When the Phillies are playing this bad - I tend to not watch them. I decided a couple years ago that it was not worth the mental anguish of watching Carlos Ruiz hitting into a bases-loaded, one-out, double play. I get too mad. It’s only mid-way through the regular season. I can get mad in September. So instead of watching the rest of the game, gritting my teeth, and probably taking years off my lifespan, I simply change the channel or go into the other room and look at trade rumors or something.
During this slump, I’ve been distracting myself by thinking about whether or not we should include Carlos Carrasco in a trade for a rent-a-pitcher. At this point, I’ve pretty much made up my mind that we should not. Especially after reading stuff like this from Jayson Stark…
• The Carlos Carrasco Watch: Carlos Carrasco is no household name to most fans. But among the scouting community, he’s the most-watched pitcher in the entire Phillies system — a 21-year-old right-handed rocket-launcher the Phillies would have to agonize over seriously before trading. One scout’s review: “Why is this guy still in Double-A? He’s a big-time arm with quality stuff who could eventually be a top-of-the-rotation guy. I don’t see them trading him. I really don’t.”
I am a real believer that you do not give up guys like this unless you are getting a proven pitcher back who will be on your team for at least 3 years (Johan Santana, Dan Haren, etc…). Right now, it appears that the two players Carrasco would be traded for would be a 1/2 year rental (Sabathia) or a 1 1/2 year rental (Bedard). Young pitchers who come up through your system and who you control for their first 6 years in the majors are THE most valuable commodities in baseball. You’ve got to get equal value back on a trade like that.
If Carrasco can make an impact in 2009-2010, the Phils would add a starter to their rotation at less than $1 million a year and could certainly sign another. A rotation of Hamels, Carrasco, Kendrick, one of our other young pitchers (Bastardo, Savery, Garcia, Naylor or Happ) and a decent FA - is not a bad “rotation of the future.” I know 2010 is far away, but if you make this type of trade now, you are forcing yourself to build your future rotation through overpaying free agents, which as we’ve seen with Eaton, Lieber and others, is not the way you want to go about it and is extremely frustrating for the fans.
I know there will be several different opinions on this, let me know what you think.
ALSO - In a completely unrelated, and probably boring for you, development, I was bored at work today and put together my dream roster (no Phillies) if I were able to create team with every player in the league available. These are not the best players at every position, but rather who I would want on my team and would want to watch every day - essentially my favorite players at every position.
C- Joe Mauer, Twins
1B- Jim Thome, White Sox
2B- Howie Kendrick, Angels
SS- Hanley Ramirez, Marlins
3B- Evan Longoria, Rays
OF- Justin Upton, Diamondbacks
OF- B.J. Upton, Rays
OF- Manny Ramirez, Red Sox
DH- Vladimir Guerrero, Angels
SP- Dan Haren, Diamondbacks
SP- Scott Kazmir, Rays
SP- Tim Lincecum, Giants
SP- Zach Greinke, Royals
SP- Jon Lester, Red Sox
RP- Scot Shields, Angels
RP- Jonathan Broxton, Dodgers
CL- Francisco Rodriguez, Angels
6 comments ↓
C- Victor Martinez, CLE
1B- Mark Texiera, ATL
2B- Dan Uggla, FLA
3B- David Wright, NYM
SS- Hanley Ramirez, FLA
OF- Grady Sizemore, CLE
OF- Matt Holliday, COL
OF- Vlad Guerrero, LAA
DH- Albert Pujols, STL
P- Jake Peavy, SD
P- Roy Halladay, TOR
P- Ervin Santana, LAA
P- Danny Haren, ARI
P- Tim Lincecum, SF
RP-Carlos Marmol, CHC
RP- Brandon Morrow, SEA
CL- Francisco Rodriguez, LAA
C-Joe Mauer-Twins
1B-Justin Morneau-Twins
2B-Dan Uggla-Marlins
3B-Garrett Atkins-Rockies
SS-Hanley Ramirez-Marlins
OF-Matt Holliday-Rockies
OF-Ryan Braun-Brewers
OF-Josh Hamilton-Rangers
DH-David Ortiz-Red Sox
SP-Brandon Webb-Diamondbacks
SP-Edinson Volquez-Reds
SP-Jon Lester-Red Sox
SP-Scott Kazmir-Rays
SP-Tim Lincecum-Giants
RP-Joe Nathan-Twins
RP-Johnathan Papelbon-Red Sox
CL-Mariano Rivera-Yankees
It’s my team and I want the best bullpen arms around, so I’m loading up on closers.
I will say the same thing I have been saying all along. If the Phils are sure that Carrasco is top of the rotation caliber and he will be a solid # 2 behind Hamels beginning next year, then they must keep him. If the reality is he will be a #4 starter in two or three years, then I’d rather take our shot now. As long as we can get a top of the rotation starter who will be with us for a few years(no 1/2 year rentals), we owe it to the guys that are here to give them the best shot at winning a title.
Your offensive core is made up of Howard (age 28), Rollins (age 29), and Utley (age 29), all of whom are at their peaks. I’d bring this guy up to the Majors now, go through the growing pains, and then hope he becomes a solid #2 starter before the Big Three disband.
bski, I’ve started reading a book called “Baseball Between the Numbers” by the guys who do Baseball Prospectus, and it’s starting to give me some ideas (oh no…). I’m starting to get familiar with some strange stats, like VORP, RBI per out, etc.
Why? I have this idea that’s been gnawing at me: is the city of Philadelphia overrating the Phillies’ “Big 3″? I wanna find out for myself, by looking at some of those sabermetric stats. I’m gonna go with the hypothesis that Rollins, Utley and Howard are overrated and see where that takes me.
They have an interesting idea in there about how some runs are worth more than others, like how in a blowout, a run is worth much less than in a tie game, and that this can be accounted for somehow. The Phils must be last in the league in value per run, like they’ve scored more runs than Team B, but Team B’s value per run is much higher than the Phils. Like I said, I’ll keep reading.
Also, I was thinking about what Pete said about leadership. If that is something that adds value on top of a player’s stats, then doesn’t that mean we could bring in a negative clubhouse influence, like Barry Bonds, and because of the leadership of our Big 3, Barry wouldn’t have such a negative effect? If you bring in all high-character guys, why do you still need so much leadership? All the Phils are good guys, isn’t Jimmy Rollins’ leadership being wasted? Isn’t Utley’s leadership enough for a team of good guys?
ZACK: That’s pretty interesting. Maybe I’ll check into that book as well. In the meantime keep me up to speed on what you find.
More and more, I’m thinking that, in an effort to objectively quantify player performance, we’re really going off the deep end. I fully understand why each organization would want to know exactly how productive each player in the league is. After all the amount of productivity=relative value=$$$$. With player salaries ever on the rise, this would certainly help teams avoid overpaying for the productivity they get from each player.
For example, if the sabermetricians can pinpoint the exact productivity value of Ryan Howard, it will make the Phils decision, regarding whether or not to sign him, easier. Once you quantify Howard, you can then use the current market to decide how many years and dollars he is actually worth.
Even if Bill James and his followers are able to tease that kind of information out of the numbers, I think it is still flawed. I say that because the numbers accrue to individual players, BUT they are generated in a team setting. Individual players are affected by the others in the lineup and the game situation when they step into the batter’s box.
You mentioned leadership. How do you quantify that? In my mind, it is beyond question that there are certain players who make their teammates better. They help others put up better numbers, but it doesn’t show up in their productivity.
What if we compared the productivity of #8 hitters in the NL against that of #9 hitters in the AL. The #9 hitter in the AL is followed by the lead off man in the lineup. There are not many “outs” in the typical AL lineup. Any pitcher is going to go after the ones that are there. In most situations, the pitcher will go after the #9 hitter, so as not to face the lead off man(or to not face him in an RBI situation). Therefore, the #9 hitter will get more pitches to hit, giving him a better chance of being productive. In the NL, the #8 hitter is followed by the pitcher. He is dealing with the exact opposite scenario. In almost every situation, a pitcher would chose to pitch to the opposing pitcher instead of the #8 hitter, What happens? The pitcher nibbles, throws off speed stuff, tries to get the #8 hitter to chase, etc…He’s getting nothing to hit. Added to that, when the #8 hitter comes up with 2 outs and runners on, he is going to expand his strike zone and go after pitches he normally wouldn’t, knowing full well that he is the best chance the team has at driving the runners in. In many cases, the #8 hitter swings at a bad pitch and grounds out or strikes out, thereby decreasing his productivity. I have a very strong feeling that if you compared the productivity numbers of #9 hitters in the AL and #8 hitters in the NL, you would find that the #9 AL hitters have the edge. I also think if you switched every #8 hitter in the NL with every #9 hitter in the NL, the stat advantage would stay in the AL.
To me, that statistical advantage is a mirage. It is a function of the league and team dynamic more than it is a reflection of the actual ability and productivity of the individual players. The individual players are basically a victim of circumstances. The faulty disparity in the numbers, upon which the sabermetricians base their calculations, will cause them to wrongly overvalue some players and overvalue others.
The other problem I have with all these numbers and values is that we are losing the human element. Boiling human performance down to these acronyms just sort of takes the romance out of it, you know? I still have a love for “the game”. I would much prefer the usual barroom debate about whether Lefty Grove or Steve Carlton was the better pitcher over whether or not VORP is a valid measuring tool.
Leave a Comment