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

Sunday, March 20, 2005

Mets - Acquired Ishii

New York Mets - Acquired P Kazuhisa Ishii from the Los Angeles Dodgers for C-1B Jason Phillips

Zambrano and Ishii in the same rotation?  To see four balls more often, you’ll have to go rent a gay porno.

Will Ishii be terrible in Trachsel’s absence?  Probably not; if the Mets are good enough to compete, having Ishii in the 5th spot won’t hinder them enough to send them to the basement.  It seems at this point that the Dodgers will pay Ishii’s salary, so it’s not too bad for the Mets in the long run.

The Dodgers do get a little help.  I really don’t think Navarro is ready and other than that, the short-term catching situation is bleak, especially for a contender.  Phillips won’t hit like he did in 2003 but I think he’ll hit something like 330/400 for the Dodgers which isn’t a gaping hole, which is the likely situation now.

Dan Szymborski Posted: March 20, 2005 at 03:29 AM | 117 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 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. CraigK Posted: March 20, 2005 at 03:54 AM (#1207685)
Primey for Dan for the "gay porno" line.
   2. Lawyerhoya Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:04 AM (#1207696)
This is part of a devious plan by Omar to get Piazza to renounce his salary and disappear by mid-May. Can you imagine his creaky bones trying to catch the 30 pitch innings these two will generate?
   3. nygiants5811 Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:08 AM (#1207701)
Where is this confirmed? I haven't seen anything official and I'm still looking....
   4. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:17 AM (#1207711)
To see four balls more often, you'll have to go rent a gay porno.

Why rent? As Rosie Clooney used to sing, just "come on 'a my house, 'a my house . . . ."

If the Dodgers really are paying the salary (or even a lot of it), then I really have no problem with this deal. How much do you expect to get for a back-up catcher, anyway? The most important thing this deal does is restore the depth of starters the Mets lost when Trachsel went down. Now, they have some options if (when?) one of their other four starters goes down sometime along the way.

Meanwhile, an encouraging article in the Times about Heilman, and Peterson working with him to restore the delivery he was successful with in college. Just the kind of thing a good pitching coach should try with a struggling young pitcher. It probably won't help, but at least they're trying some new stuff with him instead of just giving up.
   5. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:25 AM (#1207719)
This is just not a big deal.
   6. Шĥy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:30 AM (#1207734)
I concur with the Primey nomination. Sums this trade up very nicely.
   7. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:46 AM (#1207766)
And can all of you bloggers stop talking about how he won't give you innings? HE WAS CRACKED IN THE SKULL BY A LINE DRIVE.
   8. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:50 AM (#1207779)
From the Ed Kranepool Society:

If this happens it's a ####### catastrophe!

Are you people ####### kidding me?
   9. akrasian Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:58 AM (#1207799)
The line drive was in 2002. And lost in that was that he was pitching horribly for the previous month and a half, and was getting close to losing his rotation spot at the time of the injury.

By horribly, btw, I mean he had an ERA of 7.57 his last 8 starts in 2002. The game he took the line drive in the skull he had walked 4 and given up two homeruns in the first 3.1 innings.

But while Ishii does have virtues, what doesn't get talked about is how the bullpen has to warm up frequently when he's on the mound. At his best he does a balancing act, letting men on and then getting out of it. But pretty much every game there are several times in the first five innings that he is on the edge of giving up a bunch of runs - and it can happen quickly with him, so the bullpen must get ready once he lets a couple of runners on base.

As a pitcher to fill a hole for a half season, he won't be the worst thing - but unless the Dodgers are paying the buyout and the majority of his salary he'll be expensive for what he gives the Mets.
   10. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:59 AM (#1207800)
Zambrano and Ishii in the same rotation? To see four balls more often, you'll have to go rent a gay porno.

Primey for Dan! How long did it take you to think of that one?

As for the deal, UGH. Jae Seo can't possibly be worse than this guy. He's horrible. 98/99 BB/K? Come on. Thats preposterous. So who will join me in my Zambrano-Ishii boycott?
   11. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:00 AM (#1207805)
Have fun with his .390 slugging percentage.
   12. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:08 AM (#1207832)
The only positive of the Ishii deal is that it will finally uncover the farce that is Rick Peterson. Pitching guru, my ass.
   13. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:11 AM (#1207841)
ANOTHER BS charge call . . .
   14. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:12 AM (#1207850)
Sam, is everybody here crazy but us?
   15. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:18 AM (#1207872)
I can see not wanting Ishii at all. But to think this is some disaster -- or to think giving up Jason Phillips is some high price to pay -- I just don't get.

Ishii is certainly the kind of pitcher I don't like; I want someone who throws strikes. But this is just not that bad, for a 5th starter it'll be OK.
   16. baudib Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:25 AM (#1207892)
I think the trade's pretty good. I don't see much of any upside in Phillips.

Ishii -- he could be bad, but I don't see it as likely. On the other hand, he's capable of pitching 16 good games a year. anyone who can do that can pitch 10 good games in 16, and if he does that, it'll be a steal.

I don't see that Ginter or Seo have much chance, if any, of doing that. As to what's likely, it's likely that Ishii will have a 4.20-4.50ish ERA and be around 6-5, 5-5, 5-6, which is perhaps what Seo or Ginter would do. I actually think Ishii is a good upside gamble.
   17. Joshemy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:30 AM (#1207899)
Sam, is everybody here crazy but us?

I don't think I am.

I don't like Ishii the pitcher, but I've agreed, this is nothing to get really worked up over. Phillips is a backup catcher... that is equal worth to take a shot on Ishii...

I'm not optimistic it will work out great, but its not a disaster...
   18. Imperabo Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:37 AM (#1207919)
But while Ishii does have virtues, what doesn't get talked about is how the bullpen has to warm up frequently when he's on the mound.

Great point Akrasian.
   19. Joshemy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:38 AM (#1207921)
And can all of you bloggers stop talking about how he won't give you innings? HE WAS CRACKED IN THE SKULL BY A LINE DRIVE.

And he also has a 5.5 IP/GS career line...

Just saying.
   20. baudib Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:41 AM (#1207931)
I think Peterson should try to get Ishii to somehow get more groundballs. Ishii gets bailed out a lot by GIDPs for a guy who's a pretty extreme flyball pitcher. With the guys he puts on base, he needs them.
   21. Dag Nabbit: secretary of the World Banana Forum Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:04 AM (#1207960)
Last year the Dodgers had a team H% of .279. Ishii had a H% of .254.

Is he an anti-Voros pitcher? Well, in '03 the Dodgers posted a .280 mark and Ishii had a .289 mark. In '02 LA was at .270 and Ishii was at .279. Uh-oh.

So last year he allowed 15 fewer hits than his teams H% says he should have, he doesn't seem to be one of those Charlie Hough types that can defy this.

Last year the Mets had a team H% of .284, though team H%s can change from year to year and they did just get Beltran.

Looking it up, he is an extreme flyball pitcher last year (0.64!!). That would explain the low H%. If he keeps on allowing all those flyballs, especially in this park and with this OF, he might be OK.

That being said, it couldn't hurt if he, ya know, threw the occasional strike or something.
   22. Tom S Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:05 AM (#1207961)
I think Peterson should try to get Ishii to pitch well. He gets into a lot of trouble by pitching poorly, most of which could be avoided by being a better pitcher.
   23. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:18 AM (#1207972)
Fun with splits: Ishii against Atlanta in 3 starts (0-1 record):

11 IP
11 H
11 ER
11 K
10 BB

A regular Brave killer, huh?
   24. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:30 AM (#1207983)
Just remember guys, when Ishii posts a 7.50 ERA this year, don't say I didn't warn you.
   25. Old Matt Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:32 AM (#1207987)
I'm a little ticked.
   26. Old Matt Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:33 AM (#1207991)
Also, this means the Mets will go out and acquire Charles Johnson.

Ishii + Johnson for Phillips? Sorry, major loss here.
   27. baudib Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:42 AM (#1208001)
Make sure you bookmark this thread for "I told you so's"
   28. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:52 AM (#1208005)
Just remember guys, when Ishii posts a 7.50 ERA this year, don't say I didn't warn you.

OK. And if Zambrano takes a major step forward, and Ishii gives us a 90-100 ERA+, don't expect me to hold my tongue at how quickly you gave up on Peterson, OFF. He just has too good a track record to jump ship after one full season.
   29. baudib Posted: March 20, 2005 at 07:01 AM (#1208018)
Hey, I'm first in line to pat myself on the back if Zambrano outpitches Kazmir.
   30. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:08 AM (#1208159)
Jason Phillips looks actually pretty decent, and is better than that giant pile of ass that was Dodger's catching last year.

This move also puts Depodesta back in my "good" book after he moved into the "bad" with the Lowe signing. It takes a man of intelligence and skill to get ANYTHING for Ishii.
   31. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:21 AM (#1208160)
are you people insane? ishii is a perfectly decent 5th starter, and we're giving him up for a backup catcher that's likely PAST his prime. you want to say it's nothing more than a wash, fine. but to say it's a disaster is like saying lochner v. new york was a prime example of the rights of the state overrule those of private contracts.
   32. The Adam Dunn Effort #44 Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:23 AM (#1208161)
Ishii was maddening. Unhittable at times, and then the next week, not making it out of the third inning. Not the kind of pitcher you want to have to use in the post season. Ishii is like russian roulette.

Hopefully Phillips will have a rebound in LA, akin to another ex New Yorker, Jeff Weaver. That is, if the trade goes through.
   33. manchestermets Posted: March 20, 2005 at 12:31 PM (#1208163)
But to think this is some disaster -- or to think giving up Jason Phillips is some high price to pay -- I just don't get.

I think the point is that there's no evidence to think that Ishii will do any better than Jae Seo could do - yes, he strikes out more batters, but he also gives up more walks than Seo, and slightly more home runs. On that basis, since they already have Seo, any price is too high for something they can get for free.

Furthermore, while it's nice to think that Piazza will catch 120 games this year and as such his backup isn't all that important, there is every chance he will miss a fair chunk, and even for 40 games I'd rather have Jason Phillips's career ERA+ of 90 than Castro's 73.
   34. Chris Dial Posted: March 20, 2005 at 02:22 PM (#1208173)
I agree with #33. We have someone as good already.
   35. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 03:53 PM (#1208193)
Not according to Rick. And we all know Peterson's pitching acumen is infallible.
   36. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:19 PM (#1208202)
We have someone as good already.

At worst -- at worst -- that makes this trade a minor mistake, giving up a not-very-valuable asset for a redundant piece.

But even if it's true, I repeat: since when is it a bad thing to give up a back-up catcher for a serviceable major league starter? On the theory that you already have one? The Mets are quite likely to need Seo, Ginter, and Ishii along the way. There is a very good chance -- too good, in my book -- that Seo and Ginter together simply will not be enough to handle the starting and long relief chores that are likely to come their way with the Mets' staff. I'd rather have a third guy who is basically their equal than Jason Phillips. If I had my druthers, it'd be a more reliable strike-thrower than Ishii, but there isn't a hell of a lot out there to pick from.
   37. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:23 PM (#1208203)
And in any case, this was the biggest news the Mets made yesterday, and it was good news:

For the first time this spring, Cameron — who's recovering from left wrist surgery — played in an intrasquad game yesterday. He faced minor leaguers, getting five at-bats and coming away pleased.

"I felt good," Cameron said. "I felt real good."


Imagine that -- good medical news coming from the Mets. You'd think they overhauled their medical and training staff or something.
   38. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:35 PM (#1208212)
but to say it's a disaster is like saying lochner v. new york was a prime example of the rights of the state overrule those of private contracts.

Major party foul!
   39. Johnny Tuttle Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:35 PM (#1208213)
The cost of a pitcher akin to Ishii is only going to escalate as the season progresses. Sure, they need a back-up C more than do a lot of other teams, but this is no dumping of Bagwell to the Astros.

Maybe they could swing a deal for a guy like Greg Myers, guys who are going to get "caught" in roster crunches as teams decide against three Cs on the 25 man roster.
   40. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:37 PM (#1208218)
And if Mike Jacobs hits .325/.360/.500 over the first month of the season, this is a non-issue.
   41. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 04:54 PM (#1208230)
Since when is it a bad thing to give up a back-up catcher for a serviceable major league starter?

Sure, Phillips is a backup with the Mets, but that doesn't mean he couldn't be starting for a bunch of other clubs.

I'd rather have a third guy who is basically their equal than Jason Phillips.

That maybe true of this year, but what about next year when Piazza is gone?

You know, I have no problem with dealing Phillips. I do have a problem, however, with dealing Phillips for Kaz Ishii.
   42. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:07 PM (#1208246)
what about next year when Piazza is gone?

Then we're going to need a starting catcher, and I wouldn't want it to be Jason Phillips anyway. Maybe it'll be Mike Jacobs, though I doubt it.

The underlying message of this situation, BTW, is that it is important to have a pipeline of young talent that doesn't work in "bursts" but provides a steady stream of major-league ready replacements. We're in this fix because we don't have a starting pitcher quite ready in the pipeline.

Interestingly, a Daily News article today (here) suggests they might be willing to speed pitchers along more quickly than they have since Generation K flamed out. The money quote from Minaya:

To me, it's not what level a guy is in, it's how he throws the ball. I would not be afraid of bringing a guy up. I will say, your preference is to go through the process and the system. But there are some kids who are special guys - Zack Greinke with Kansas City, and we had Chad Cordero with the Expos. I don't get caught up into how many innings you have in the minor leagues and all that stuff.

Which tells me that if Ishii is as bad as OFF thinks he'll be -- a 7.50 ERA??? -- that it will clear the way for Petit by late June.
   43. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:09 PM (#1208248)

You know, I have no problem with dealing Phillips. I do have a problem, however, with dealing Phillips for Kaz Ishii.


Yeah, they should have held out for Ben Sheets.
   44. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:13 PM (#1208251)
Silly Omar, doesn't he know that Rick Peterson, pitching coach god, said that you have to have 500 innings of minor league ball to be a successful major league pitcher?
   45. Chris Pummer Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:20 PM (#1208254)
I just don't understand the fear of using Ramon Castro as a backup catcher. Someone is going to say he has an OPS+ of 73, but you know what? That's in less than a full season's worth of ABs.

Castro's not very good, granted. But how good is Phillips... really?
   46. pablo ibbieta Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:24 PM (#1208257)
PECOTA EQERAs, ZiPS ERA(not park neutral):

Ginter-4.94,3.91 (36 G/ 14 GS in ZiPS)
Heilman-5.06, 4.92
Seo-5.22, 4.47

Benson-4.86, 4.01
Zambrano-5.23, 4.92
Ishii-5.56,5.33
   47. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:36 PM (#1208269)
What did those systems predict for those 6 last year and how did they fare?
   48. Шĥy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:48 PM (#1208284)
I can't make a decision about this trade until I get a time count on Ishiit from Rick Peterson.
   49. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 05:50 PM (#1208287)
OK, instead of just slamming Rick Peterson, let's try to assess what this trade might tell us about Peterson's outlook. If we assume he has had significant input here, and in the Zambrano trade, then it suggests one of two things. Either

(a) Peterson doesn't give a rat's ass whether his pitchers throw strikes or not; or

(b) Peterson believes he can work with a pitcher to achieve better command of his stuff, hence improving his ability to throw strikes and making him more valuable to the Mets (or the A's before that) than he was to his original team.

I think we can safely rule out (a). Now the question is: is there any evidence to support Peterson's belief that he can accomplish (b)?

Well, I don't have the time or inclination to do a systematic study of the A's and Mets' pitchers who've worked with Peterson. But a number of pitchers have improved significantly in this respect working with him, including Kenny Rogers, Tim Hudson, Billy Taylor, Jason Isringhausen, and Mark Mulder (whose walks shot up significantly last year, sans Peterson). I, for one, am willing to take a wait-and-see attitude on whether Zambrano and/or Ishii show progress.
   50. philly Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:03 PM (#1208298)
Zito had a very high BB rate his last year in college. At the time of the BA Draft Preview he had 52 BB in 96 IP. His MLB walk rate is about 1.5 BB/9 IP lower. No clue who gets credit for that - perhaps nobody but Zito himself.

BTW, why is everybody so down on Peterson? He went from the epitome of a sabre pitching coach with all his pre-hab work with Dr Andrews to an overrated, self-promoting jack ass in less than one year.

Is it just because of speculation about his role in the Kazmir-Zambrano trade?

It's really been a shocking change in perception.
   51. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 06:54 PM (#1208319)
I am learning that the Mets fans on this site will criticize anything.
   52. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 07:28 PM (#1208349)
the mets fans on this site are battered and bruised after years of poor management. now they're akin to an abused dog that bites anything that comes near it, regardless of whether thier target deserves it. i think the kazmir trade was the straw that broke their back, they simply haven't recovered from that debacle.
   53. The Wilpons Must Go (Tom D) Posted: March 20, 2005 at 07:40 PM (#1208361)
I just got back from spring training to see this thread. I think the Mets would be happy if Ishii could give them a couple of average months. He's as good a candidate as the next guy to do that.
   54. Famous Original Joe C Posted: March 20, 2005 at 07:40 PM (#1208362)
I like the Mets fans here. They're a fantastic combination of highly knowledgeable and completely crazy. (And I really do mean that as a compliment).

They also have a fascinating team to watch next year...whether they win 92 or lose 90 they have a great combination of young potential (or just becoming stars) and superstars in various stages of their careers.
   55. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 08:20 PM (#1208436)
i think the kazmir trade was the straw that broke their back, they simply haven't recovered from that debacle.

I haven't either, but I can certainly see the difference between that trade and this one -- Zambrano and Ishii are similar pitchers, but Kazmir was about 10 times as valuable a commodity as Phillips.

And I think the Mientkiewicz trade was much worse than this one. Actually gave up a piece we can't readily replace in that one.
   56. "Andruw for HoF" sure died down Posted: March 20, 2005 at 08:48 PM (#1208473)
I'm surprised that DePo if settled for just Phillips and pay for all of Ishii's salary. Not counting salary, I don't see that as a real net gain. DePo has to be able to take advantage of Omar somehow.

Instead of stockpiling averagish catchers, can the Dodgers just get a good one?
   57. akrasian Posted: March 20, 2005 at 08:53 PM (#1208484)
They have two minor league catchers nearly ready.

In terms of salary, it looks like the Dodgers will pay for Ishii's option buyout. That would still save the Dodgers about $3 million, enough for multiple signing bonuses of international free agents, for instance.
   58. pablo ibbieta Posted: March 20, 2005 at 08:57 PM (#1208493)
What did those systems predict for those 6 last year and how did they fare?

For PECOTA(2004 projected EQERA, actual EQERA)

Ginter-5.15, 4.03 MLE, 5.19 in MLB
Heilman-5.05, 5.39 MLE, 5.33 in MLB
Seo- 4.67, 3.32 MLE, 5.07 MLB

Benson-5.31, 4.53 in PIT, 4.85 NYM
Zambrano-4.99, 4.33 in TBY
Ishii-5.79, 5.09
   59. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 09:08 PM (#1208503)

Ginter-5.15, 4.03 MLE, 5.19 in MLB
Heilman-5.05, 5.39 MLE, 5.33 in MLB
Seo- 4.67, 3.32 MLE, 5.07 MLB

Benson-5.31, 4.53 in PIT, 4.85 NYM
Zambrano-4.99, 4.33 in TBY
Ishii-5.79, 5.09


Looks like a pretty shitty basis for an argument.
   60. Шĥy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 09:42 PM (#1208538)
Well, I don't have the time or inclination to do a systematic study of the A's and Mets' pitchers who've worked with Peterson.

Actually, dks did a study in this thread (post 8), which showed that Peterson hads no effect on pitchers.
   61. pablo ibbieta Posted: March 20, 2005 at 10:05 PM (#1208564)
Does anyone know how much the Dodgers are paying in this deal? Also, how much are the Mets paying Meinkweihtah and Zambrano this year?
   62. akrasian Posted: March 20, 2005 at 10:18 PM (#1208573)
The amount hasn't been announced yet. Likely it will be at least the option buyout ($2.2 million).
   63. Chris Dial Posted: March 20, 2005 at 10:24 PM (#1208577)
We have someone as good already.

At worst -- at worst


########.

Jae Seo threw 188 IP at 111 ERA+ *BEFORE* Peterson showed up.

Ishii is significantly worse than Seo. The cost is solely financial, but Peterson ####### up a perfectly good starter is pissing me off.
   64. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 10:30 PM (#1208588)
The cost is solely financial, but Peterson #### up a perfectly good starter is pissing me off.

Yeah, because you never see a pitcher have a first season with a 111 ERA+ and then fail to duplicate it. It had to have been Peterson screwing him up, rather than Seo losing 3-5 MPH off his fastball. It couldn't be that Jae Seo saw his performance deteriorate because he was never a 111 ERA+ pitcher to begin with.
   65. akrasian Posted: March 20, 2005 at 10:46 PM (#1208620)
Of course, in 307 innings Seo has a 101 ERA+. In 473 innings Ishii has a 93 ERA+. So even if Seo isn't a 111 ERA+ pitcher, he's probably closer to one than Ishii is.

Not that I mind Ishii leaving the Dodgers. He has his decent stretches, but the negatives are enough that few Dodger fans will miss him. I don't think anybody expected Ishii to finish the season with the team.
   66. Шĥy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:09 PM (#1208659)
The trade is now official according to Mets.com.
   67. Шĥy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:11 PM (#1208662)
Marty Noble showing off his journalistic skills:

He batted .218 with seven home runs and 34 RBIs in 362 at-bats last season, after batting .298 with 11 home runs and 58 home runs as a rookie in 2003.
   68. Chris Dial Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:23 PM (#1208674)
Yeah, because you never see a pitcher have a first season with a 111 ERA+ and then fail to duplicate it. It had to have been Peterson screwing him up, rather than Seo losing 3-5 MPH off his fastball. It couldn't be that Jae Seo saw his performance deteriorate because he was never a 111 ERA+ pitcher to begin with.

Sam,
you are going to lose this argument. Just concede.

Sure pitchers have. If only there weren't a pitching coach openly saying he sucks.
   69. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:30 PM (#1208682)
Dial, are you saying Seo performed poorly because he was too sad? And not because he was topping out at 86 instead of 91? All the while refusing to use his curveball? And not pitching with the control he had in 2003? I don't know why you're so sure you're going to win that argument.
   70. Шĥy Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:34 PM (#1208685)
Peterson has said that he tried to change the way Seo pitched but Seo tried to resist. I think a pitching coach forcing himto pitch a way that he didn't want to could definatley ruin him. Add to that, he was sent down to AAA after a bad spring triaing in which he (along with everyone besides Peterson) thought he was basically a lock for a rotation spot.
   71. Rob Base Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:35 PM (#1208687)
Again, this is no doubt unrelated to him showing up to camp characteristically out of shape and sporting a reduced fastball? No reason to suspect that that was the reason Peterson wanted him to start using his curveball more, is there?
   72. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:40 PM (#1208692)
It's a chicken and egg problem. Did Peterson try to work with Seo because he saw the diminished performance and performance indicators, or did Peterson mess around with Seo, undermine his confidence and his approach, and cause the decline in performance?

It may not be an argument either side can "win," Chris, but I'm pretty confident in what I believe happened. And while I think Peterson might have been more flexible in the way he tried to go about things, I put most of the explanation about the same place Rob puts it.
   73. Sam M. Posted: March 20, 2005 at 11:43 PM (#1208698)
I do wish Phillips well with the Dodgers. Bad as he was in '04, he was one of the few bright spots in 2003.
   74. Chris Dial Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:03 AM (#1208717)
I think the usage of Tyler Yates indicates Peterson's "judgement".

He sabotaged Seo, IMO, and left alone, Seo would be better than Ishii by a goog margin.

peterson tried/made Seo change his delivery or not pitch (my way or teh hiway). Seo got shafted.
   75. Chris Dial Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:08 AM (#1208721)
It's a chicken and egg problem. Did Peterson try to work with Seo because he saw the diminished performance and performance indicators, or did Peterson mess around with Seo, undermine his confidence and his approach, and cause the decline in performance?


Well:
Pre peterson: 188 IP, 111 ERA+
Post peterson: 118 IP 87 ERA+

Is your argument that Seo would have done that (or worse) anyway? That's pretty weak (particularly from a lawyer).

Every aspect of is game got worse *and* Peterson was sending him down *specifically* because Seo would't listen *in pre-season*. Seo never got a chance to struggle on his own.

chicken and egg requires a leap of faith in Peterson, IMNSHO.
   76. Sam M. Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:11 AM (#1208724)
Except, Chris, that Seo reported to camp having gained a lot of weight and with a fastball topping out 5 MPH slower than he'd been showing in 2003. Peterson didn't cause those things; he reacted to them. If Peterson deserves some of the blame for not handling the situation differently, then Seo deserves plenty, too, for creating the situation. Peterson saw what Seo was dealing, and thought it wasn't good enough. And IMO, he was right.
   77. Sam M. Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:17 AM (#1208733)
Meanwhile, Matt Ginter threw four strong innings to get the win against Baltimore today.

But in the other game (v. LA), Jose Reyes' two errors almost cost the Mets the win, blowing a 6-1 lead. But Eric Valent's 3-run walk-off HR won it, 10-9. Pedro pitched great, five innings, one run.
   78. Rob Base Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:34 AM (#1208757)
Pre peterson: 188 IP, 111 ERA+
Post peterson: 118 IP 87 ERA+


post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Nice argument, Dial.
   79. Rob Base Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:40 AM (#1208765)
Glavine: 94 --> 119 ERA+
Leiter: 106 --> 133 ERA+
Heilman: 63 --> 78 ERA+
Looper: 109 --> 158 ERA+
Stanton: 93 --> 135 ERA+

These statistics (2003 ERA+ --> 2004 ERA+) prove that Peterson is a god among me.
   80. Rob Base Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:41 AM (#1208768)
among men, that is.
   81. Imperabo Posted: March 21, 2005 at 12:46 AM (#1208778)
among men, that is.

The first way you said it was much funnier.
   82. 1k5v3L Posted: March 21, 2005 at 01:02 AM (#1208796)
post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

So did you hear about the plane full of lawyers that crashed into the ocean?
   83. Chris Dial Posted: March 21, 2005 at 01:08 AM (#1208812)
Pre peterson: 188 IP, 111 ERA+
Post peterson: 118 IP 87 ERA+

post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Nice argument, Dial.


Well, Rob, I didn't make that argument.

What I posted are simple facts. I didn't assign causation.

Reading comprehension rules.
   84. Chris Dial Posted: March 21, 2005 at 01:09 AM (#1208815)
Except, Chris, that Seo reported to camp having gained a lot of weight and with a fastball topping out 5 MPH slower than he'd been showing in 2003.

I don't know that to be true.
   85. Rob Base Posted: March 21, 2005 at 01:25 AM (#1208860)
What I posted are simple facts. I didn't assign causation.

Reading comprehension rules.


I guess my criticism is that your simple facts have no relevance then.
   86. Most Favored Haitian Status Posted: March 21, 2005 at 01:40 AM (#1208883)
Did you hear the one about the constipated mathematician?

Had to work it out with a pencil.
   87. Шĥy Posted: March 21, 2005 at 02:14 AM (#1208939)
Had to find this from dodgers.com since Marty Noble put out his usualy level of quality.


Here are the details of Ishii's contract: He earns $3.2 million in 2005, with $2.05 million deferred without interest, and the Dodgers will pay that deferred money. There is an option for 2006 at $3.25 million, with a buyout of $2.2 million. If the Mets choose the buyout, the Dodgers must pay it. If the Mets pick up the option, there then is an option for 2007 for $4 million, or a $1.1 million buyout. If the Mets choose the buyout, the Dodgers must pay it. If the Mets pick up both option years, the Dodgers are responsible only for the $2.05 million deferred salary.
   88. Imperabo Posted: March 21, 2005 at 02:29 AM (#1208960)
So the Dodgers are paying all but a million of Ishii's salary, just as I predicted. Depo would have released Ishii before he ever let him pitch for the Dodgers again. I have to think he could have gotten more for him though if he had bargained harder. The Mets gave up nothing of consequence and get a decent starter for a million bucks.
   89. Dr. Vaux Posted: March 21, 2005 at 02:36 AM (#1208966)
Plus. if the Mets choose the buyout, it's another $2.2 million, and they're almost certain to do that. Still, they're saving a million by doing this, since they'd have bought hiim out after the season too.
   90. pablo ibbieta Posted: March 21, 2005 at 02:55 AM (#1208991)
So, if Ishii sucks, Mets only lose one million. But if Peterson fixes him and Ishii becomes around league average, they can have him cheap for three years.
   91. Шĥy Posted: March 21, 2005 at 03:03 AM (#1209005)
So, if Ishii sucks, Mets only lose one million.

And games. He is a downgrade from Seo and Ginter.
   92. akrasian Posted: March 21, 2005 at 03:31 AM (#1209059)
And when Phillips bounces back some to his career averages, the Dodgers will have a starting catcher in the general range of "average". One who could have been starting for the Mets the 40-80 games their backup catcher will be playing.
   93. cynic Posted: March 21, 2005 at 03:56 AM (#1209083)
Phillips' career average is .727, while Castro's is .692. If that's their true talent, and their defensive abilities are as far apart as some have claimed, there's probably not a real big dropoff from one to the other.
   94. Old Matt Posted: March 21, 2005 at 04:06 AM (#1209097)
I'm just worried that Charles Johnson is probably on his way over.

And Heilman pitched great today, first game after Peterson "fixed" him.
   95. akrasian Posted: March 21, 2005 at 04:07 AM (#1209100)
Castro's career OPS is .661, not .692. And he is especially weak in OBP. Phillips bad year last year still had a higher OBP than Castro's career average. And Castro has never had an OBP as high as Phillips career average.

I don't know about their relative defensive abilities, but I do know that Phillips was highly regarded by the scouts when he was coming up. And in so far as every catching move the A's made the last couple of years DePodesta was there, and every catching move the Dodgers have made, was for good defensive players, I'd guess that Phillips scores well on whatever analysis DePo is using.
   96. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: March 21, 2005 at 04:20 AM (#1209118)
I guess my criticism is that your simple facts have no relevance then.

Unassigned causation does not preclude relevance, man.

What I want to know is where the information about Seo's turning up to camp fat and slow comes from. I don't remember hearing that, but then again, I don't really follow the Mets.

Furthermore, how much do we really know about Peterson's involvement with transactions? I assume most teams get some input from their pitching coaches when they think about acquiring a pitcher. And we've all heard the whispers that Peterson thought Kazmir was fragile and Zambrano could be fixed. But people seem to be acting as if it was Peterson himself who pulled the trigger on this trade, whereas it might just be Minaya's doing, with little or no input from Peterson.
   97. Шĥy Posted: March 21, 2005 at 04:30 AM (#1209134)
I'd guess that Phillips scores well on whatever analysis DePo is using.

FWIW, DePo said this about Phillips:

He's very solid defensively
   98. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: March 21, 2005 at 04:33 AM (#1209139)
Some interesting stuff. You will notice Jason Phillips prominently featured in some of the lists here.

IMO it looks like his 2004 was a pretty unlucky year for him at the plate. I'm not saying 2003 was his "true" talent level but I think the Dodgers may have gotten themselves a fairly valuable player in exchange for a spare part.
   99. Roadblock Jones Posted: March 21, 2005 at 04:45 AM (#1209160)
The Mets just want the same depth in their rotation they had before Trachsel's injury is all. I still think Phillips can hit, and he's useful in that he can also play reasonably well at 1B. On the other hand, he got into a rotten funk at the plate and played with his head up his ass for great stretches last year (bad baserunning on top of awful speed)

From what I understand Seo's personality has been a concern for the Mets on and off going back a few years, even pre-2003: A New Yorker article last year described it as a peculiar form of melancholy they have a word for in Korea, forget what it was. But it's safe to say Seo and the Mets have been cool on one another for awhile now: He definitely seemed to get the short shrift at spring training last year, and this winter he'd apparently said unkind things to the Koran press regarding his treatment by the team. Don't know what caused what.
   100. Sam M. Posted: March 21, 2005 at 04:51 AM (#1209172)
How rough was Jason Phillips' season? He had fewer singles than his batted ball types would suggest, but he also had fewer doubles, fewer triples, and fewer home runs. Perhaps he's hitting a healthy combination of infield pop-ups and weak ground balls or perhaps he just had the unluckiest season in baseball.

FWIW, my own impression is that Phillips developed a bad case of the uppercuts last year. He was hitting everything in the air, and with not much authority. I don't doubt he was somewhat unlucky, but I don't think that was the biggest part of it.

(Dodger fans may remember one particularly unlucky AB Phillips had last year, in an April 28th game where the Mets had the tying run on second base and Gagne still had the save streak going. Phillips hit a bullet targeted for center field, which would have tied the game and ended the streak. Instead, it ricocheted off Gagne, and Phillips was retired for the last out of the 8th. The Mets didn't score, and the save streak continued.
Here it is.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Id of SugarBear Blanks
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 1.2259 seconds
68 querie(s) executed