|
|
|
Friday, November 07, 2003
A Day OffYou ever just get hit with a sudden wave of exhaustion? Like you're cruising along, doing what you normally do everyday, getting ready to type up a nice, long blog entry for your loyal audience to enjoy. And then BOOM, it's 8:15 at night and you want nothing more than to crawl under the covers and sleep for a very long time.I know I promised a "Mailbag" entry devoted to last week's back-to-back entries on Derek "Mr. Clutch" Jeter, and I really do want to respond to all of the good emails I got on the subject, but man, I am just beat right now. I had a paper due in one class yesterday and I've got a big project due in another class this afternoon. Not to mention the long hours I put in this week working on the three-part "Meat Market" series on this year's free agents (Part One, Part Two, Part Three). Honestly, I hope you enjoyed reading those, because they took some serious time to write! But hey, I'm not complaining. I'm just asking for a day off on a random Friday in November. I'm pretty sure it's my first skipped weekday in several months and probably only like the third or fourth one in the last year. Heck, what you've just read about me explaining why I need a day off is more than many bloggers write everyday, so I guess I really just need a day off in the "Gleeman-length" sense of the word. Have no fear, come Monday morning they'll be a brand-new, Gleeman-length entry for you to read and I bet you'll even get that Mr. Clutch Mailbag before next week is over. In the meantime, if you missed an entry or two from earlier this week, I'd really like it if you'd go back and read them now. Here are the relevant links: Monday: The Meat Market (Part One: Outfielders) Tuesday: The Meat Market (Part Two: Catchers and Infielders) Wednesday: The Meat Market (Part Three: Pitchers) Thursday: Wagner to the Phils Also, if you haven't yet read the aforementioned two-part entry on Derek Jeter from last week, here are those links: "Derek is really, really cute" "Derek is really, really cute" (Part Two) Now, if you'll excuse me, I must sleep. See ya Monday. *****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****     
Thursday, November 06, 2003
Wagner to the PhilsAfter spending the last few days talking about all of the available free agents (The Meat Market: Part One, Part Two, Part Three), it's time to get caught up on a big story that happened this week...The Philadelphia Phillies, not wanting to wait to see what the free agent closer-market would look like, acquired Billy Wagner from the Houston Astros in exchange for pitchers Brandon Duckworth, Taylor Buchholz and Ezequiel Astacio. I think this is one of those rare trades that is pretty good for both teams. It is good for the Phillies because they get one of the premier relievers in all of baseball, who is locked in for $8 million in 2004, with a team-option for $9 mill in 2005. It is good for the Astros because they apparently needed to cut some salary and in dumping Wagner they got three relatively valuable pitchers in return. All things being equal I think I would rather have Billy Wagner than the three pitchers the Astros got in return for him, but baseball teams usually don't operate under "all things being equal." The Phillies are in a position where they can add payroll, so they did. The Astros are in a position where they had to cut payroll, and they did. You don't always get equal value in a situation like that. It always hurts to lose a pitcher the caliber of Wagner, but the Astros are in the unique position of having an extraordinarily good setup-man in place to step in as closer. Take a look at what these two mystery pitchers have done over the last three years: IP ERA SO/9 BB/9 HR/9 OAVGThose two pitching-lines belong to two of the most dominant relievers in all of baseball, Octavio Dotel (Pitcher X) and Billy Wagner (Pitcher Z). The Astros have had the good fortune of having both of them in their bullpen during that time. It is a little like when the Yankees had John Wetteland closing games with Mariano Rivera setting him up. Wagner now leaves, just like Wetteland did after the 1996 season, and the Astros are obviously hoping Dotel becomes the next Mariano Rivera. Aside from losing a great reliever, the other downside to this for Houston is that Dotel is now put into a role where his usage is very limited. In the past the Astros could stick him into a game in the seventh or eighth inning, whenever they had a jam, and keep him in their for six, eight, 10 batters. Now he's stuck pitching the ninth innings of games Houston has a lead in. Dotel has pitched 105, 97.1 and 87 innings over the last three years. I will be shocked if he gets even 75 innings as Houston's closer in 2004. Houston's bullpen alignment over the last few years is what I feel is the optimal setup with the way closers are used right now. If teams are determined to use their "closer" in a very rigid role without much room for versatility, it pays to have a setup-man who is actually a better pitcher than the closer. Because, while closing out games in the ninth inning is important, I think coming into close games in the late innings for everything that isn't a "save situation" is probably even more valuable, especially if the setup-man is used correctly. I think Houston had this over the last few years, with Dotel setting up Wagner, although I guess it's debatable who the better pitcher is. Minnesota has had a similar situation, with Latroy Hawkins setting up Eddie Guardado. And there are probably a couple other teams who have done this lately as well. In a perfect world, the strict usage for closers would be done away with. Next to that happening, the next best thing for a team is to continue using their closer in their defined role, but to have that closer be the second or third-best reliever on the team, with the best reliever serving as his setup-man, able to come into any game, at any time. If I didn't think it would bruise his ego too much, I might even consider keeping Dotel as the setup-man, and making someone like Brad Lidge (85 IP, 3.60 ERA) the closer. But I'm one of those weirdos who isn't obsessed by "saves," so I'm probably crazy. Adding Wagner to Philadelphia's bullpen is going to have a huge impact. Philadelphia had the third-best team Equivalent Average in the National League last season and they will likely have essentially the same lineup intact, so the pitching-staff is the place to make improvements. They may lose Kevin Millwood to free agency, which is certainly a big loss, but they should be able to find another good starter among the group of free agent pitchers I discussed yesterday. If they can fill Millwood's spot with a solid starter, the addition of Wagner will make them a much better pitching-staff than last season. According to Baseball Prospectus, Wagner was the third-best relief pitcher in baseball last year. The guy he replaces as Philadelphia's closer, Jose Mesa, was ranked as the third-worst pitcher in all of baseball last year. That's one hell of an upgrade. And it might be even better than it appears, because Wagner has a miniscule 1.19 ERA away from hitter-friendly Enron/Minute Maid/whatever Park over the last three years. On the other side of this deal, the Astros get three young pitchers. Or at least that is what all the stories I have read about this trade say. Actually though, Brandon Duckworth turns 28 years old in about two months, so the "young pitcher" ship has long sailed with him. Along with Old Man Duckworth, whom I think can be a solid middle-of-the-rotation starter, the Astros did get two legitimately young pitchers from Philadelphia. The better prospect of the two is Taylor Buchholz, who was originally Philadelphia's sixth-round pick back in the 2000 draft. His minor league track-record is pretty impressive: LVL IP ERA SO/9 BB/9 HR/9I left out a rough 23-inning stint Buchholz had after moving up to Double-A for the first time in 2002. I don't think those are the numbers of a future ace, but they certainly suggest a guy who can be a successful starting pitcher in the major leagues. His strikeout-rate has stayed at the same level as he has advanced up to higher levels of competition, which is a very good sign. His walk-rate actually improved by about 30% this year in Double-A. The only rate that declined is his home runs allowed, but that is to be expected as a pitcher moves up the ladder. And certainly allowing 0.87 homers per nine innings (14 in 144.2 IP) is nothing to get concerned about at all. I think Buchholz could use a full year in Triple-A next year, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him in Houston at some point in 2004. He's got a good chance to join their rotation for good well before he turns 24 years old. Aside from having a really cool name, Ezequiel Astacio isn't nearly as good a prospect. Astacio has pitched well throughout his minor league career (3.29 ERA this year, 3.31 ERA in 2002), but his strikeout-rate is sub par and he is already 24 years old and has not pitched a single inning above Single-A. I could certainly see him becoming a back-of-the-rotation starter in the future or an okay bullpen guy though, and it never hurts to add young arms to the system. I think I would say that the Phillies "won" this trade, but also that the Astros did pretty well, considering the circumstances. They felt they had to dump Wagner's salary and there are plenty of good closers on the market as free agents right now, so getting the three guys they did wasn't a bad haul. *****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****
Wednesday, November 05, 2003
The Meat Market (Part Three: Pitchers)After one of the best Octobers in baseball history the calendar now reads "November," which means we are officially in free agent season. Players are filing for free agency, teams are getting their plans and budgets together, and agents are starting to make some phone calls. Over the next several months dozens of major league veterans will be finding new homes and signing big contracts.Today I will discuss the free agent pitchers. Yesterday I covered the free agent infielders and catchers, and earlier this week I looked at the free agent outfielders. Enjoy... THE STARTERS:        
There aren't any real #1, "ace" starters in this year's crop of free agent starting pitchers, but there are a few of what I would call #1A guys, as well as a bunch of solid middle-of-the-rotation options. While the majority opinion seems to be that Bartolo Colon and Kevin Millwood are the two most desirable free agent pitchers this off-season, I would actually rank Andy Pettitte as my #1 target. And that is even without taking into account that Pettitte will likely command less in salary than either Colon or Millwood. Take a look at what the three did this season... IP ERA SO/9 BB/9 HR/9I am a big believer in strikeout-rates and walk-rates, and Pettitte is the best of the three in both of those areas. Of course, he is also the oldest of the three, which is always a big consideration with pitchers. Next year will be Pettitte's "age-32" season, while Colon will be 31 and Millwood will be 29. That said, I wouldn't be interested in giving any of those three long-term contracts, so how well they are going to pitch five or six years down the road wouldn't really matter much to me. I think, at most, I would offer a four-year deal, and even that is debatable. Andy Pettitte is an extreme ground ball pitcher and he plays for the New York Yankees, which means he has been getting killed by his infield defense. In my opinion (and in the opinion of many of the more advanced defensive metrics), Derek Jeter and Alfonso Soriano form one of the worst double-play combinations in all of baseball. In addition to just those two, New York's defense as a whole ranked 27th in Major League Baseball at turning balls in play into outs this year. Not coincidentally, Pettitte yielded a hit on 32% of the balls that were put in play against him this year. That is a rate higher than any defense in baseball gave up. What all of that says to me is that Andy Pettitte, with his extreme ground ball tendencies and solid strikeout, walk and home run numbers, is someone who could see his numbers improve dramatically if given a chance to pitch with a good or even average defense behind him. The difference between having a good middle infield behind him and the combo he has had of late could easily mean 20+ fewer hits allowed over the course of a season, and that is the sort of thing that could drop someone's ERA from 4.02 into the mid-3.00s. Pettitte has been a work-horse throughout his career, pitching 200+ innings in six of the last eight seasons. His strikeout rates over the last three years are significantly improved over his early-career numbers, and his control is dramatically better than it was years ago. I would love to sign him up to a three-year deal, stick him on a team with a solid defense and watch him rack up those ground ball outs. I could see him providing a team with 600+ innings with a 3.50-3.75 ERA over the next three years, and I think he will prove to be a bargain when compared to Colon and Millwood. Of course, that's not to say that Colon and Millwood aren't desirable free agents either. I just think that their price-tags are going to be a lot higher than they should be. Colon and Millwood both had very nice years in 2002, finishing with ERAs of 2.93 and 3.24, respectively. If you ignore what they did in 2002 however, the picture changes quite a bit. Consider the following numbers... ERAs*Without 2002 Those aren't exactly the numbers of pitchers I want to be giving big, multi-year contracts to. Of course, ignoring what they did in 2002 is pretty pointless, and don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Colon and Millwood aren't good pitchers. They'll give you lots of innings and they'll be dominant at times, but the end result is likely going to be just slightly better than league-average and I just don't think that's worth paying big bucks to. Especially in a market without any really great starting pitchers, which will undoubtedly force up their price even more. I think instead of throwing money at Colon or Millwood, a team would be best served to go after the more reasonably priced Pettitte, whom I think has a good chance of outperforming both of them over the next few seasons anyway. Even if Pettitte isn't a possibility, I think going after some of the "second-tier" starters would be a better idea than signing Colon or Millwood long-term, unless they are asking for much less than I am figuring, of course. And who exactly is in the "second-tier" of starters this off-season? Well, strangely enough, one of the greatest pitchers in the history of baseball, Greg Maddux. At 37 years old, Maddux had his worst season since 1987, when he went 6-14 as a 21-year old with the Cubs. Of course, when you're as good as Maddux has been, your "worst season since 1987" is still pretty good. He went 16-11 with a 3.96 ERA in 218.1 innings. Both his ERA and adjusted ERA+ were better than Millwood's. That said, unlike Millwood, Maddux is nearing 40 and the end of the line. The big question is whether or not he has a couple of good years left in him. Maddux has always relied on incredible control, a deceptively good strikeout-rate and the ability to keep the ball in the ballpark. In the last couple years, his walk-rate has remained excellent, but his strikeouts have dropped significantly and he has started to serve up a few more homers. Maddux's K-rates of 5.33 and 5.11 over the last two years were his lowest since 1989, and just the second and third times his strikeouts have dropped below 6.0/9 IP since 1991. He also allowed 24 homers, the most in his entire career. Are his days of being a dominant pitcher over? Most likely, yes. Is he just as likely to be a solid #2 or #3 starter over the next year or two as Colon or Millwood? Probably. I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to give Maddux a one-year deal and I might even consider a two-year pact if the money was right. I think he'd be perfect someplace like San Diego, where he can finish his career with a solid offense scoring runs for him and help mentor some good young pitchers. I think the potential "sleeper" among this year's free agent starting pitchers is Kelvim Escobar. He has bounced around between the bullpen and the rotation over the years, but has generally been very good as a starter whenever he has been given the opportunity. This year he went 12-8 with a 3.92 ERA in 26 starts, striking out 136 batters in 163 innings. Over the past three years combined he has started a total of 37 games and has a 3.70 ERA in 231 innings. Escobar has good "stuff," he has always posted good strikeout-rates and he does a very nice job limiting home runs. He struggles a bit with control at times, but his strikeout/walk ratio has been right around 2/1 for the last few seasons. Plus, at just 27 years old, Escobar is younger than just about every other decent free agent starter, aside from Sidney Ponson, who is the same age. Speaking of Ponson, he is another guy who I think is going to end up getting a lot more money than he deserves. This is a guy who has a career ERA of 4.54 and whose 3.75 ERA this season was, by far, the best of his career. At 27, his strikeout-rate was just 5.58/9 IP, he has some injury-concerns, and he isn't exactly the best physical specimen. I don't doubt that Ponson could give a team 200+ innings with a league-average ERA over the next few years, but I don't think that's worth what he'll probably end up getting. Oh, and speaking of physical specimens, the Yankees declined their 2004 option on David Wells yesterday, officially making Boomer a free agent. Wells is an interesting free agent. On one hand, he has a history of back problems and he turns 41 in May. On the other hand, he's likely to come pretty cheap and he has actually been a fairly dependable pitcher over the years. Wells pitched just 100.2 innings for the White Sox in 2001. Other than that, he has thrown at least 200 innings every year since 1995. His strikeout-rate this year was pretty much non-existent, but he walked just 20 batters in 213 innings, which is absolutely amazing. A lot of people would probably suggest that signing David Wells is a risky move, and in a way I would agree. But really, what is more risky, giving David Wells $2-3 million bucks for one season or giving someone like Bartolo Colon or Kevin Millwood or Sidney Ponson a four or five-year deal for two or three times that much per season? Another aging lefty who I think would be worth signing for one year is Kenny Rogers, who went 13-8 with a 4.57 ERA for the Twins this season. Rogers turns 39 in a week, but I watched almost every one of his 31 starts this year and was fairly impressed with his pitching. He's not dominant in any sense of the word, but he works the corners, gets ground balls and generally stays out of big trouble. His 4.57 ERA is nothing special, but it's a little more impressive when you consider he did it on turf and did it with The Keystone Chasm (Guzman and Rivas, for the uninitiated) playing behind him. The Twins signed him for $2 million last off-season, so I'm sure he'd be willing to work for similar wages this year. For a team with a good defensive infield, Rogers would be a nice, cheap one-year solution in the middle of the rotation. The final free agent pitcher who I would put into the "solid middle-of-the-rotation starter" category is Miguel Batista. At 32, Batista had his third-straight solid season for the Diamondbacks, pitching 193.1 innings with a 3.54 ERA. Since joining Arizona in 2001, Batista has a 3.76 ERA in 517.1 innings, while pitching in a hitter's ballpark. Arizona gave him a $300,000 buy-out instead of picking up his 2004 option for $5 million, but have said they are interested in re-signing him for less money. Another team would be smart to swoop in and offer Batista a two-year deal for about $3 million a season. His strikeout-rate has been okay, his control is decent and he does a great job limiting homers. He'd make a very nice #3 starter on a lot of teams. After Batista, we get to the huge group of pitchers who have a lot of question-marks attached to them. It's a very long list of names, so rather than use a few thousand words talking about all of them, I'm going to list them all and then try to pick out a few guys who I think are worth taking a chance on above the rest of the group. - John Burkett - Jeff Suppan - Pat Hentgen - Garrett Stephenson - Brian Anderson - Rick Reed - Darren Oliver - Pedro Astacio - Wilson Alvarez - Ismael Valdes - Andy Ashby - John Thomson - Brett Tomko - Kevin Appier - Shane Reynolds - Jose Lima - Cory Lidle - Sterling Hitchcock - Shawn Estes - Steve Sparks - Rick Helling What that group lacks in pitching ability, they certainly make up for in sheer numbers. There are plenty of teams out there right now who could vastly improve their pitching-staff if they could just find a way to get a couple of guys who could give them some bulk innings of somewhere around league-average pitching. Of the 21 guys on that above list, I'm guessing at least a half-dozen of them will be able to do that in 2004. The key, of course, is figuring out which ones they are. The three guys who I would go after first from that list are Jeff Suppan, John Thomson and Cory Lidle. I don't think those guys will be pulling an Esteban Loaiza next year, but they're the three I think have the best shot at giving a team 180+ innings with an ERA around league-average. Suppan is probably the biggest no-brainer on the list, just because he has thrown league-average innings in bulk in each of the last five years. His innings totals during that time: 208.2, 217, 218.1, 208 and 204. He's also been better than league-average in four of those five years, including this past season, when he went 13-11 with a 4.19 ERA between Pittsburgh and Boston. John Thomson is another guy who pitched 200+ decent innings last year. He did so for the Rangers who, coincidentally enough, are one of the main teams who are in need of a couple of good bargains from this group of pitchers. Thomson went 13-14 with a 4.85 ERA in 217 innings this year. That 4.85 ERA certainly isn't pretty, but when you adjust for the league and ballpark, it comes out to about 2% better than league-average. Not great, but I believe that qualifies him for sainthood in Texas these days. Thomson also had a solid year in 2002, pitching 181.2 innings with a 4.71 ERA between with the Rockies and Mets. He pitched for $1.1 mill in 2002 and $1.3 mill last year, and I would definitely give him similar money for 2004. Cory Lidle has a little more upside than either Suppan or Thomson, but he didn't have nearly as good a year in 2003. After back-to-back good seasons in Oakland, Lidle went to Toronto, where he was supposed to be the #2 man behind Roy Halladay. Lidle started poorly, posting a 5.75 ERA in six April starts. He turned it around in May, going 5-1 with a 2.98 ERA, but then fell apart. He had ERAs of 7.90, 7.90 and 8.44 over the next three months, before finishing the year with a respectable September (4.13 ERA in five starts). A look at Lidle's rate stats shows a fairly similar pitcher to the one that had success with the A's in 2001 and 2002: SO/9 BB/9 HR/9All three rates were slightly worse than they were with the A's, but certainly not enough to explain a 50% increase in ERA. I think the thing that really hurt Lidle last year was his defense. In Oakland, he had one of the best defenses in the league at converting balls in play into outs playing behind him. In 2003, the Blue Jays finished 11th in the AL in "defensive efficiency" and Lidle allowed a hit on 30% of the balls put in play against him. I think he's a good bet to bounce back in 2004 and at least be a league-average pitcher. THE RELIEVERS:        
While there aren't any top-of-the-line starting pitchers on the market this off-season, there are plenty of great relievers to be had. The best of the bunch is Keith Foulke, who had an awesome season as Oakland's closer. Foulke went 9-1 with 43 saves and a 2.08 ERA in 86.2 innings pitched. He struck out 88, walked 20 and held opponents to a .184 batting average. Beyond his great 2003 season, Foulke has been one of the best relievers in baseball for quite a while. He posted ERAs of 2.22, 2.97, 2.33 and 2.90 with the White Sox from 1999-2002. I read that the A's are interested in re-signing Foulke, but I am fairly confident he has priced himself out of their range. There are just too many teams shopping for an "established closer" and Foulke was not only dominant this season, he has that nice, shiny "43" under the "save" column to show potential employers who are into such things. Foulke is certainly among the elite closers in baseball right now and if his deal ends up being close to what the rest of the members of that group are currently getting, he's looking at three or four years and at least $20-$25 million. For those teams not able to spend that much on Foulke, there are plenty of cheaper alternatives. The guy I would recommend is Latroy Hawkins, who has turned himself into one of the league's best setup men, after spending the first part of his career as an absolutely horrible pitcher. My nickname for Hawkins is "The Machine," because he simply pumps strike after strike at the hitter, daring them to hit his 95 MPH heat. Not many have been successful over the last two years. Hawkins is 15-3 with a 1.99 ERA during the last two seasons, including 9-3 with a 1.86 ERA in 77.1 innings this year. Many people say that they don't they don't think he has the "mentality" to be a closer. I don't really know if that is true or not, although certainly Hawkins struggled when given the closer-job in 2001. But that may be just as well, because a great setup man can be used much more liberally than most closers, and because of that I think Hawkins was actually more valuable to the Twins in 2003 than Eddie Guardado was. I think a smart team out there is going to sign Hawkins for two or three years at $3-4 million a season and get one of the best relievers in baseball out of the deal. I'm still hoping that team will be the Twins. The man Hawkins setup during the last two years is almost certainly going to get a much bigger contract. Eddie Guardado has 86 saves over the last two seasons and, although Guardado hasn't been as good or as versatile as Hawkins has been, saves equal big money right now and Guardado will get just that. Guardado has been very good for the Twins and he is certainly a pitcher who would help a lot of teams in the bullpen, but there are no fewer than a half-dozen other pitchers I would rather have when likely salaries are considered. One of those pitchers is Arthur Rhodes who, like Hawkins, has been one of the best setup men in baseball. He had a down year this season, pitching just 54 innings with a 4.13 ERA, but between 2001 and 2002 he was 18-4 with a 2.03 ERA in 136.2 innings. After striking out 10+ batters per nine innings from 1999-2002, Rhodes struck out "only" 8.00/9 this season. That is definitely a concern, especially considering Rhodes is 34 years old, but I think he will bounce back. Even with the bloated ERA, opponents hit just .256/.316/.372 off Rhodes this year. Over the last three years he has held opponents to just .208/.254/.305 and has a strikeout/walk ratio of nearly 5/1. He has been death to lefties (.206/.243/.281) and almost as dominant against righties (.210/.266/.329). Like Hawkins, Rhodes is a guy who I think could do a great job as a closer, but is probably more valuable as a setup man. The man Rhodes setup for much of the season in Seattle was Shigetoshi Hasegawa, who posted a 1.48 ERA in 73 innings and racked up 16 saves while replacing an injured Kazuhiro Sasaski. Hasegawa is my pick for Most Overpaid Free Agent Pitcher of 2004. That's not meant to be a big knock against Hasegawa, who has certainly proven himself to be a solid reliever during his career. It's just that his 1.48 ERA this season strikes me as fairly fluky and I think at least one team out there is going to be willing to reward him with a pretty big contract. Hasegawa had a great year and was one of the best relievers in baseball, but his strikeout rate doesn't suggest sustained success to me. Shiggy struck out just 3.95 batters per nine innings this year, a drop of 21% from last year and 40% from 2001. Losing that many strikeouts is definitely not an encouraging sign for the future and the list of relievers who have remained dominant for multiple years while striking out less than four batters a game is a pretty short one. I think Hasegawa was helped by his defense and his home ballpark in 2003 and I also think he simply got a little lucky at times. That doesn't take away from what he accomplished at all, but it would definitely make me stay away from him as a free agent. Another guy who is likely to cash-in pretty well this off-season is Ugueth Urbina. Urbina had a shaky first-half with the Rangers, going 0-4 with a 4.19 ERA. He was traded to the Marlins in mid-July and was lights-out in the second-half of the year. Urbina went 3-0 with a 1.41 ERA in 38.1 innings for Florida, finishing the year with a 2.81 combined ERA in 77 total innings. He also pitched pretty well in the playoffs, pitching 13 innings with a 3.46 ERA, while saving four games. Like Guardado, Urbina is another guy who will be helped by being a "proven closer." There are better pitchers available and cheaper pitchers available, but lots of teams want a guy who has proven he can close games, and Urbina has certainly done that, saving 72 games over the past two years and a total of 206 during his career. On the flip-side of things, Tim Worrell helped to disprove that whole "proven closer" thing at least a little bit this season. After Robb Nen went down with a season-ending injury, Worrell stepped in as San Francisco's closer and, despite having saved a total of seven games during the first 10 years of his career, racked up 38 saves in 2003. Worrell wasn't really any better or worse than he had been as one of San Francisco's setup men in 2001 and 2002, but he pitched the ninth inning in 2003, instead of the seventh and eighth innings, and that means quite a bit to lots of people. The funny thing about it is that if Worrell hadn't served as a closer this year, I would probably be talking about him as a good guy to pick up for next year. Instead, he's probably looking at an extra $2-3 million bucks a year and he's no longer someone I would go after. I was hoping the Twins would sign Tom Gordon last off-season and they apparently tried to, but he ended up in Chicago instead. Gordon had a great year for the White Sox, going 7-6 with a 3.16 ERA in 74 innings. His strikeout-rate (11.0/9) was once again incredible, his fourth straight year of striking out 10+ per game. The only real downside to Gordon is his health, which has been a major factor at various points during the last 3-4 years. He's definitely a guy I would go after. Armando Benitez is very hard to get a handle on. He can be one of the most dominant pitchers in baseball at times and his numbers have almost always been great, but he has never been regarded as one of the top closers in baseball. He spent 2003 between three teams, pitching a grand-total of 9.1 innings (with a 1.93 ERA) for New York before the Yankees gave up on him. He is coming off a four-year deal for $23 million, which is way too much, but if most teams shy away and he can be had for cheap, he's certainly a great pickup. Mike Timlin was one of the lone consistently dependable relievers in Boston's pen this year, going 6-4 with a 3.55 ERA in 83.2 innings. Timlin is pretty old, but he's been a real workhorse out of the pen over the last few years. Another guy who is a great pickup if he can be had cheaply. Ricardo Rincon was the left-handed portion of Oakland's three-headed Foulke/Bradford/Rincon monster in the bullpen this year. He went 8-4 with a 3.25 ERA in 55.1 innings and was awesome against lefties, holding them to .200/.267/.275. Steve Reed is the owner of some of the strangest year-to-year splits you'll ever see. Reed, a sidearming righty, is always dominant against right-handed hitters (.192/.253/.268 over the last three years). He's a little less consistent against lefties... AVG OBP SLGI love to show a player's splits on this blog and I really think they are an important part of analyzing baseball players, but looking at Reed's splits makes me want to reconsider that whole way of thinking. Other quality relievers who are worth picking up for the right price (read: cheap)... Righties: - Paul Quantrill - Scott Sullivan - Jeff Nelson - Rick White - Chad Fox - Rod Beck - Terry Adams - Jason Grimsley - Curtis Leskanic - Mike DeJean - Dave Veres Lefties: - Steve Kline - Mark Guthrie - Felix Heredia - Dan Plesac In discussing all of these free agent relievers, it seems to me that there are a ton of quality relievers available this off-season. Not only are there a whole bunch of upper-level closers and setup-men, there are also a couple dozen very good middle-of-the-bullpen guys. This year's class of free agent relievers is so deep that there isn't even any reason for teams to talk to guys like Jose Mesa, Mike Williams and Antonio Alfonseca, although you just know they still will. *****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****
Tuesday, November 04, 2003
The Meat Market (Part Two: Catchers and Infielders)After one of the best Octobers in baseball history the calendar now reads "November," which means we are officially in free agent season. Players are filing for free agency, teams are getting their plans and budgets together, and agents are starting to make some phone calls. Over the next several months dozens of major league veterans will be finding new homes and signing big contracts.Today I will look at the free agent catchers and infielders. Yesterday I covered the free agent outfielders, and later this week I will discuss the free agent pitchers. Enjoy... THE CATCHERS:   
There are three legit, veteran starting catchers on the market this off-season, which strikes me as a lot. Last year, for example, only one such catcher was available, and he is once again a free agent. Ivan Rodriguez signed a one-year deal for $10 million with the Marlins last off-season. Rodriguez had problems staying healthy in his last few years with the Rangers, so his hope was obviously to sign the one-year deal and show everyone that he could be injury-free and productive. I'd say he accomplished that, and then some. Pudge played in 144 games for the Marlins, catching a total of 1,132 innings, and hit .297/.367/.474 with 16 homers, 36 doubles, 90 runs and 85 RBIs. Plus, he did all that in what is a very tough ballpark to hit in, and then hit .313/.390/.522 in the post-season. Aside from simply having a very good season, Rodriguez also showed significant improvement in one facet of his game. Through his first 30 years on earth and his first 12 seasons in the majors, Pudge Rodriguez had been one of the most extreme free-swingers around. Prior to 2003, his career-high in walks was 38. He came into this season having walked an average of 30 times for every 150 games he played. Then he got to Florida and something just clicked, I guess. I don't know if it was the change of leagues or just plain coincidence, but Ivan Rodriguez started walking this year. Way back in early April, Rodriguez walked in all five of his plate appearances in a game against the Mets. He followed that up by walking two times in each of the next two games and once more the next game, meaning he walked a total of 10 times in a four-game stretch. Just to put that in some context, in 1995 Ivan Rodriguez walked 16 times...in 130 games. Rodriguez didn't keep up that walk-rate the whole year, but he did end up with 55 walks this season (six of them intentional). Because of that, Rodriguez was able to post the second-best on-base percentage (.369) of his entire career, despite hitting below .300 for the first time since 1994. Pudge turns 32 later this month, but I still think he has some good years left in him. Defensively, he is still very good, although that cannon throwing-arm he showed in Texas appears to be gone. From 1995-2001, Rodriguez threw out at least 48% of would-be basestealers. Then in 2002 he threw out "only" 36.6%, and this season he was at just 33.3%. Of course, 36.6% and 33.3% are still very good throw-out rates, but there's a pretty big gap from "very good" and what Rodriguez did throughout the 1990s. Offensively, Rodriguez has yet to experience much of a drop-off. His slugging percentage this season (.474) was his lowest since 1996, but a lot of that has to do with moving from one of the best hitter's park in baseball (Texas) to one of the best pitcher's parks in baseball (Florida). Pudge ranked third among all MLB catchers in "Runs Above Replacement Position" this year. From 1997 until this past season, Rodriguez's "Equivalent Average" has been above .285. It was .293 this year. The only real question I have regarding signing Rodriguez to a multi-year deal (which is almost certainly what he will get) is whether or not he will physically be able to hold up for that long. Catchers tend to age very poorly and Rodriguez isn't just a normal catcher, he is a guy who consistently played in 130, 140, 150+ games per season while in Texas. That's an awful lot of squatting in the incredible Texas heat. Take that and add in the fact that he missed significant time with injuries in 2000, 2001 and 2002 and I think his health is a fairly big question-mark. I would have no hesitation signing him to a two-year deal, but I suspect he is going to be looking for a lot more than that, and I bet he'll get it too. I figure Rodriguez probably made himself an extra $20 million or so by signing that one-year deal with the Marlins. Oh, and he got $10 million and a World Series ring out of the deal too. The other top free agent catcher is Javy Lopez. His free agency is pretty interesting, for a couple reasons. First of all, he had an extraordinary season for the Braves, hitting .328/.378/.687 with 43 homers and 29 doubles in 129 games. It was the best season of his career and one of the best seasons by a catcher in the history of baseball. Plus, he did all that at the age of 32 and in a "contract year." And not only all of that, Lopez also had that incredible offensive season after several years of being a horrible hitter. Take a look at his yearly numbers, starting in 1999... AVG OBP SLGEven someone as mathematically-challenged as me can see the pattern there. His batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage all declined each season. If you see that pattern from a catcher in his 30s, what would you have expected from him in 2003? .328/.378/.687 with 43 homers, of course. It's hard to get a handle on Lopez's season. On one hand, it seems very "flukish" in that it came out of nowhere and followed several very poor seasons. On the other hand, I know that Lopez worked to get into extremely good physical shape this year, I know that it's not uncommon for a player to have a good season right before they become a free agent, and I also know that Javy Lopez was actually a very good hitting catcher in the past. From 1997-1999, he slugged .534, .540 and .533, hitting a total of 80 homers, so it's not like this is completely out of character for him. When I think of flukes the first thing I think of is someone like Brady Anderson, who hit 50 homers with a .637 slugging percentage in 1996, the only year of his entire career with more than 24 homers or a slugging percentage above .477. But is it a fluke if a guy used to be really good, was really bad for a while, and then became really good again, better than he ever was before, all at 32 years old? Further complicating the issue of whether or not someone should give Javy Lopez multiple years and big bucks as a free agent is the fact that he has said he is interesting in switching to first base in the near future. If a team gives Lopez a big contract and he reverts back to hitting .267/.322/.425 or even .233/.299/.372, it isn't a complete disaster for a catcher, because the position isn't very offensive anyway (catchers hit just .258/.320/.403 as a whole this year). But if he hits like that while making tons of money and playing first base, it's going to be a huge problem. Even if Lopez continues to hit well, much of his value disappears if he moves to first base. As a whole, major league first basemen were about 14% better offensively than major league catchers. If I were a team with a hole at catcher and money to burn I would definitely pursue Ivan Rodriguez before Javy Lopez. If I couldn't get Pudge I would offer Lopez a two-year deal, with a whole bunch of incentives in place of some guaranteed money. If he balked at that or insisted on moving to first base, I would say no thanks and look to fill my hole at catcher with someone like... Benito Santiago. Yes, that's right, Benito Santiago. Believe it or not he's still around and, at 38 years old, he actually had a very nice year, his second in a row. Obviously Santiago is not a guy you want to sign to anything longer than a one-year deal, but he is definitely a decent short-term solution behind the plate. Here are Benito's numbers for the last two years: PA AVG OBP SLGThose numbers aren't great, certainly, but they are safely above league-average for a catcher, especially considering he did that while playing in one of baseball's most extreme pitcher's parks. Santiago ranked 11th among MLB catchers in RARP this year and was fifth in RARP last season. At 38 a complete collapse is always looming, but I bet he will come cheap and I wouldn't hesitate to give him another year behind the plate. Faced with a need at catcher and the prospect of either signing Javy Lopez to a multi-year mega-deal or signing Benito Santiago to a one-year deal worth a million bucks or so, I would avoid the risk, sign Santiago and spend the extra money somewhere else. Even if Benito Santiago is too rich (or too old) for your blood, there is one other attractive free agent catcher available. His name is Todd Pratt and he has been one of baseball's best hitting backup catchers. Pratt hit .272/.400/.462 in 156 plate appearances this year and did even better last season, hitting .311/.449/.500 in 136 plate appearances. He had a very rough year in 2001, but hit .275/.378/.463 way back in 2000. At 36 years old Pratt is no more a long-term solution than Santiago is, but he will almost certainly sign for very little money and he is the type of guy a team could give 350 plate appearances to and get a very nice surprise season in return. Most of the other available veteran catchers are pretty undesirable. Guys like Brad Ausmus, Brent Mayne and Sandy Alomar Jr. all have that shiny "veteran" tag, but they also can't hit, they're old and they are probably going to be extremely overpriced. For example, Ausmus is absolutely useless against right-handed pitching (.238/.290/.316 over the last three years), but he plays good defense and can hit lefties reasonably well (.248/.361/.385 over the last three years). He'd be a very nice veteran backup, capable of getting some spot-starts against left-handed pitching. Unfortunately, Ausmus has been given 1,319 at bats over the last three years and seems likely to be given similar playing time by another team blinded by whatever it is that he does that makes teams think he is worth playing everyday. Same thing goes for Brent Mayne, who wouldn't be a horrible backup catcher able to play a little against right-handed pitching. As for Sandy Alomar Jr., you can stick a fork in him, because he's done. He's 37 years old and hasn't had a decent season in four years. At this point he's about as useless as Neifi Perez's bat. THE FIRST BASEMEN:     
This is a very weak class of free agent first basemen, although it is relatively deep in mediocrity. In years past there have usually been at least one or two star sluggers available at the position, but this year's best hitter is a guy who turned 39 years old about a month ago. Rafael Palmeiro did this season what he seemingly always does, which is hit 35+ homers and drive in 100+ runs. In fact, he's done both things in each of the last nine years. Despite the continued power and production, 2003 was Palmeiro's worst season since 1997. Like Benito Santiago, Rafael Palmeiro is obviously not a guy who teams are looking to sign long-term. He's 39, his offense is declining and his ability to play first base on a consistent basis is in question. Still, like Santiago, Palmeiro is an excellent short-term solution who will likely come relatively cheap. Palmeiro hit .260/.359/.508 in 154 games this season. That was good for 30.1 RARP. Palmeiro didn't play a whole lot at first base so he is classified as a DH, but his 30.1 RARP would have tied him for ninth among all MLB first basemen. His .291 EqA would have ranked him 10th. There is no doubt that Palmeiro is still an upper-level hitter and, even with his declining defensive abilities, he'd be a fine first baseman for some team next year or a DH for several seasons. I think his batting average will likely continue to drop as he ages, but the home run power is more likely to stay. For a one or two-year deal, I think Palmeiro would be a solid addition to a veteran team needing another hitter in the middle of the lineup. Beyond Palmeiro, the list of available first basemen is long on depth and short on quality. Travis Lee had a decent year in Tampa Bay, hitting .275/.348/.459 with 19 homers and 37 doubles in 145 games. The on-base percentage and power aren't quite what you look for in a first baseman, but he plays good D and his offense was actually right around league-average for the position. The Devil Rays had a $2.5 million option on him and declined it, saying they hope to be able to work out a deal for a little less money. Like Palmeiro and a few other available first basemen, Lee would be a nice, cheap short-term answer at first base. If I were a team with a hole there, I would offer him a one-year deal for about $1.5 mill with a few incentives. Scott Spiezio is similar to Lee in that he plays good defense at first base and hits a little bit. Spiezio hit .265/.326/.453 with 16 homers, 36 doubles and 7 triples this year. That's slightly below-average offensive production for a first baseman, but add in the good D and he's definitely worthy of starting somewhere. The weird thing with Spiezio is the way his splits have fluctuated. Check out how Spiezio, who is a switch-hitter, has done against lefties: AVG OBP SLGAnd now look what he's done against righties: AVG OBP SLGIf he could ever combine what he did this year against righties (.282/.344/.499) with what he did last year against lefties (.368/.448/.539) he could have a helluva year. Of course, combining 2002 versus righties with 2003 versus lefties makes him Neifi Perez (and yes, I realize that's the second Neifi line I've used already, but he deserves it). Spiezio comes with an added bonus in that he can play a passable third base and probably second base too, in a pinch. He made 43 starts at third when Troy Glaus was injured and didn't do too badly. And back in his early days with Oakland, he was their starting second baseman. Another potential starting first baseman who is available is...don't laugh...J.T. Snow. Now, Snow has deservedly taken a lot of heat over the last few years for his lack of offense with the Giants. And, while his hitting has not been good, there is a big difference between hitting like he does while making $6 million a year during a multi-year contract and hitting like he does while making what will probably be about a million bucks next season. To me, Snow is an interesting player who is almost certainly worth a one-year deal for minimal money. I know that sounds weird, but stay with me on this... Snow has been playing in Pac Bell, which is one of the most extreme pitcher's parks in baseball. This year he hit just .267/.371/.361 at home, which is a nice OBP but horrible overall production at first base. Over the last three years he has hit just .227/.347/.322 at home, which is just plain awful. But now take a look at what he has done away from Pac Bell during the last three seasons: AB AVG OBP SLG HR 2B RBI RUN BBOver the last three years Snow has essentially totaled one full season's worth of playing time on the road. In that time he hit .282/.384/.444 with 16 homers, 37 doubles and 83 RBIs. Look at how Snow's power disappears in Pac Bell: 2001-2003:If Snow could hit anything close to .280/.380/.440 with solid defense at first base, I would snatch him up in a second and would probably even say he's the #1 first baseman on the market (considering Palmeiro's age and higher price-tag). That may be saying more about the other first basemen than about Snow, but the fact is that if he hits away from Pac Bell in 2004 like he did from 2001-2003, his offense will be way above-average for a first baseman. Add in some good D and he's a no-brainer for a cheap one-year deal. Of course, that is all based on the belief that his numbers away from Pac Bell are for real, and not just based on luck and sample-sizes, which is certainly debatable. If I am a team with a hole at first base and no internal options to fill it, I take one look at the list of first basemen available, groan, and then give J.T. Snow's agent a call. Seriously. You can probably get him really cheap, because I doubt he's sitting at home looking at his home/road splits on ESPN.com After Palmeiro, Lee, Spiezio and Snow, there aren't really any other everyday first basemen available. There are, however, several guys who would be very good in platoon roles. Julio Franco is just slightly older than God (and thus slightly younger than God's older brother, Jesse Orosco), but he can also still do one very valuable thing, which is smack around left-handed pitching. Since coming back to the major leagues in 2001, Franco is a .369/.447/.528 hitter against lefties. He doesn't hit righties much at all, but he's a perfect platoon partner for a left-handed hitter. I dunno, maybe someone like... Brad Fullmer. Fullmer went down with a season-ending knee injury in June, ending what was looking like it would have been a very good season. At the time of the injury Fullmer was hitting .306/.387/.500, after hitting .289/.357/.531 in 2002. A left-handed hitter, Fullmer is essentially useless against left-handed pitching (.217/.246/.325 from 2001-2003), but he can beat up on right-handed pitching with the best of them. Over the last three years Fullmer has hit .301/.371/.523 against righties. He and Franco would make a perfect platoon at DH for an American League club looking for cheap production. You could even platoon them at first base if you didn't mind sacrificing a little bit of defense in favor of some hitting. If you aren't a big fan of Fullmer or you are interested in setting some sort of platooning age-record, you could platoon Franco and 40-year old Fred McGriff. Like Fullmer, McGriff is fairly useless against lefties at this point, but he still has a little juice left in him against right-handed pitching. Even in what was a pretty horrible season with the Dodgers, McGriff still managed to hit .275/.365/.441 against righties, in a pitcher's park. Over the last three years he has hit .297/.380/.522 against righties. Aside from Julio Franco, another guy to partner with someone like McGriff or Fullmer is Eric Karros. I'm guessing some team will give him a contract that is for way too much, but if no teams do something dumb like that, Karros would be a nice guy to grab at a reasonable price. He has no business playing everyday, but he can do a great job playing against left-handed pitching. From 2001-2003 Karros has hit .316/.389/.515 against lefties, including .366/.441/.545 against them this year. Over that same span he is .246/.298/.374 against righties. Sign him cheap and platoon him? Yes! Give him a big deal and play him everyday? No! I bet if you give a smart manager Julio Franco, Brad Fullmer, Fred McGriff and Eric Karros, he could mix and match them for a season and get one of the top-10 most productive 1B/DH-combos in all of baseball. And all for a fraction of what Mo Vaughn will get paid to sit on his couch and eat Cheetos in-between getting lap dances this year. THE SECOND BASEMEN:     
Second base is another position with quite a bit of depth and not much quality. The best of the bunch is Luis Castillo, who is coming off a .314/.381/.397 year and a trip to the World Series. Castillo is a good defensive second baseman and would make a very nice leadoff man for many teams. The thing that concerns me with him is that most of his offensive value comes from his speed, and there are signs of that vanishing. First of all, speed is an asset that leaves players sooner than most other things, like power or plate discipline. So, in that sense, Castillo is at risk just because of the type of player he is and the group of players he belongs in. More specifically though, Castillo himself has shown signs of a speed drop-off. After stealing 193 bases over the previous four seasons, Castillo stole just 21 this year. More disturbingly, he stole those 21 bags while being caught 19 times. That's just a horrendous rate, and it's particularly troubling coming from a guy who is both incredibly fast and has had good stolen base percentages in the past (74% in 1999, 74% in 2000, 76% in 2002). The lack of stolen bases is not what worries me, because I am not really a big fan of the running-game anyway. What does worry me is that Castillo's offense is based almost solely on his ability to hit singles. In 595 at bats this season, Castillo had 187 hits - 156 of them singles. Over the last three years, 83.6% of his hits have been singles, and many of those have been of the infield variety. If the speed vanishes and Castillo stops beating out all of those ground balls, you're basically left with a guy who doesn't do a whole lot else other than drawing a few walks. Still, if I were running a team with a need at the top of the lineup and at second base, I would definitely pursue Luis Castillo. There is some risk that his legs could go and take all of his offense along with, but if he stays at his current level you have yourself one of the top all-around second basemen in baseball and a really nice leadoff man. After Castillo, it gets a little iffy. Roberto Alomar is certainly the biggest name available, but I wouldn't touch him with your team's payroll. He's still okay defensively (although not nearly as good as some delusional people would have you believe), but he simply can't hit any longer. He hit .266/.331/.376 last year and just .258/.333/.349 this season. He remains somewhat passable against right-handed pitching, but absolutely unplayable against lefties (.189/.250/.277 this year, .204/.259/.315 last year). Alomar is a Hall of Famer and one of the best second baseman in baseball history. He's also pretty much done and not a good person to spend money on this off-season. Todd Walker is available, although I seem to be a bigger fan of his than just about anyone else in the world. I thought Boston bringing him in for a year as their second baseman was a good move and, although he hit just .283/.333/.428, I think he's still an attractive option for someone at second base for next year. Assuming he comes cheap and for a one or two-year commitment, of course. Walker's defense is highly underrated (although still not good) and, although he struggled offensively this year, he still finished 13th among all MLB second basemen in RARP, with 23.2. I'd take Walker on a cheap one-year deal over whatever Alomar ends up getting anytime. Mark Grudzielanek is similar to J.T. Snow in that he has gotten a lot of grief for his play over the years, particularly when he was with the Dodgers. But, like with Snow, there is a big difference between paying someone $6 million a year and $1 million a year. At a small price, Grudzielanek is a solid defensive player who hits lefties well (.302/.361/.453 from 2001-2003). At a big price, he's a guy making a lot of money and not hitting righties (.279/.318/.373 from 2001-2003). He's another guy I would talk to well before I thought about calling Alomar. Eric Young wouldn't be a completely horrible one-year solution. At 36, Young isn't much of a defender at second, but he can still hit a little bit. He batted .251/.336/.392 this year and was hitting .260/.344/.421 before being traded to San Francisco (where he hit just .197/.293/.225). Personally I would rather try to find someone in the minors to play second, but for a team wanting a veteran at the position, Young would be okay, assuming he's cheap. For team's looking for a glove-man, they need look no further than Pokey Reese. Of course, with Reese, you don't just get the glove. You also get the anemic bat and some injury concerns. Reese played just 37 games this year after tearing a ligament in his thumb. He also played in just 119 games in 2002. If you like good fielders who may or may not be able to play and may or may not be able to crack a .600 OPS, Pokey is definitely the man for the job. Actually, if I had a good offensive team in place and a pitching staff that was ground ball dominant, I might consider Pokey if he was extraordinarily cheap. THE SHORTSTOPS:   
I would love it if Joe Morgan were the General Manager of a team. Not my team obviously, and not just because I'd like to see what moves he would make. No, I would want to see specifically how much money he would give to Miguel Tejada. There hasn't been a TV announcer this in love with a shortstop since Tim McCarver first laid eyes on Mr. Clutch many years ago. Morgan not only supported Tejada's undeserved AL MVP award last season, he also had Tejada as his #2 candidate this year. I've talked about Tejada's 2002 season and its lack of MVP quality too many times in the past, so I won't go into it again. What I will say is that Tejada is definitely one of the top shortstops in baseball. He ranked sixth among MLB shortstops in RARP this season and, if you account for defense, he moves ahead of at least one of those other five shortstops. So, he may not have been the MVP of the 2002 season, but he is almost certainly a top-five shortstop, he doesn't turn 28 years old until May, and he's also a free agent. What does someone like that deserve, on the open-market? Well, if a team is planning long-term this off-season, I would say Tejada is the second-most attractive free agent on the market, behind only Vladimir Guerrero, whom I talked about in some length yesterday. However, while I said I would "bust the bank and give [Guerrero] just about whatever he wants," I would stop well short of that with Tejada. While Tejada is a good defender at a key position who also hits well, he is also a guy with a .339 OBP over the last three years. But beyond that, I just have a feeling that some team out there is going to give Tejada a massive contract. I don't know who that team will be (although I have an idea or two), but based solely on the amount of media attention he gets, the amount of RBIs he racks up and the amount guys like Joe Morgan adore him, I've got to think that at least one team out there sees Tejada as their Vladimir Guerrero. For five years and $40 million, I would definitely sign Miggy up. But if he gets anything close to that, in either years or yearly salary, I'll be extremely surprised. The #2 shortstop on the market this year is Rich Aurilia. Aurilia had a monster year in 2001 (.324/.369/.572), but followed that up with back-to-back injury-plagued seasons in which his offense was nowhere near that level. Aurilia hit .277/.325/.410 this year, finishing 15th among MLB shortstops in RARP. He hit .257/.305/.413 in 2002 and finished 13th. Like J.T. Snow, Aurilia has played in Pac Bell. Unlike Snow, his offensive numbers don't seem to have been hurt by playing there. Over the last three years Aurilia's OPS (on-base % + slugging %) at Pac Bell is actually about 8% higher than it is on the road. Obviously ballparks impact different hitters in different ways, so I'm not as intrigued by the possibility of Aurilia breaking out once he's away from Pac Bell as I am with Snow. For a team with a hole at shortstop and no interest in giving Tejada a huge deal, Aurilia is a nice option. He's much older than Tejada, but for the short-term he's a good bet to give overall production that isn't extraordinarily different. While Tejada might give a team .290/.350/.500 over the next couple years, Aurilia could certainly hit .270/.330/.440. I'd see what Aurilia thought about two years at about $3 mill per. For those teams priced out of even Rich Aurilia's range, there are a couple of decent (and cheap) options. For a team looking for offense at shortstop, Jose Valentin would be a very good choice. Valentin can't hit lefties at all, but he does very well against righties. He hit .265/.345/.535 against them this year and .264/.337/.522 against them over the past three years. He definitely needs a platoon partner, but that is much better offense against righties than Aurilia will give and even Tejada has hit just .288/.324/.486 against righties in the last three years (albeit in a pitcher's park). On the issue of defense, I think Valentin gets a bum-rap. He doesn't look particularly good at shortstop and he tends to make a few really horrible looking errors every year, but that only matters if you are a big fan of fielding percentage and unable to look at the bigger picture. Most of Valentin's other defensive statistics suggest that he has good range and that he makes more plays at shortstop than many other, more highly-regarded defenders. Because of the likely difference in cost, I might actually go after Valentin before Aurilia, particularly if I had a good platoon-partner for him already in place. There isn't a whole lot left after Valentin. Jose Hernandez was absolutely horrendous this year for three different teams. He even did the impossible, which is hit .261/.340/.373 in Coors Field. I have to admit that I thought Hernandez was in for a huge season when he signed with Colorado. The thought being that players who strike out a lot were helped by playing in Coors, in addition to the fact that everyone's offense is helped out by being in Colorado. Hernandez is probably worth a cheap one-year deal, just because he hit .288/.356/.478 in 2002 and can play almost anywhere on the field. Royce Clayton is a good defensive player, but he complains when he doesn't play everyday and he doesn't give a team any sort of offensive contribution. He's the sort of guy who could be a very nice backup infielder for a few more years, if only he'd have an attitude adjustment and/or realize he is just not a good baseball player. If you need a backup glove-man, save the hassle and just sign Rey Sanchez. One guy I really like as a backup infielder is Tony Graffanino. He has been serving as a platoon-partner for Jose Valentin in Chicago for the last few years and whichever team goes after Valentin would also be smart to talk to Graffanino about filling the same role next year. He hit .303/.356/.533 against lefties this season and .293/.367/.497 against them over the last three years. THE THIRD BASEMEN:   
Third base is far and away the weakest position in this year's free agent class. Here's basically all you need to know: Joe Randa is the best third baseman on the market. Sad, isn't it? To Randa's credit, he had a relatively good year, hitting .291/.348/.452 in 131 games. How he got to those totals is pretty interesting too. Randa hit .329/.388/.632 in April and then was absolutely horrible in May (.152/.218/.232) and only sort of horrible in June (.281/.320/.396). He ended the first-half of the year at .248/.304/.414. So what did he do in the second-half? He hit .344/.402/.500, of course. Over the last three years Randa is a .275/.331/.420 hitter who does slightly better against lefties than righties. Considering that, and the fact that he turns 34 next month, I would probably lean towards staying away unless he wanted to sign a cheap one or two-year deal. That said, if a team has a hole at third base and they stay away from Randa, they may have nightmares about their other options. Here's a list of names to pick from: - Robin Ventura - Tony Batista - Vinny Castilla - Todd Zeile - Chris Stynes - Mark McLemore - Fernando Tatis Those guys should get together and form a third base super-group. They could call themselves "Old, Injured and Just Plain Stinky" (O-I-J-P-S). I see Fernando Tatis playing the role of Justin Timberlake. But okay, the gun is to your head and you need to sign one of those above seven guys to a contract for next year. I think the least sickening choice is probably Robin Ventura. Ventura hit .242/.340/.401 last year between New York and Los Angeles. At 36 years old, he is essentially down to playing defense, taking some walks and yanking the occasional homer. His .242 batting average last year came after averages of .232, .237 and .247 in the previous three seasons. But unlike the other guys in that group, Ventura at least showed the ability to get on base at a reasonable clip last year. I think most people given those seven names to pick from would go with Tony Batista, on the basis of his power numbers. Batista hit 26 homers this year and he has 154 homers over the last five seasons, including 41 long balls in 2000. Of course, the team that gets those homers also gets a guy who makes an out about 70% of the time, and that's not really a trade-off I'm all that interested in making. Batista had a .270 on-base percentage this year, which was dead-last among the 164 players who qualified for the batting-title. That's just unbelievably horrible and his OBPs from past years (.280 in 2001, .309 in 2002) aren't much better. As nice as home runs are and as fun as it is to look at Batista's wacky batting-stance, I would not be interested. Vinny Castilla had a similar season to Batista this year, posting a .310 OBP in 147 games with the Braves. He hit 22 homers but, unlike Batista, his slugging percentage actually cracked .400 - .461 to be exact. Vinny also plays pretty good defense at third, so I guess he wouldn't be a completely horrible choice for a one-year pickup, although that .232/.268/.348 performance from 2002 would probably scare me off. Among the other guys, I think Zeile is pretty worthless at this point. I used to think Stynes was a nice utility player, but he just finished a year in which he slugged .413 while playing in Colorado. I'm a bigger Mark McLemore fan than most, but he hit .233/.318/.314 this year and, at 39, he might be done. Fernando Tatis still has that .298/.403/.553 season on his resume, but he hasn't been healthy at all since then and he's also a .225/.305/.357 hitter over the last three years. For those of you who are fans of a team with an established third baseman in place, consider yourselves lucky. For those of you who root for a team with a hole at third, it's a tough-break. The best you can hope for is that your team's GM fills the hole with a trade. The worst you can hope for is that you open up your local sports-section one morning and read the words: "Batista agrees to three-year deal..." *****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****
Monday, November 03, 2003
The Meat Market (Part One: Outfielders)After one of the best Octobers in baseball history the calendar now reads "November," which means we are officially in free agent season. Players are filing for free agency, teams are getting their plans and budgets together, and agents are starting to make some phone calls. Over the next several months dozens of major league veterans will be finding new homes and signing big contracts.Today I will look at the free agent outfielders. Later this week I will cover the free agent infielders, catchers and pitchers. Enjoy... THE CORNER OUTFIELDERS:        
Bad Vlad is obviously the crown-jewel of this year's free agent crop. Like Alex Rodriguez a few years ago, Vladimir Guerrero is an elite-level player eligible for free agency well before he hits 30. What that means is that, assuming Guerrero signs the 6-8 year deal that has been typical for the top free agents of late, the team that signs him will be getting his prime years and they won't be forced to pay him as he nears 40. Anytime you give a player a guaranteed contract that spans that many years there is a lot of risk involved. Not having to worry about whether or not that player will remain productive as a 38-year old is an added bonus. Vlad Guerrero is one of baseball's best hitters and has been remarkably consistent. Since hitting .302/.350/.483 as a 21-year old in 1997, Guerrero has had an OPS (on-base % + slugging %) between .943 and 1.074 every year. He has hit at least .300 in each of his seven full-seasons and his slugging percentage has been above .550 every year since his first season. Here is what he's done recently: AVG OBP SLGThe thing that makes Guerrero particularly intriguing is that there is one part of his offensive game that he has definitely not mastered. Guerrero is essentially a "hacker" who goes up to the plate looking for anything to swing at. He doesn't take a whole lot of pitches and he's willing to swing at just about anything traveling in his direction, as long as it's round, white and has stitches in it. This season he saw an average of 3.33 pitches per plate appearance and he has seen an average of 3.16 P/PA during his entire career. There were only two players in all of baseball who had enough playing-time to qualify for the batting title while seeing fewer pitches per plate appearance than Guerrero: Cesar Izturis and Deivi Cruz, who each saw 3.2 P/PA. Not exactly stellar company. Despite the few pitches he sees, it would appear at first glance as though Guerrero has become much more selective at the plate over the years. From 1998 to 2002 his walks went from 42 to 55 to 58 to 60 to 84. Guerrero was injured for part of this season, but if you project his walk total out to 155 games played it comes out to 87. Of course, first glances can often be misleading. Guerrero gets intentionally walked more than almost any other player in baseball. He has been intentionally walked 128 times over the last six seasons, including 32 times in 2002 and 22 times in just 112 games this season. If you ignore those intentional walks and look only at the "non-intentional" variety, here are what Guerrero's walk-rates look like: BB per 650 PAThere are definitely signs of improvement there, but we're still talking about a guy who has actually drawn the equivalent of about 40 walks a year, with a career-high rate of 57 this season. Of course, when you are hitting .330 with 70 extra-base hits every year there aren't going to be a whole lot of people complaining about your walk-rate. As Guerrero ages, I wouldn't be surprised if he gradually continues to become more patient at the plate. I don't think he's going to be leading the league in walks anytime soon, but if he could get to where he's drawing 80 legit walks a year, and thus laying off more bad pitches and getting better pitches to hit, it would make him even more dangerous. Vladimir Guerrero is one of the best free agents in baseball history and the team that signs him will be adding an extraordinarily valuable piece to their team. I'd bust the bank and give him just about whatever he wants if he expressed interest in signing with my team. According to everything I've been reading, I'd say about a dozen teams think they have a shot at him, which means that price-tag is going to rise pretty high. He's worth it. Because there is only one Vladimir Guerrero to go around (there's also one Wilton Guerrero, but no one seems to want him), there are going to be quite a few teams that budgeted for a big-time corner outfielder and didn't get the #1 guy on their list. That's good news for Gary Sheffield, who is the second-best free agent hitter on the market this off-season. I am of the opinion that Gary Sheffield is one of the most underrated hitters of this era. Sheffield is a career .299/.401/.527 hitter with over 2,000 hits who will top 400 homers next season. Yet he is never really mentioned in the same breath as other top sluggers. I think there are probably a few reasons for this. First, he has a reputation for being a bad guy. That plays a part in how the media treats him and that in turn plays a part in how fans perceive him. Second, he has spent much of his career in pitcher's parks. Third, a ton of his value offensively comes from his tremendous plate discipline. While the value of on-base percentage is gradually finding more support throughout baseball, it still remains a stat and a skill many people don't think that highly of. Sheffield has been an offensive-machine for more than a decade. He hasn't had a sub-.400 on-base percentage since 1994 and he has had a sub-.500 slugging percentage just twice since 1992. He's also a fairly good outfielder with a strong throwing-arm. Among active outfielders, Sheffield ranks fourth in career adjusted OPS (OPS+), behind only Barry Bonds, Manny Ramirez and Brian Giles. At 35, he's nearing the end of the line, but he showed no signs of slowing down this season. Sheffield hit .330/.419/.604 with 39 homers, 37 doubles and a career-high 132 RBIs. He even added in 18 steals while being caught just four times. Aside from the obvious stuff, something about Sheffield that has always impressed me is his strikeout/walk ratio. He hasn't struck out more times than he has walked in the last 10 seasons and has actually had twice as many walks as strikeouts in two of those years. For his career he has 1,110 walks compared to just 796 strikeouts, which is pretty amazing. Sheffield is coming off of a six-year, $61 million-dollar deal that he signed prior to the 1998 season. That works out to an average of about $10 mill per year, which is around what I expect him to command this off-season. If I were running a team with an opening if left or right field I would love to sign him for something like three years and $32-35 million, but I suspect at least one team will be willing to give him more years than that. After Guerrero and Sheffield are off the market, a lot of teams will be scrambling for corner outfielders. While there is a big drop-off after those two stars, there is still quite a bit of depth at the position. The top second-tier name is probably Shannon Stewart, who had a very nice second-half with Minnesota and whose hype and media attention have never been stronger. In other words, he picked the perfect time to be a free agent. And, while Stewart is nowhere near an MVP-caliber player (like Jayson Stark, among others, have suggested), he is definitely a solid corner outfielder. Check out how consistent he has been in recent years: AVG OBP SLG HR 2BThe funny thing about all this "Stewart for MVP" talk, aside from the fact that he was nowhere near the MVP of the league, is that his performance this year is essentially the exact same as in 2001 and 2002. But I digress... The one area of Stewart's offensive-game that is far from consistent is his running. Once upon a time Stewart was one of the best basestealers in baseball. He stole 51 bases in 1998 and followed that up with 37 more in 1999. Stewart stole just 14 bags with the Blue Jays in 2002, although much of that was said to be because the new Toronto regime wasn't much into running. Before being dealt to the Twins this year, Stewart had a grand-total of one stolen base in 71 games with Toronto. Once he got to Minnesota he would be set free on the bases and the old Shannon Stewart would come back. Or so the theory went. I can't begin to tell you how many times I heard about how Shannon Stewart was adding "a whole new dimension" to the Twins. For the first month or so in Minnesota, every time Stewart was on first base, the Twins' TV announcers would warn their audience that Stewart was likely to run. Except he never did. In 65 games with the Twins, a team that was certainly in favor or running, Stewart stole three bases and was caught stealing four times. My personal observation of him was that his speed, while still good, was definitely not great, and he also did not get very good jumps off the pitchers. I would say that any team expecting Shannon Stewart to steal 30 or 40 bases again is being foolish at this point. What they will get is a .300 hitter who will laces doubles all over the field. He will also walk a little bit, and his outfield defense was much better than I expected, even after he was asked to play right field for the first time in his career. For a team looking for some offense in a corner outfield spot, Shannon Stewart would be an excellent choice. He's 29 years old and, although his speed appears to be in a decline, his bat looked just fine all year. I was very impressed with his ability to turn on good fastballs and rip them down the left field line for doubles, and the guy is a career .303 hitter. You can pretty much pencil him in for .300/.360/.450, which is probably worth about $5-$7 mill a season for three or four years. For those teams unable to get any of the "sure things" in Guerrero, Sheffield and Stewart, there are plenty of other corner outfield options, although most of them come with a lot more risk and baggage. The highest risk/reward ratio in the group definitely belongs to Juan Gonzalez. Gonzalez has played in a total of 152 games over the last two years with Texas. When he's been healthy his hitting has been very solid, particularly this year, when he hit .294/.329/.572 in 346 plate appearances. If you go back three seasons, you find a .325/.370/.590 performance for Cleveland, when he played in 140 games and drove in 140 runs. At this point in his career, Juan Gonzalez has to know he isn't going to be getting any multi-year deals for mega-bucks. And that's the reason he is worth taking a chance on. To sign him to a one-year deal, even if it is an expensive one, is worth the risk in my opinion. If you can keep him healthy, he's going to hit. If you can't...well, at least you don't have to keep paying him next year. There's a chance he might play 70 games, but there's also a chance he could play 135 and hit 35 homers while slugging .600. I'd offer him one year at $5 million with some incentives and go from there. After Gonzalez, you've got a bunch of guys who played everyday in 2003 - Carl Everett, Jose Cruz Jr., Jeromy Burnitz, Raul Ibanez, Rondell White, Jose Guillen and Raul Mondesi. Personally, there isn't a guy on that list that I would be all the excited about acquiring, for various reasons, and I would much rather save some money and try my luck with the guys on the "clearance rack" (more on them in a moment). That said, if you have a hole in left or right field and you don't have any other options, there is some value in the above group. I would stay away from Mondesi, because he is not only an overrated player with a mediocre bat (.251/.330/.456 over the last three years), he's an overrated player with a mediocre bat who is a pain in the butt and bad defensively. I wouldn't give him more than a million bucks for a single year, and I'm sure at least one team will give him a whole lot more than that. I would also stay away from Burnitz, unless he is really cheap. Burnitz had a very good first-half, hitting .274/.344/.581, but he was awful after he joined the Dodgers for the second-half. In 61 games with Los Angeles, Burnitz hit .204/.252/.391, forcing his season-totals all the way down to .239/.299/.487. That means his OBPs for the last two years are .311 and .299, which also means I'm not interested unless he wants to play for next-to-nothing. The most intriguing guy in that group is probably Jose Guillen. At 27 he's younger than the rest of those guys and he hit .337/.385/.629 in 91 games with the Reds, before being dealt to Oakland. After joining the A's he hit just .265/.311/.459, although he had a serious wrist injury for some of that time. I'm inclined to say he's the same guy who came into this season as a .260/.305/.398 career hitter, but the chance that his first-half with Cincy is a sign of him turning the corner is definitely interesting. I'd say there's a pretty good chance some team gives Guillen a four-year deal for like $25 million, which is about two years and $20 million more than my price-range would be for him. He's interesting, but he's still Jose Guillen, you know? Of those seven guys who played everyday that I mentioned, the two that I would go after if I felt I needed to fill a corner outfield spot with a "name" free agent would be Jose Cruz Jr. and Raul Ibanez. Carl Everett is also worth a look and he can fake center field too, but he's probably too much of a hassle and too expensive. Jose Cruz Jr. had an interesting season. After being let go by the Blue Jays he signed a one-year deal with the Giants. He started out very hot, hitting .308/.439/.593 in April, and then didn't have another good month the entire year. He hit just .233/.348/.335 in the second-half and finished the year at .250/.366/.414. So why exactly would I be interested in him? Well, he hit 20 homers in a very tough park to hit homers in and he also walked 102 times. If he can keep most of that plate discipline and bump the power up a little bit when leaves Pac Bell, he could very easily hit .260/.365/.450 next year (he has a career SLG of .458), which, along with good defense, is worth a one-year deal for a couple mill. Raul Ibanez is an interesting player, because when he came to the Royals in 2001 he was 29 years old and a career .241/.295/.383 hitter. Over the next three years with Kansas City he got 1,384 at bats and hit .291/.347/.492. My first reaction was that some of that comes from hitting in a very good hitter's park, but Ibanez also hit .283/.345/.483 on the road during that span. He struggles with left-handed pitching and probably needs a platoon partner, but he hits righties very well (.304/.364/.523 from 2001-2003) and he can play either corner outfield spot, as well as first base. Beyond the everyday guys from last year like Ibanez and Mondesi, I guess we get to what would be described as the "fourth-tier" of corner outfield free agents, or the "clearance rack." This is a group of guys who have not had everyday playing time, and who are either injury-prone, poor defensively or in definite need of a platoon partner - and sometimes all three. Of course, being the big fan of platoons and cheap offense that I am, I see a TON of value in this group. For example, Matt Stairs, when put into the lineup against right-handed pitching, was one of the best hitters in baseball last year. And yet the Pirates recently offered him a one-year deal for $900,000, which Stairs rightly turned down. Stairs hit .304/.402/.582 against right-handed pitching last year and has hit .270/.375/.517 against righties over the last three years combined. The man can't hit lefties to save his life, but that only matters if you ask him to try, which I wouldn't. If you only play Stairs against righties, you get All-Star level production for about two-thirds of the playing time, all for very little money. Then you just need to find him a platoon-partner to bash lefties and you can get yourself a .900 OPS-platoon for around two million bucks. Oh, and there are definitely some lefty-bashers on this list too. For example, Eduardo Perez destroyed lefties to the tune of .353/.459/.667 this season and .271/.354/.643 last year. Like Stairs, he can play either corner outfield spot and first base. If you use Stairs and Perez in a strict platoon you could very easily get a .280/.380/.520 "hitter" with 30 homers. If you ask me, that sure beats overpaying for non-platooned mediocrity like Mondesi. Another guy who can destroy lefties is Reggie Sanders. Sanders hit .301/.368/.647 against southpaws this season and .282/.359/.611 against them over the last three years. And, unlike many lefty-mashers, he is good enough against righties that you don't have to put him into a strict platoon. In fact, Sanders was very good against righties this year, hitting .278/.335/.533. Over the last three years he has hit righties at .259/.326/.487, which is right at the border of "acceptable" for an everyday corner outfielder. Sanders is also a good defensive player with a little speed, which separates him from guys like Stairs and Perez. He will most likely be joining his seventh team in seven seasons, which is good, because he is definitely the perfect one-year pickup. A similar player to Reggie Sanders is Brian Jordan, who plays good corner outfield defense and kills lefties, while hitting just "okay" against righties. Over the last three years Jordan has hit .318/.381/.582 against lefties and just .284/.331/.441 against righties. He's been overpaid coming off a five-year deal for $40 mill, but he's definitely worth a million or two for 2004. Another guy I like for cheap platooning in 2004 is John Vander Wal, who has hit .267/.358/.464 against righties during the last few years. Also, Ben Grieve might be worth taking a shot at on a cheap deal, just because he used to be pretty good and he's still only 27. And Ellis Burks can still DH and hit, as long as his legs are working and his hand isn't numb. THE CENTER FIELDERS:  
This year's group of free agent center fielders leaves a lot to be desired. Basically, you can either break the bank open and sign Mike Cameron to a multi-year deal, go for a one-year bargain with Kenny Lofton, or sign a corner outfielder like Carl Everett and ask him to stand around in the middle of the outfield while doubles fly past him. As anyone who has read this blog for a long time knows, I am a big fan of Mike Cameron, so he is definitely the guy I would go after. That said, it's similar to the Vlad Guerrero-situation, in that every team needing a center fielder is going to go after Cameron and, last I checked, there is only one Mike Cameron to go around. That would put Kenny Lofton in a similar situation to Gary Sheffield, I suppose. Way back in early July, I declared Mike Cameron "The Most Underrated Player in Baseball." My reasoning for that was based on several things. For one, I believe Mike Cameron is the best defensive center fielder in the world and, because defense is often overlooked, the fact that much of his value comes from that area makes him underrated. Along with that making him underrated was also the fact that his home ballpark, Safeco Field in Seattle, has cost him an incredible amount of offensive production over the years. Here's a little quote from that entry: "Since joining the Mariners, Cameron has played 3.5 seasons with Safeco Field as his home ballpark. During that time at Safeco, compared to playing on the road, his AVG is down 26.6%, his OBP is down 14.5% and his SLG is down 32.6%.I am still not quite sure why Safeco Field has had such a negative impact on Cameron's hitting. It is certainly a pitcher's park, but its impact on other hitters isn't nearly as pronounced. The interesting thing about this is that players have long complained about Safeco Field's "hitter's background" and the Mariners changed it for the second-half. Here's a quote from an Associated Press story from July 19th: "Safeco Field will have a new look for the second half of the season, one the Seattle Mariners hope will cut down the glare for day and early evening games. Mariners hitters have complained about that glare since the ballpark opened four years ago. Some have even campaigned to have the team keep Safeco's retractable roof closed for day games to solve the problem."I can't say for sure that this was Mike Cameron's main problem with hitting in Safeco, but it seems to have been a problem for many hitters, a group which probably included Cameron. So, did Cameron's Safeco hitting improve after the new hitting background was put in? Let's take a look... Mike Cameron at Safeco Field:Batting average up 19%, on-base percentage up 18%, slugging percentage up 8%. I'd say Cameron liked the new background. Of course, the really interesting thing about all of this is that right around the time the new hitter's background was put in and right around the time Cameron starting hitting better at home, he stopped hitting on the road. Mike Cameron on the roadI don't even know how to begin to explain that, so I won't. What I will say is that over the last three seasons, a span that includes those awful numbers from last year's second-half, Mike Cameron is a .278/.364/.510 hitter away from Safeco Field. In addition to that, he is a .260/.355/.448 hitter at Safeco Field in the time after the hitter's background was changed. I don't know how much of this is just dumb luck and sample-sizes and how much of it is legitimate, but either way I think it's safe to say that Mike Cameron deserves a shot at trying to put up some big offensive numbers outside of Safeco Field. Thankfully, because of his current free agency, the odds are pretty good that he'll be able to do that. So, the big question is how much is he worth to another team? The answer to that question obviously hinges on whether or not you think the hitter he has been on the road the last several seasons is the one that will come out once he is away from Seattle. If you do think that, then I don't think it is a stretch to say that he could very easily hit .275/.365/.510 for his new team, and possibly even higher if he goes to a friendly ballpark for hitters. What is .275/.365/.510 with extraordinary defense in center field worth? Andruw Jones hit .277/.338/.513 last year, so Cameron's "projection" is a step up from that. In fact, if Cameron can get his OBP around .360 and his SLG around .500, the only everyday center fielders from last year to do better than were Jim Edmonds, Carlos Beltran and Vernon Wells. In other words, if Cameron hits like I think he can, the team that signs him will end up with one of the top handful of center fielders in all of baseball next year. What's that worth on the open-market? A lot more than he's going to end up getting, that's for sure. If I was running a team you can be certain I would be the guy signing Mike Cameron this off-season. I'd ask his agent what the best offer they have is, add a million a year to it, and get Mike in a uniform for the press-conference. My prediction for Cameron next year? Hmm...let's say .270/.360/.500 with 25 homers, 35 doubles, 5 triples, 75 walks and a Gold Glove in center field. Assuming no GMs are reading this blog, I'd say Cameron is going to be one hell of a bargain for whatever price he ends up signing for. I guess we'll just have to wait a year to find out if I'm right. *****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****
|
