News & Notes

Justin Upton was called up yesterday. In terms of physical tools, he's the best player to come up in years. If you want someone to compare him to, think of Ken Griffey Jr, only less reliable defensively. He spent this season tearing up the minor leagues and working with Brett Butler (perhaps the most underrated player of the past 30 years) until Butler suffered a mild stroke last week.

The Dunne Deal fan favorite Lew Ford was sent down to Rochester today. It made me realize that I'm probably the only person alive who would welcome being demoted from my job back to Rochester. Lew could probably help a team looking for a backup outfielder, but it seems that the Twins have an organizational philosophy against trading from their strengths to fill their weaknesses.

Right now I'd have Justin Masterson as the #1 prospect in the Sox organization. He strikes people out, doesn't walk people, and when people do hit the ball, they hit it on the ground. In 33 innings since his promotion to Portland, he's striking out more than a batter per inning, about four times as many times as he's walking someone, and getting 4.5 times more ground balls than fly balls. For comparison's sake, groundball master Brandon Webb gets 2.78 ground balls for every fly ball. 33 innings is a small sample size, but nobody puts up stats like that by accident.

As I'm writing, Bonds has hit #755. Most of the guys Bonds homered off of were doing PEDs too. What are people so offended about anyway? Do they think people will appreciate Henry Aaron less? There are plenty of reasons to dislike Barry Bonds, but this steroids issue, and the constant battering we've taken from holier-than-thou sportscasters has managed to make Bonds into a more sympathetic figure than he's ever been.

One of the funniest things I've seen this week is on ESPN's "Page 2" they have a list of "50 future football Hall of Famers" includes 20 guys who would be there if they retired today, and 30 who are all the guys who have been drafted high in the past two years. Really, it's embarrassing. One of the picks they have there is Shawne Merriman. Who, as you recall, failed a steroid test, and also got votes for defensive player of the year. If Barry Bonds gets suspended next season for 50 games (which is about 5% more of the season than Merriman's four game suspension in the NFL) and spends the rest of the season being the best player in the league, he'd be getting serious MVP consideration? I seriously doubt it. The hypocrisy on this issue is just overwhelming.

So it seems to me that Bonds two biggest crimes have been being better at baseball than everyone who is doing what he does, and not smiling enough.

Sox Bullpen

Now a week into spring training games, the question of who will be the Red Sox closer continues to be a wide open one. Now, this isn’t the time for discussion on the merits of the closer role—the Red Sox will not be trying a committee setup like they did in 2003. So, who are the candidates?

Joel Piniero – What’s the old saying? If you tell yourself someone is a good pitcher enough times, maybe he’ll actually become a good pitcher? Actually, I’m not sure if that’s an old saying or not, but it seems to be the mantra they’ve taken with Piniero, a one-time Mariners prospect whose ERAs have been increasing with age. In 2002, at 23, Piniero had a 3.24 ERA, earning him note as one of the best young pitchers in the league. Since that time, his ERA has increased in seemingly regular increments, to 3.78, 4.67, 5.62, and peaking with a 6.36 last season. Meanwhile, his strikeout rate dropped from the high 6’s/low 7’s into the 4’s. His walk rate has climbed into the mid 3’s. In spite of all this evidence that Piniero is slipping, the Red Sox not only signed him, but have seemingly made him the front runner to be their relief ace.

The Sox are high on Piniero on the advice of advance scout Allard Baird, former GM of the Kansas City Royals. Baird thinks Piniero was misused as a starter, and has the makeup and quality stuff to make a great closer. With all due respect to Baird, if he has the power to identify misused starters who can become bullpen aces, he certainly didn’t display it as Royal GM. The Red Sox need to get Piniero pitching well before putting him into high leverage situations, instead of hoping that the high-leverage situations will bring out the best in him. He may begin the season as the closer, but I’m not convinced that it shouldn’t be as the closer in Pawtucket, quite honestly. Putting a player in a major role without a recent history of success does not make any sense, regardless of how his spring training ERA turns out. This isn’t to say that Piniero definitely can’t become a closer—just let him prove himself first.

Brendan Donnelly – Like Piniero, Donnelly’s ERA has been steadily rising for four years now. Unlike Piniero, it’s still within the range of what is acceptable for a major league pitcher. In 2006, Donnelly had the worst season of his major league career, posting a 3.94 ERA over 62 appearances, a stat that shows just how effective Donnelly has been since the Angels plucked him off the scrap heap in 2002. His best season came in 2003, when he sported a 1.58 ERA, struck out 79 batters in 74 innings and was named to the All-Star team. He hasn’t matched that success since, but he has remained an effective part of the Angels bullpen, striking out close to a batter per inning. His control was a bit of an issue last season, but it’s to say how relevant that is when dealing with only 64 innings. He’s been an effective reliever, and all signs seem to indicate that he’ll continue to be an effective reliever. He’s not likely to be a shut down guy, but he’s a couple good bounces away from a 2.50 ERA/ 30+ save season. The Sox could do much worse at the back of their bullpen. And they may. Among this group, he’d be my choice, if only by default.

J.C. Romero – The Red Sox other offseason acquisition from the Angels, Romero got roughed up in a big way last season. Romero’s positives are essentially that he still keeps the ball in the ballpark. Other than that, everything else seems to have dropped off significantly from his glory days with the Twins. His strikeout rates have been dropping, and walk rates rising, to the point where they were nearly 1:1 in 2006. Lefties still had trouble with him, hitting only .202, but he couldn’t throw strikes to them either, walking 13 and striking out 13 against only 89 AB’s. Your lefty-one-out-guy can’t be walking lefties. He seems to be considered a real long shot for the closer role, and it seems likely that if he wanders into it, he won’t be there long.

Mike Timlin – Timlin is coming into his 5^th season with Boston, a period of time unheard of by today’s standards for middle relievers. Middle relievers are often seen as replaceable parts. In some ways they are, but identifying relievers who can be effective on a yearly basis can be difficult. Timlin had a rough season last year, missing a month with a right shoulder strain, and having trouble missing bats, a big deal in front of Boston’s highly overrated defense. The 2.24 ERA from 2005 was a bit of a fluke, based on the fact he allowed only two homers all season, a stinginess he’d never exhibited in the past and didn’t replicate last year. Timlin isn’t a stopper, but he’s likely to be a solid middle of the bullpen guy if he stays healthy, a good sized if for a guy turning 41 on Saturday. Timlin is 39 appearances from the 1000^th of his career, and 41 from tying Goose Gossage for 10^th on the all time list.

Hideki Okajima – He’s the wild card in the closer race. It seems unlikely that he’ll be in the closer role to start the season, but if he pitches well early in the season, and the closer situation still isn’t sorted, it’s very likely he’ll be given a chance. Okajima, a lefty, features an overhand curve as his best pitch. He may actually be best suited coming in in the 7^th and 8^th innings, following the flamethrower starters. He had a 2.12 ERA for Bob Costas’s favorite Japanese team, the Nippon Ham Fighters. While Japanese statistics don’t always transfer, the level of play there is somewhere higher than Triple A baseball in the states, and a 2.12 ERA is impressive in any language. Here’s to hoping he doesn’t get stuck with lefty-one-out-guy duties. At $2.5M over the next two seasons, he could turn out to be one of the bargains of this crazy offseason.

Manny Delcarmen – Delcarmen will not be the closer when the Red Sox break camp, but don’t be too surprised if he’s one of the Red Sox more effective relievers in 2007. That 5.06 ERA from 2006 is not indicative of the quality pitcher Delcarmen was. He, more than anyone else, was let down in a big way by the Red Sox bad defense in the second half. His BABIP of .368 was the second lowest in the AL among pitchers with over 50 innings, behind only Kris Benson, who was pitching in front of a league-worst Oriole defense. Sometimes pitchers have a high BABIP because they’re bad, and get the ball hit hard off of them. Other times, it’s because they’re unlucky. With Delcarmen, it appears to be the latter. If he was just bad, and was prone to giving up rockets all over the field that fielders can’t get to, it would also seem likely that he’s prone to giving up hits that go out of the park. That was far from the case with Delcarmen, who gave up only two homers to 243 batters faced, the third best rate in the AL with pitchers of 50+ innings.

There were 14 pitchers in the AL who gave up a homer fewer than once every 70 batters—7 of them had ERAs of .3.00 or lower, and the highest after Delcarmen’s was Ruddy Lugo’s 3.81. Seven of the guys in this category had 30+ saves: Mariano Rivera, B.J. Ryan, Joe Nathan, Jonathan Papelbon, Akinori Otsuka, JJ Putz, and Huston Street. Fairly strong company. I wouldn’t give him the closing job straight off, myself. Hey, maybe he IS a guy who is just always going to be prone to giving up a high number of hits on balls batted in play. However, Delcarmen should absolutely be on the opening day roster.

Julian Tavarez – What a season that was. I’m not going to sit here and predict what Julian Tavarez is going to do this season, because nobody has any clue, not even Julian. He could be the best reliever on the team, he could be released in June, he could end up suspended for kicking someone in the face. It’s a total mystery. He was a lot of fun to watch in September, though, with the highlight being the one-hit complete game win against Toronto. As far as handling the pressure of Boston, he’s perfect for it, since he’s completely insane. I wouldn’t trust him as my closer or housesitter, but he could be a valuable member of the bullpen.

Craig Hansen – Hailed as the bullpen stud of the future coming into the season, the Red Sox didn’t seem willing to wait for the future when it came to Hansen, despite the fact that he’d seen mixed results at Triple A Pawtucket. There were some positives in Hansen’s season—I like any 22 year old who can come into the majors with less than a year of minor league experience and strike out 30 guys against 15 walks in only 38 innings—but it was pretty apparent that Hansen wasn’t quite ready for the majors. In a couple of the paragraphs above, I talked about pitchers needing to experience success before being put into a major role. Hansen may have been an example of the opposite—a guy coming to the majors who had never really experienced failure. He had been the best closer in college baseball, was a first round draft pick in 2005, was given a major league contract on signing, tore through the minors up to Double A without giving up a run, and made his major league debut within three months of being drafted. When he got hit hard with Boston, he didn’t seem to really know how to make adjustments, and it compounded his problems. By the end of the year, his ERA was 6.63.

The Red Sox use of Hansen in 2006 was really a mistake. First, they started him in Double A Portland, despite the fact that he’d been dominant at that level in 2005. Once they brought him to Pawtucket, they decided they were going to use him as a starter to strengthen his arm and get some innings under him. That lasted four starts, until the Red Sox decided they needed him in the majors, despite some high walk rates. Their interest was understandable. Hansen’s ERA was below 3.00, he was highly touted, and the Sox had success throwing Papelbon into the fire.

From there on, he was terribly inconsistent, and usually downright bad at Fenway, where his ERA was 8.70. Hansen’s biggest problem was his first pitch. When he throw a first pitch strike, the OBP against him was .268, against a .488 OBP when he threw a first pitch ball. There’s almost always a difference there, but rarely is it so profound. There’s little shame in having a bad season in the majors at Age 22. Hopefully he’s a strong enough kid to overcome it. He needs to start the season in Pawtucket though, and stay there through June. With any luck, he’ll be the closer in 2008.

Hall of Fame picks

My Hall of Fame ballot:

Well, sort of. They don’t actually let me vote, even though I’ve made at least a dozen posts on the internet. But this isn’t the time to go into detail about the fascist rules for gaining a Hall of Fame vote. It’s time for the rundown of who I’m pretend voting for.

Cal Ripken – Tough call, huh? The Streak got most of the press during Ripken’s career, which is unfortunate. Ripken was much, much more than that. A 19 time all-star and two-time Most Valuable Player, Ripken redefined the shortstop position, bringing it out of the era of short defensive aces who provided little power. Ripken, at 6’4”, paved the way for the power hitting stars of the late ‘90’s. Ripken’s defense was no slouch either. He was one of the hardest working guys in the league, especially when it came to positioning and knowing hitters tendencies. He wasn’t as flashy as some of his contemporaries, but nobody else had as many balls hit directly at him.

Tony Gwynn – Another slam-dunk. Batting average may be a bit overrated as a statistic, but when someone can hit the ball as frequently and consistently as Gwynn did, that’s something special. In 1982, Gwynn broke in with a .289 average in 190 at-bats. From there on, in 19 seasons, he hit below .317 only twice: .309 in both 1983 and 1990. His career .338 average is second best of anyone who played after World War 2, behind only Ted Williams. His most impressive stretch was from 1994 to 1997, where he hit an astounding .371.

Mark McGwire – The steroids issue is preposterous, and it’s been done to death, and I’m generally just sick of talking about it. I’m going to address the most relevant issue, that McGwire was a “one-dimensional player.” That’s a bit of an exaggeration anyway, but even if it were true, he’s a one-dimensional player in the same way Tony Gwynn is. We’re not talking about Tony Batista or Pedro Feliz here, who have enough power to make managers forget that they offer absolutely nothing else of positive value. Mark McGwire led his league in slugging four times, is 10^th all time in SLG, and for his career, he homered more frequently, per at-bat, than any other player, ever. On top of that, though, he twice led his league in OBP. I’m no doctor, but I’ve never read anything about steroids being able to improve your ability to not swing at bad pitches. McGwire will get into the Hall of Fame someday. It won’t be this year, though.

Goose Gossage – He was a borderline candidate for a number of years, but one that I thought should have made it. With Sutter’s induction, though, Gossage absolutely should be Hall-worthy. Gossage was a better player at his peak, and a guy who was effective for a much, much longer time. Sutter had one season with an ERA under 4.00 season after age 29. Gossage had eight, including six under 3.00. This led to Gossage pitching 800 more innings in his career, and pitch in three more all star games (nine, to Sutter’s six.) My guess is that Gossage will be short this year, but make it in on next years weaker ballot.

Burt Blyleven – The center of the Blyleven argument is the value of a Hall of Famer being very good over a long time, or great over a shorter time. Blyleven was rarely truly great. He never won a Cy Young, only went to two all-star teams, and his career ERA+ is 118. Then you realize that that 118 was accumulated over 4,970 career innings, thirteenth all-time. You realize that in those innings, he had 3,701 strikeouts, fifth all-time (and he was third all-time when he retired), behind only Nolan Ryan, Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson and Steve Carlton. Ahead of Tom Seaver, Walter Johnson, and several other greats. Sutton is probably the best comparison for Blyleven. He was another who was rarely the very best in the league, but was very good for a very, very long time. The main difference is that Sutton played on some much better teams, notably the Dodgers of the late 70’s and early 80’s, allowing him to reach 324 wins, while Blyleven usually played for below average teams, and it left him with 289 wins. Blyleven had 10 seasons where he was in the top ten in the league in ERA, and 15 where he finished in the top 10 in strikeouts, but only four times finished in the top-10 in Cy Young voting, a fact that shows the Cy Young voter’s attraction to wins. Now, years later, the same voters who didn’t appreciate him during his playing days are using the lack of awards he won as a major strike against him. Some guys just can’t win.

Jim Rice – I’ve gone back and forth on Rice over the years, but in the past, I don’t think I gave him enough credit for how long he was good. It’s often said his career ended early, which is true—his last effective season was at age 33. He was a bit surly with the media, and was completely worthless on defense. But man, could he hit. His career .502 SLG may not seem so impressive after the past 10 years of that kind of number not getting people into the top 10, but in Rice’s day, that meant something. He led the league in slugging twice, and finished second three more times. A knock against him seems to be his patience. He walked only 670 times in his career, a number Barry Bonds would’ve called “a slow May” at his peak. Barry Bonds isn’t the standard for your regular Hall of Famer, though. Rice finished with a career .298 batting average. One wonders if he’d retired with a .300 career average before 1989, when it was clear his skills had eroded completely, if he’d have gotten more support. Those two points don’t mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, but when some voters see something like “.300 batting average” they think of how nice it would look on someone’s plaque.

Albert Belle – Probably the least popular of anyone I’ll pick amongst the voters, and I can’t say I’ll be shedding a tear for him when he isn’t elected. But, when talking about what he was as a baseball player, he was like Jim Rice on steroids (likely literally). He was meaner than Rice, worse defensively than Rice, worse with the media than Rice, even more feared in the lineup than Rice, and his career ended even more abruptly. His .569 SLG ranks him 19^th all-time, ahead of Stan Musial, Ken Griffey,Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Mickey Mantle. Say what you will about the steroids/small parks era, that’s an impressive group. For what it’s worth, Belle was also becoming a more selective, patient hitter when his hip started to degenerate, walking a career high 101 times in 1999, his last full season.

Anyway, it’d be nice to think people aren’t voting for him because his career lacked longevity, rather than because he wasn’t a very nice guy, but I’m not so naïve. It’s the baseball Hall of Fame, not the nice guy Hall of Fame. If Ty Cobb, a racist who overtly tried to hurt other players was a member of the Hall’s introductory class, then Belle, who was essentially just prone to the occasional roid rage here and there, meets the personality standard.

Dale Murphy – Murphy’s lack of support is more evidnce of players who finish their careers strong after slow starts getting more votes than players who start fast and do not age especially well. In the 1980’s, Murphy was a better player than Rice in the late 70’s and Belle in the mid-90’s. He didn’t hit for the power that Belle and Rice did, or for the average, but he was a much more patient hitter. The big difference, though, is the defense. Rice and Belle are among the two worst defensive players of all-time. Rice was sheltered by the wall in Fenway, but he was a born DH. Belle was even worse, combining a lack of range with a lack of caring. Murphy was a legitimate Gold Glover, winning five awards, and being regarded by many as the best defensive centerfielder of his day. He won two MVP awards, more than Rice and Belle combined. Unfortunately, Murphy really only had one quality season after age 30. Does the fact that he aged so badly make everyone forget that he may have been baseball’s best player from 1980 to 1985? It’s a shame that he couldn’t have held on enough to get two more homers, giving him an even 400 for his career, but looking back, he should feel fortunate he got as many chances at the end of his career as he did. Like Rice and Belle, the issue here is longevity.

Guys who are just missing the cut:

I’ve supported Alan Trammell and Andre Dawson before, but looking back, I think I have to reconsider. Dawson was one of my favorites growing up, a striking personality who played great defense and could hit the ball out of the park at any moment. He was a lot like Vlad Guerrero, in that he had a big, violent looking swing that could produce some ugly swings-and-misses, but when he hit the ball, watch out. Also, like Vlad, he was a brilliant bad-ball hitter. Few hit balls out of the strike zone like those two. And, it seems that knee problems are going to play a huge role in the rest of Vlad’s career, much the way they did for Dawson as he got older. The problem with Dawson is that he just made too many outs. That .323 OBP just doesn’t cut it, even for a guy who played defense as well as Andre.

As far as Trammell goes, I’ve already debated truly great for a short time against being very good for a very long time. Trammell was merely very good for an average amount of time. People remember him playing with the Tigers late into his 30’s, but in reality, he was a part timer for too long, only getting over 400 AB’s once after age 32. That would be fine if someone were a dominant player like Belle or Rice or Murphy, but Trammell never was. He was one of the better shortstops in the league, and a great guy, but not a Hall of Famer. One wonders if some of the sentiment for him comes from the fact that he played his entire career for the Tigers. I have no problem with a voter using loyalty like that as the extra nudge someone gets—we all love a player who is immediately identifiable with his team, the way Trammell, Ripken and Gwynn are. The Trammell/Whitaker double play combo was beloved by anyone who watched baseball in the 1980’s. That doesn’t earn a plaque in Cooperstown, though.

Also, I’d be wrong not to at least mention Eric Davis. He’s not a Hall of Famer, but he was a great example of everything that we love about baseball. Davis came up in the mid-80’s, one of the most talented of a generation that included Darryl Strawberry, Jose Canseco, Dwight Gooden, and other famous flamouts. Eric Davis should never be remembered as a bust. We talk about wanting players to leave everything they have on the field. That’s description fits Davis perfectly. Davis played so hard that he often wouldn’t be healthy enough to make his way onto the field. It seemed he came back from every injury there was, from knee problems, to groin problems, to the time he lacerated his kidney in the 1990 World Series, to his heroic comeback from colon cancer in 1999, Davis was everything that baseball should be about.

Moves you may have missed. Or not cared about.

You folks have probably read all that there is to read on Alfonso Soriano and Daisuke Matsuzaka, so there probably isn’t all that much more I can add to the discussion. There have been some lesser moves that may make a difference in 2007. And moves that may not.

Atlanta acquires reliever Rafael Soriano from Seattle for starter Horacio Ramirez.

Normally, it’s a good idea to pick up a starting pitcher in exchange for a reliever. This is one of those exceptions, and John Schuerholz may have quietly picked up one of the biggest steals of the offseason. Three years removed from arm surgery, Soriano threw 60 innings in relief for Seattle, with a 2.25 ERA, 65 strikeouts, and only 21 walks. Perhaps the Mariners were scared off by the season ending concussion, and feared that they may have a Matt Clement situation. However, all reports are that Soriano is throwing comfortably, and Clements demise seems to be as much about arm trouble as it was the Carl Crawford liner off the side of the head in 2005. Only three years ago, scouts named Soriano the most likely reliever to become the next Johan Santana, making the transfer from little known setup man to stud starter, because of his spectacular stuff. The Braves seem set on having Soriano in the bullpen though, which is fine as well—he’s immediately the most talented reliever they’ve had since John Smoltz. With the problems the Braves have had a closer since Smoltz moved back to the rotation, Soriano is a great bet to assume the 9^th inning role, and score at least 35 saves. Fantasy players take note, this is one of your sleepers for next year.

If the Mariners did feel Soriano was a risk, perhaps it would’ve made sense to try to acquire an innings eater type, who could rack up a solid season in Safeco Field. However, Ramirez is likely a bigger injury risk than Soriano, while not being nearly as good a pitcher. Ramirez has failed to reach 80 innings in two of the last three seasons with a variety of arm troubles. The season he stayed healthy, he had a 4.63 ERA in 202 innings, with only 80 strikeouts, 67 walks, and 31 homers allowed. Safeco will help depress that homer number, but in the more patient American League, teams like the A’s and Rangers who he will see several times will take advantage of his inabilility to put people away. Those poor K/BB numbers in the NL are likely to translate even worse into the AL.

So, while both players may offer the same injury risk, Soriano offers the reward of being an elite closer, while Ramirez, at best, isn’t likely to replace the production of Gil Meche. Another poor move in what has been a pretty awful tenure by Mariners GM Bill Bavasi.

Royals sign pitcher Gil Meche for 5 years, $55M.

Almost every offseason, a really really bad team signs a player who isn’t good to a huge contract, and there is a glut of stories praising them for being willing to show fans they care by being willing to spend money. It’s all a crock. Fans don’t really care, during the season, whether or not their team has spent money. They care whether or not their team is winning.

Signing Gil Meche does not show a commitment to winning. It shows a commitment to spending money. In four years since his return from injury, Meche has not had a park-adjusted ERA above league average even once. On the ERA+ scare, where 100 is average, he’s scored a 97, 86, 85 and 97. Meche turned 28 in September, and pitchers suddenly figuring it out at his age is exceedingly rare, unless they’re put with a Leo Mazzone or Ray Miller level pitching coach. Meche is often compared to Jason Schmidt, who DID figure it out at roughly Meche’s age, so I suppose there is hope, but the comparison with Schmidt againt the comparison with the hundreds of similar pitchers who didn’t figure it out at the same time is a pretty strong weight to the negative. The silver lining is the huge jump in his strikeout rate this year, from 5.2 per 9 IP in 2005 to 7.5 per 9 in 2006. If his ERA can begin to follow that improvement, Meche may make the jump to slightly above average pitcher, but the Royals are betting against huge odds that Meche will make such a significant improvement.

Of course, a slightly below average starter is a HUGE improvement for the Royals, whose rotation last year was somewhere in the neighborhood of abysmal. So, the thinking goes, if they have the money, why not spend it to improve their team? Which may be fine, but why commit to five years? If the Royals had signed Meche for a two-year commitment on the chance he breaks out, it wouldn’t be a big deal, as they wouldn’t be tying up funds for the future. But as it is, if Meche doesn’t make that leap, don’t you think they’d want that money to give an extension to Alex Gordon, baseball’s #1 prospect, if Gordon is anything close to the player he looks like? The problem isn’t the $11M on Meche in 2007, as maybe they don’t have any better use for that money. The problem is that $11M in 2010 and 2011, when they should be hoping to be competitive.

Cubs sign Jason Marquis to a 3 year, $21M deal.

Now, this is a deal that looks more reasonable on the surface, but actually may be just as bad as the Meche deal. According to baseball-reference.com, Meche and Marquis are actually each others most comparable players, and both are the same age (Marquis is actually a month older.) The problem is that Marquis is clearly going in the wrong direction. While there are some signs with Meche to at least consider him worth betting on, In the last three years, Marquis has gone into a tailspin. His ERA has gone 3.71, 4.13, 6.02. His K/9IP has gone down: 6.2, 4.3, 4.4. His K/BB have gone down: 1.97, 1.44, 1.28. And his HR/9IP have gone up: 1.2, 1.3, 1.6.

Marquis is heading backwards in a hurry, and the fact that he’s going to a much worse pitchers park could make things ugly. I’m talking mid 7’s ERA ugly. This is all made worse by the fact that Marquis apparently isn’t all that nice a guy. He badmouthed Mazzone on his way out the door in Atlanta, got progressively worse every season under Duncan, and moaned about not being on the playoff roster for the Cardinals, despite the fact that one of the biggest reasons they won the World Series was the decision not let Jason Marquis pitch in the playoffs. Forget the fact that $7M isn’t all that much money in today’s market. All things considered, I’d take a chance with just about any Triple A journeyman over Marquis. He’s the Cubs headache now.

Offseason begins

This is shaping up to be the most interesting and expensive offseason since 2000-2001. With so many teams being profitable, new revenue sharing money coming in, and so many contracts ending, expect to see some contracts that appear mind boggling. I'll probably go through a list of what teams need sometime next week. Until then, here are some things that have come up.

-Guillermo Mota tested positive for steroids. I've seen a few articles attributing his late season success to performance enhancers, but to my knowledge, it just doesn't work that quickly. Though the argument I've heard that it could've acted as a placebo in the short term, making him feel stronger and alert seems like a valid position. The problem is, we really don't know what kind of effects different performance enhancers really have on baseball players, since there really isn't an ethical experiment that exists where we could measure the effects. We're never going to know everyone or even most of the people who have used in the past, and there's nothing George Bush, George Mitchell or Sherlock Holmes can do about that.

-I'm still of the opinion that 50 games is a bit harsh for a first offense, especially combared to the 10 games one gets for doctoring a baseball, something we DO know the effects of. On the other hand, 100 games for a repeat offender and 150 for a three-timer are too leniant. I'd' probably go with something along the lines of 25 games for the first offense, one season for the second, two seasons for the third, lifetime for the fourth. But that's just me. I'd also be in favor of testing those who do test positive much more frequently. Once someone fails once, they should be subjected to biweekly tests, during the season AND offseason. I'm less inclined to worry about a players privacy rights once they've broken the rules.

It matters little, because the steroid testing is a joke anyway, without blood samples. Heck, from what I've read, hair samples would be more likely to show traces of HGH than urine.

-Every year, the Gold Gloves get more recognition than they should, because the writers just don't take the time to research who the best fielders are at that position. So I suppose I'm exacerbating the problem. Derek Jeter won his third gold glove. A lot of people have taken the time to say that Alex Gonzalez was the player who was actually deserving, and that Jeter won based on name recognition. Neither player was especially close to being the best defensive shortstop in the AL this year. Michael Young had 113 more assists than Jeter (494-381) and 28 more putouts (241-214), despite the fact that Jeter was playing behind baseballs most profound groundball pitcher every fifth day. Assist and putout numbers can be misleading, but rarely when a guy is making 20% more outs in the field than another, from the same position, then it seems likely that he's the better player.

Here's what strikes me. Young makes the play in the hold and has the strong arm, like the other top shortstops in the league. When I watch the Rangers, though, Young has more balls hit directly at him than any shortstop I've seen since Cal Ripken. This isn't luck, not over the course of seasons. Young is just so superior at positioning himself, that he's not making enough spectacular looking plays. It's easier, though, for Gold Glove voters to vote for whoever they did last year.

-Interesting column by Rob Neyer a couple days ago, saying that the Tigers should trade a young arm to get a top bat at first base or DH. It's true that they are going to need to upgrade those positions significantly, playing in the toughest division in baseball. Trading young pitching isn't the way to do it, though. Young, inexpensive, healthy pitching is the most valuable resource in baseball, so unless the Tigers can get a truly elite player in return, it just doesn't seem worth it. First base and DH are the easiest positions to fill with lower-level trades and free agent signings. The Tigers plan is not just to compete in 2007, but also for years beyond. At this point, even if they do regress to 85 wins next year and miss the playoffs, their long-term outlook is among the best of any in baseball.

Much of the Tigers offseason plan likely revolves around Carlos Guillen. If they feel he can be more productive and be in the lineup more often by moving him off of shortstop, then that's an easy choice. He hits like a good corner infielder, so it's not like they'd get the usual hit from a team trying to move a shortstop there. Plus, he'd probably have the range to be a Gold Glove level 1B with some work. All things equal, their lineup is better with him at SS, as they'll be more likely to find an effective 1B than SS on the open market. If he knees won't hold, though, then all things aren't equal.