The Official 2012 MLB Thread
- Thread starter Erndog
- Start date
#1PilarFan
New member
What, you don't think Melky is a .340+ hitter?
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Basically pretty much every team's bullpen sucks if you're allowed to just pick and choose their worst recent outings to determine if they're good or not.
hockeyfan1
New member
ESPN the Magazine had an article on the rising spate of injuries especially to pitchers in MLB. Here are some interesting facts...
- Injury rates in baseball have been climbing for more than 20 years
- From 2007 to 2009, clubs sent more players to the DL than in any three-year stretch for which data is available
- Pitchers account for about half of disabled-list reports and last season contributed to the nearly $500 million in terms of DL costs
- Pitching injuries have reached epidemic levels. Research shows that overuse leads to fatigue, then mechanical breakdowns, then disaster. But injuries have risen even as teams impose pitch counts and reduce workloads -- by switching to 5-man rotations
- The 10 MLB pitchers who threw the most innings in 1971 averaged 307.4 IP; in 1991 the average was 249.1 IP, and in 2011, 238.2 IP. The decline doesn't seem to be helping.
- Baseball insiders have shown little initiative in getting to the bottom of this crisis.
- In assessing injury risk, what really matters is how many throws a pitcher makes when he's tired. Pitch counts don't make sense either. Starters are averaging close to 100 pitches per game this season
- Pitchers aren't averaging fewer pitches per start than they were 50 years ago -- but the spread around the average is much narrower
- For example, in a study that examined the Dodgers from 1947 to 1964, starters threw 130 or more pitchers per game much more often than starters from the 1998 team. But, the earlier-era guys also threw 60 or fewer pitches three times more frequently than their modern counterparts, according to research
- Teams need to study the kinetics of their individual pitchers to better pinpoint when players fatigue and when their mechanics start slipping
- Injury rates in baseball have been climbing for more than 20 years
- From 2007 to 2009, clubs sent more players to the DL than in any three-year stretch for which data is available
- Pitchers account for about half of disabled-list reports and last season contributed to the nearly $500 million in terms of DL costs
- Pitching injuries have reached epidemic levels. Research shows that overuse leads to fatigue, then mechanical breakdowns, then disaster. But injuries have risen even as teams impose pitch counts and reduce workloads -- by switching to 5-man rotations
- The 10 MLB pitchers who threw the most innings in 1971 averaged 307.4 IP; in 1991 the average was 249.1 IP, and in 2011, 238.2 IP. The decline doesn't seem to be helping.
- Baseball insiders have shown little initiative in getting to the bottom of this crisis.
- In assessing injury risk, what really matters is how many throws a pitcher makes when he's tired. Pitch counts don't make sense either. Starters are averaging close to 100 pitches per game this season
- Pitchers aren't averaging fewer pitches per start than they were 50 years ago -- but the spread around the average is much narrower
- For example, in a study that examined the Dodgers from 1947 to 1964, starters threw 130 or more pitchers per game much more often than starters from the 1998 team. But, the earlier-era guys also threw 60 or fewer pitches three times more frequently than their modern counterparts, according to research
- Teams need to study the kinetics of their individual pitchers to better pinpoint when players fatigue and when their mechanics start slipping
Interesting points.
I wonder how much of the issue starts before the kids ever make it to the majors? Pitching from young ages, over time, may cause chronic arm problems that finally manifest later on - kind of like repetitive stress. Pitchers are throwing harder than ever and have higher fitness levels than before.
It would be interesting to look at the entire pitching life cycle from when the kids first start out to when they finally make it to the bigs, and compare it to what happened in the past. This is probably not at all likely to be anything other than anecdotal, but it would be fascinating nonetheless.
I wonder how much of the issue starts before the kids ever make it to the majors? Pitching from young ages, over time, may cause chronic arm problems that finally manifest later on - kind of like repetitive stress. Pitchers are throwing harder than ever and have higher fitness levels than before.
It would be interesting to look at the entire pitching life cycle from when the kids first start out to when they finally make it to the bigs, and compare it to what happened in the past. This is probably not at all likely to be anything other than anecdotal, but it would be fascinating nonetheless.
hockeyfan1
New member
http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8285548/mlb-future-power-rankings-season-update-2012-nos-15-1
(also posted in the Blue Jays thread)
ESPN's MLB Future Power Rankings lists teams based on several categories -- Majors, Minors, Finances, Management, and Mobility.
(Check out the methodology used by clicking the link within the article).
(also posted in the Blue Jays thread)
ESPN's MLB Future Power Rankings lists teams based on several categories -- Majors, Minors, Finances, Management, and Mobility.
(Check out the methodology used by clicking the link within the article).
bustaheims
Active member
THe BoSox and Dodgers are apparently near a deal that would send Beckett, Gonzalez, Crawford, Punto and cash to LA for James Loney and a bunch of prospects/young players.
maplesyrup
New member
Wow, that's massive!
Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal
Boston Herald RT @MikeSilvermanBB: #RedSox source: Deal is done. Worth $275-plus million in savings to Red Sox. Will pay #Dodgers $12M.
Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal
Boston Herald RT @MikeSilvermanBB: #RedSox source: Deal is done. Worth $275-plus million in savings to Red Sox. Will pay #Dodgers $12M.
#1PilarFan
New member
Well, they're not the cheapest team in the league, but next year that offense could be epic, if Crawford can turn it around.
Little confused as to their rotation now though; by my count they have Blanton, Lilly, Kershaw, Beckett, Harang, Billingsley and Capuano.
So, who makes the cut?
Little confused as to their rotation now though; by my count they have Blanton, Lilly, Kershaw, Beckett, Harang, Billingsley and Capuano.
So, who makes the cut?
bustaheims
Active member
From a talent perspective, it's not a great deal for Boston - the return is a non-tender candidate in Loney, a couple pitchers with control issues, one of which is coming off Tommy John surgery (de la Rosa) and a couple older hitters with holes in their swing who project to be bench/utility types. From a financial perspective, it's a great move for them, and it's likely the beginning of a fairly significant overhaul in Bean Town.
#1PilarFan
New member
Let's be honest though busta, it's not like they traded some of the best players in the league away. The best player in the deal is Gonzalez and he's having a pretty mediocre season for a 1B. Crawford is a huge anchor and Beckett has been an absolute knob in Boston is the last few seasons. I wouldn't put it past any of these guys to rebound, but none of them are living up to their reputation or their contract.bustaheims said:
#1PilarFan
New member
L K said:
The Sox were likely always going to be players for the big fish and their rotation needs work, but they do already have Lester, Buchholz, Doubront and Lackey looking for rotation jobs next year. Plus some Dodgers fans believe that De La Rose will be ready to start.
Conversely, they now have a few holes in the field that need to be upgraded.
bustaheims
Active member
#1PilarFan said:
Gonzalez was a bad fit for Fenway in terms of HR, as it turns out. He's still having an acceptable season, still putting up decent numbers in just about every offensive category and he's still a very valuable player. Expect an increase in his numbers now that he's back in the NL West. Beckett was excellent for Boston last season, and, coming into this season, his performance in 2010 looked very much like an aberration. He could (and likely will) rebound nicely in a pitcher friendly park like Dodger Stadium. Crawford is the only real pure albatross in this deal.
#1PilarFan
New member
bustaheims said:
Gonzalez's OPS is 100 points higher at Fenway than anywhere else. His numbers are ok, but below average for a 1B and unacceptable for a guy making 21m/year.
Beckett is a talented headcase, and prone to inconsistency on a year to year basis. Also makes almost 16m/year.
I'm not saying these guys won't rebound, but they were sold as low as they possibly could and packaged with a huge burden in Crawford. The return reflects all of that.
bustaheims
Active member
#1PilarFan said:
His OPS in Fenway is good, but is HR totals are not. He's a gap to gap power type guy, and, in Fenway, that means a lot of doubles and not so many homers. He's also coming off 4 straight seasons with an OPS+ over 140 and only turned 30 this season, so, let's not let one down season have that much impact on our view of him.
For a guy who is "prone to inconsistency on a year to year basis," Beckett has been surprisingly consistent. Coming into this season, in 4 of the last 5 years, he had an ERA+ of 115 or better, a WHIP of 1.19 or lower, HR/9 of 1.1 or lower and a BB/9 of 2.4 or lower. He also had a K/9 rate of at least 8.2 in all 5 of those seasons. The only recent season in which he struggled, other than this season, was an injury plagued 2010. If by inconsistency, you mean he's generally been good or very good when he's been healthy, then, sure, I guess he's been inconsistent.
#1PilarFan
New member
bustaheims said:
Home AB per HR 30.2
Away AB per HR 31
Not seeing a big difference here.
Sure A-Gon is great guy and all, but he was traded when his value was terribly low so the return was underwhelming.
Yep. In 7 years with the Sox, he's had 3 seasons with an ERA over 5.
I mean we're arguing whether a guy whose ERA+ has ranged from 75 to 150 over seven years is consistent? Really? At his best he's great and when he's bad he's pretty much Ricky Romero v2012, but that fact alone does not make him a beacon of consistency.
Really I don't care about any of the players dealt, but you wondered why the return was lower than you thought it should have been and I offered you an explanation.
hockeyfan1
New member
From: http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/2012/08/25/boston_red_sox_trade_dodgers_shi_davidi_column/
Dealing them all for massive salary relief -- Gonzalez, Crawford and Beckett were the Red Sox's three priciest salary commitments in the years to come -- plus prospects to boot, is a masterstroke for GM Ben Cherington, whose had nearly every move he's made since replacing Theo Epstein last winter blow up in his face.
The question of where Cherington goes from here is the larger issue, and it's one that should concern the Toronto Blue Jays most, especially after president Paul Beeston upped the ante this week when he told Prime Time Sports on Sportsnet Radio The Fan 590 that the team is "at a point right now where we have got to make a move."
"We've got to be aggressive," he added. "We have got to put ourselves in a position to have a chance for next year. I think we have to be in the trade market and free agent market."
A factor in the Blue Jays' thinking has been that the coming years may represent a time of opportunity for them to strike in free agency with many of the high rollers tapped out.
The New York Yankees have been holding the line in an attempt to ease under the luxury tax threshold when it climbs to $189 million in 2014 from the current $178 million. The Los Angeles Angels broke the bank last winter, the Texas Rangers are near their limit, the New York Mets can't spend, the Chicago White Sox are stretched, the Chicago Cubs are in retreat, and the Detroit Tigers can't add much more.
The Red Sox were thought to be in that group, too, although the flexibility headed their way is a significant game-changer. The Dodgers, meanwhile, may be headed to a stratosphere all their own under a new ownership intent on wielding the club's financial might.
That will make the environment this off-season that much more competitive and truly test how far the Blue Jays' looming aggressiveness will take them. They're going to need at least a couple of starters, possibly a second baseman, a left-fielder and perhaps a DH.
Even worse, the Red Sox are on the verge of setting themselves up for a major renewal, with younger options for an aging and rotten core.
Dealing them all for massive salary relief -- Gonzalez, Crawford and Beckett were the Red Sox's three priciest salary commitments in the years to come -- plus prospects to boot, is a masterstroke for GM Ben Cherington, whose had nearly every move he's made since replacing Theo Epstein last winter blow up in his face.
The question of where Cherington goes from here is the larger issue, and it's one that should concern the Toronto Blue Jays most, especially after president Paul Beeston upped the ante this week when he told Prime Time Sports on Sportsnet Radio The Fan 590 that the team is "at a point right now where we have got to make a move."
"We've got to be aggressive," he added. "We have got to put ourselves in a position to have a chance for next year. I think we have to be in the trade market and free agent market."
A factor in the Blue Jays' thinking has been that the coming years may represent a time of opportunity for them to strike in free agency with many of the high rollers tapped out.
The New York Yankees have been holding the line in an attempt to ease under the luxury tax threshold when it climbs to $189 million in 2014 from the current $178 million. The Los Angeles Angels broke the bank last winter, the Texas Rangers are near their limit, the New York Mets can't spend, the Chicago White Sox are stretched, the Chicago Cubs are in retreat, and the Detroit Tigers can't add much more.
The Red Sox were thought to be in that group, too, although the flexibility headed their way is a significant game-changer. The Dodgers, meanwhile, may be headed to a stratosphere all their own under a new ownership intent on wielding the club's financial might.
That will make the environment this off-season that much more competitive and truly test how far the Blue Jays' looming aggressiveness will take them. They're going to need at least a couple of starters, possibly a second baseman, a left-fielder and perhaps a DH.
Even worse, the Red Sox are on the verge of setting themselves up for a major renewal, with younger options for an aging and rotten core.
bustaheims
Active member
#1PilarFan said:
I didn't wonder at all. I know why they go the return they did, and, in terms of bringing in talent, I think they were too focused on moving out Crawford's contract, which lead to them making a lopsided, talent poor move on their part. They could have received more if they waited until the offseason and traded Gonzalez and Beckett individually and maybe traded Crawford for another team's bad contract.
Kin
New member
#1PilarFan said:
I don't know how fair of an assessment that is. I think it's probably more accurate to say that the good that Gonzalez brings to the table is balanced out by the ugliness of some of the contracts the Dodgers took back so the return in terms of prospects isn't really telling the whole story.
He's got a 2.6 BWAR right now which certainly isn't great but it's also a significant off year for him. I don't think his value is going to drop a ton after a bunch of solid seasons in a row followed up with a disappointing, but not terrible one.
#1PilarFan said:
I think that sort of reveals some of the limitations in ERA+ though. His xFIP's, while not being universally good, are a little more balanced. He's gone from a high of 4.44 in his first year in Boston to a low of 3.19. There's obivously still a swing there but I'd guess that outside the really elite of the elite starting pitchers there'll be a similar swing over a seven year span.
Beckett was awful when he was hurt in 2010 and lousy this year but outside of that has been a valuable pitcher. If there's an noticeable inconsistency it's that he ranges from ok to really good which is an alright inconsistency to have.