 63 hits, 28 earned runs, 8 homers, 18 walks, 44 strikeouts.

One screwy number in any DIPS formula *really* throws a monkeywrench into the works.
   172. Bill Posted: January 24, 2003 at 05:01 AM (#564173)
Per Michael Wolverton, Hernandez's Adjusted Runs Prevented (a better measure of reliever performance that ERA+ I think) in 2002 was 3.4. While not embarrassing, this trailed everyone who got significant relief innings for the Braves (including Lopez and Spooneybarger) and badly trails the incumbents Smoltz, Holmes and King. But it does suggest the possibility that with some help from Mazzone and a better defense he can be well worth the money.
   173. fracas' hope springs eternal Posted: April 11, 2003 at 03:26 PM (#565590)
The new and not improved Brave rotation already seems to be falling apart, with the possibility of Byrd not even stepping on the mound this year becoming very real. Is that a sentence?

If you're Peter Gammons. And Dan Szymborski.
   174. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 11, 2003 at 05:53 PM (#565593)
When I heard about this move, my mind immediately went to a scene from "Chicago": And now, an act... of DESPERATION!

As a side note, why is it "tendinitis" and not "tendonitis", since "tendon" doesn't have any I's in it?
   175. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 11, 2003 at 09:27 PM (#565596)
"Medical spellings are sometimes odd."

Maybe it's just a side effect of doctors having sloppy penmanship?
   176. Brian Posted: May 13, 2003 at 11:12 PM (#558610)
It could be worse... 1988 Rochester Red Wings (Baltimore AAA) had both pitchers named Michael Anthony Smith.
   177. Dan Szymborski Posted: May 27, 2003 at 03:41 PM (#552022)
Don't forget, the Orioles had the best record in the AL in 1997. One or two years away looks way to soon now, but I still think the cracks are showing in the Braves organization.
   178. MM1f Posted: May 28, 2003 at 03:25 AM (#552023)
Please, the Braves system has been kept in good shape (Wainwright, Betemit, Marte, Francouer, McBride, and a whole boatload of other good pitcher) to keep them stocked with good, young, cheap talent for at very least the next 5 years.
   179. Ned Garvin: Male Prostitute Posted: August 30, 2003 at 12:15 AM (#567641)
This sounds like yet another test of the miraculous properties of a certain Braves pitching coach. I've seen Wright pitch in San Diego, it hasn't been pretty.
   180. Michael Posted: August 30, 2003 at 12:30 AM (#567642)
Ya know, I don't think much of this either. But I've pretty much given up on looking at the twisted wreckage that the Braves pick up and saying "That'll never work." 'Cause half of the time, it does...
   181. Clemenza Posted: August 30, 2003 at 01:48 AM (#567643)
I've managed to catch Jaret on TV quite a few times this season, and every time he's been lit up. It's pretty amazing. You'd think that at least once I would have seen him throw a scoreless inning.
   182. MM1f Posted: August 30, 2003 at 03:13 AM (#567645)
Does is this the waivers where he has to stay on the Braves 25-man, or just on the 40 man?
   183. MM1f Posted: August 30, 2003 at 03:13 AM (#567646)
*ahem*

"Does this" should read "Is this"
   184. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 30, 2003 at 04:25 AM (#567647)
Bad pitcher! Bad! No biscuit!
   185. Michael Posted: August 30, 2003 at 08:49 PM (#567651)
Inning one of the Jaret Wright Era has been completed! (OK, so maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration, but he did get through the inning giving up only one hit...)
   186. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: August 31, 2003 at 01:36 AM (#567652)
And that was a cheap blooper over the 2B's head.
   187. Darren Posted: August 31, 2003 at 03:27 AM (#567653)
Mazzone's secret peptalk: "Just go out there, and stop with all the sucking. Focus on being good. Sure, sucking is fun, but only once in a while. Most the time, you're better off pitching well. So, just do that. And remember, don't go sucking out there. Okay, you're now an ace reliever. Go out there and throw 80 innings with a 2.50 ERA."
   188. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: August 31, 2003 at 04:32 PM (#567655)
Jaret Wright:

<ul> Year/ERA+

1998 102
   189. MM1f Posted: September 01, 2003 at 02:14 PM (#567660)
Anyone notice Will Cunnane of all people has been good in both Richmond and the majors?

Every time I see his line in the box score it goes something like this, 1-IP 0-H 0-BB 1-K.
   190. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: September 01, 2003 at 03:54 PM (#567662)
Actually, I like the anonymity, even if it means putting up with Piazzas and Ackbars. It makes things feel more creative and informal to me.

Plus, I hate slashcode.
   191. Veee Posted: September 02, 2003 at 05:53 AM (#567674)
I'm partial to "Jack Cressend Fresh"
   192. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: September 03, 2003 at 12:56 PM (#567690)
I'm the wit. Dial is supposed to do news and insight, but, well, you get what you pay for there.

Not everyone can be as funny as me.
   193. MM1f Posted: September 23, 2003 at 08:03 PM (#567784)
Uh oh.
   194. WillYoung Posted: September 23, 2003 at 08:19 PM (#567785)
Dan, the power here (Foggy Bottom in DC) only flickered but part of our campus just got power back yesterday. I walked down to the Potomac around 7pm and talked to some newscasters who couldn't believe someone was stupid enough to actually walk to the river during a hurricane. Anyway, if you're curious about how a college student spent the hurricane, check out my hurricane page.
   195. Mr. Crowley Posted: September 23, 2003 at 11:04 PM (#567786)
It's a trap!
   196. Gold Star for Robothal Posted: September 24, 2003 at 04:15 PM (#567787)
The Admiral Ackabar posts wasn't really that funny the first time and it's not getting any better with repetiion.
   197. flournoy Posted: September 24, 2003 at 08:33 PM (#567789)
Warren, you play for the Tigers. Oh...you said "Major League" job.
   198. BrandonMO (U L) Posted: November 25, 2003 at 03:36 AM (#568544)
Didn't Gary Sr also play for the Braves?
   199. Ziggy Posted: November 25, 2003 at 04:13 AM (#568546)
Looks like a good pickup. A useful and cheap spare part.
   200. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 25, 2003 at 04:44 PM (#568547)
Little Sarge is a pretty good outfield backup, and he won't kill you if he needs to fill in as a starter for a couple of weeks. He was a bloody miracle for the Pirates in '01, coming along just when the team needed him most.
Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
1k5v3L
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.6656 seconds
47 querie(s) executed