Writings on baseball by Matt Barnard and Dan Stein.

 
There wasn't an update yesterday (though the days are a bit misleading, as we tend to post in the wee hours of the morning), which I'll take the blame for. I fully intend to get more than one post up today to cover the continuing Winter Meetings in Nashville, as I expect we'll be hearing some news from there. That said, I'll get to what we do know so far.

Todd Walker to the Red Sox for Tony Blanco, Josh Thigpen
I don't get it. It's pretty clear that Tony Blanco, as big a prospect as he was (he's now been downgraded a bit) doesn't fit in with the new Red Sox organizational philosophy (6 walks, 70 strikeouts, .250 OBP in A ball). And it's pretty clear that he's now well behind Kevin Youkilis in terms of who the organization envisions at third base in the near future. But it seems to me that could you still probably get more for Tony Blanco. Of course I don't work in a major league front office and I'm not a scout, maybe there's something about him that I'm totally unaware of. But in a system as weak as the Red Sox have, I find it hard to believe that they can afford to give up two of their top 9 prospects (according to the excellent theprospectreport.com) to fill a position that's already got someone waiting to step into it. As I've got a lot of faith based on what I've heard so far in Mr. Epstein, I have to assume he's got something else up his sleeve. But why you'd spend some of your minimal young talent to bring in 30 year old Todd Walker when you've got the never-been-more-ready, 25 year old Freddy Sanchez in the organization already is a bit confusing to me.

From the Reds' standpoint, it makes even less sense. While there's reason to (at the very least) give Epstein the benefit of the doubt at the beginning of his tenure as Red Sox GM, there's no apparent plan at work for the Reds other than cutting payroll. Todd Walker was a very solid, reasonably priced second baseman for them last year and there's little reason to think he wouldn't be again. Unlike the Red Sox, there's no one in the Cincinnati organization ready to step in and take that job. Now while it's possible they'll look to free agency to find a cheap solution, the rumored fix is transplanting third baseman Brandon Larson. While this might work out if he can handle the position defensively, it still doesn't explain why the trade was made. This is an organization that already has Russell Branyan and Aaron Boone at third, as well as an established first baseman (Sean Casey) and young, excellent corner outfielders (Adam Dunn and Austin Kearns). Obtaining a prospect of Tony Blanco's caliber (particularly at a position where you are stacked at the major league level) and a pitching prospect (albeit a decent one) for an established player on the level of Todd Walker just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

A confusing deal on both sides, I fully expect to see more action from both teams this week.
posted by VZW Watcher at 3:19 AM -

 
Welcome to those of you coming here via Aaron's Baseball Blog, we're very thankful for the link. I hope you all (or at least some) share Aaron's sensibilities and like what you read. I can't promise you the most comprehensive or detailed analysis there is...there are so many sites out there to choose from that do an incredible job. All we hope to do here is participate in the dialogue, get our take on things out to the public, and get feedback from those who read our work. We're not claiming to be the last word on a damn thing...but we do hope you'll find this site useful and entertaining, and that you'll come back. If you've got a blog yourself, please let us know if you'd like to be linked here as I'll gladly do it, just contact me using one of the methods on the left side of the screen. If you've got any suggestions on how we could improve this site, we'd love to hear them as well. As a last piece of business, I encourage you all to check out our main site, The Dump. Okay, enough housekeeping, on to baseball matters.

The Pete Rose saga drones on
Maybe I'm totally oblivious, but I don't understand why this debate continues. Do the rules of Major League Baseball, as posted in every clubhouse, not explicitly prohibit participants from betting on games? Pete Rose has agreed to a lifetime ban from baseball. That's it. End of story. Pete Rose's decision...made by none other than Pete Rose himself...is right there on the document he signed. He's banned. Can he apply for reinstatement? Sure, he's within his rights to do so. But then everything that hasn't been revealed to the public has to be taken into consideration, and somehow I don't feel that's what Mr. Rose has in mind. On espn.com, they've run polls all day indicating that the vast majority of people (who took it upon themselves to vote on this issue) want Rose reinstated. So what? The masses are sometimes dead wrong, and this is a perfect example. It's plain as day: if you bet on baseball, you're going to be suspended. If you bet on your own team, to win or to lose, you're going to be banned for life. Pete Rose could've played it out. If he's not guilty of the charges levied against him, then he'd be fine and free to operate in baseball just like anyone else. Of course, the evidence against him is overwhelming and incredibly damning (and he knows this) so it's clear why he agreed to what he did. Pete Rose should never be allowed to participate in Major League Baseball again. Whether he fesses up to his crimes or not. His sins against the game are inexcusable and unforgivable, and clearly in violation of the rules. He's a disgrace to the league and really to all athletic competition, and whether he's a fan favorite or not, there's no room in sports for people like Pete Rose.

That said, I couldn't care less if he's allowed into the Hall of Fame. At the time, there was nothing to prohibit banned players from entering the Hall, and he does deserve to be in on merit. While I believe things can and should be done to punish him going forward, his career speaks for itself. The Hall of Fame, in my opinion, is not there to honor great men, it's there to honor great players. It's pretty clear that Rose stuck around far too long in baseball and did so to the detriment of his teams. But it's also clear that he had a superlative career and is the all-time leader in hits. He's a player that deserves a plaque in Cooperstown, regardless of his future in the sport. So I'd be in support of suspending the Hall of Fame rule that no banned player is eligible on the grounds that it was not in place when Rose agreed to a lifetime ban. There's a huge difference between this and his being reinstated, which would be totally reprehensible in light of the facts available to us.

And while this shouldn't be a concern, maybe if he's admitted into the Hall people will stop talking about him. Maybe his banishment will become a dead issue. Do people really need to hear Pete Rose on radio or television? Or in their team's dugout? I doubt it. It seems like something that the masses bitch and moan about because they feel their guy, a regular Joe who's made some mistakes, is not being given his due. Fine, give him his induction (without ceremony), and have that be the last involvement with Major League Baseball that he ever has. I'm sick of hearing about Pete Rose.

For a really terrific (and lengthy) commentary on this issue, I encourage all of you to read Derek Zumsteg's Evaluating the Dowd Report. While I suspect a great many of you have seen this already, if there's anyone reading this who hasn't...it's worth your time and will put to rest any doubts you have on the issue. If you'd like to read the commentary of a guy who doesn't recognize the difference between "reinstatement" and "induction to the Hall of Fame", check out the ruminations of Rob Dibble.
posted by VZW Watcher at 3:29 AM -

 
There's a whole mess of things to get to today, as I've been occupied and unable to comment on much of the noise and activity of the past few (or two) days. As I have a little while now, I'll try to get to as much as possible. Before I get to any original content however, I'd like to dutifully thank our friend Aaron Gleeman over at Aaron's Baseball Blog both for linking us there and giving us some advice in the early going on how to proceed here. Even more importantly, I'd like to direct your attention to his fine piece available today on the candidates up for Hall of Fame election this year, which is an excellent read. On to this site...

The Giants sign Ray Durham, Marquis Grissom
Okay, the analysis you're going to get here isn't going to be a surprise, so if that's what you're looking for you might want to move along. Put quite simply, Ray Durham is a fine investment. This deal, which by all indications is worth $20.1 million over 3 years (with a player option for an extra year at $ 7 million thrown in there), works out to a bit more than $6 million a season, perfectly reasonable in this market for a guy who brings to the table what a Ray Durham does. This greatly improves the Giant lineup right now, whether he plays his natural second base or moves to center field to accomodate the resigning of Jeff Kent (which, naturally would be all the better). He's a legitimate leadoff hitter with good speed and would help the vast majority of lineups in baseball. That said, this is quite detrimental if this is money that would be needed to bring back Jeff Kent, a more productive player than Durham. That said, the Giants have gone ahead and offered arbitration to Kent, and with the market as it is, it's conceivable that he might be willing to negotiate with the Giants and agree to a contract that's a bit less than he intended heading into the offseason.

On the other hand, signing Marquis Grissom to what is allegedly a 2 year, $4.25 million contract (with a team option) is foolishness. While it's impossible to deny that he's coming off a pretty decent season (.289 EqA), he's also the same guy that has been well below average for the five seasons prior. He's also going to be 36 and 37 over the two seasons included in this contract. Basically, my problem with signing Grissom is not signing him, but the terms of this contract. He's no longer good enough defensively to handle playing center field on a regular basis, and he's not productive enough offensively to handle the Giants vacant outfield corner (right field, naturally). Given his production last year, is he a viable contributor (potentially) on a team in 2003? Sure, he deserves that shot. But there's no justification for giving him anything more than a one year contract on the cheap to be a 4th outfielder/pinch hitter, which I fear is not all the Giants are envisioning here.

That said, if the Giants can find a way to bring Jeff Kent back into the fold, even if you do start Grissom in right, this is a far more daunting lineup than anything the Giants trotted out there in 2002.

Some Yankee News
First of all, the Yanks had to make some tough decisions on arbitration day, and I'm not too pleased with what went down. Both Mike Stanton and Ramiro Mendoza, guys who have been essential cogs in the Yankee machine during its run, were not offered arbitration and are now done in pinstripes. Apparently, the Yanks have chosen to negotiate instead with Chris Hammond, who would presumably take over Stanton's role as the top lefty in the bullpen. This sucks. I don't know how much Stanton and Mendoza would've cost the Yanks, but these guys, when healthy, have been as good as anyone in their respective roles. I'm all for going out and improving the team even if it means saying goodbye to some friendly faces, but I don't see it happening here. Hammond is a very questionable signing for any team in my opinion, as his incredible season last year in Atlanta sticks out like a conservative in Boston. I'm disappointed, have no idea how they intend to replace Mendoza, and hope that the negotiations with Hammond (supposedly for a two year deal worth about $5 million) break down somehow.

The Yanks came to terms with Chris Widger, who'll return as the backup to Jorge Posada, which is fine by me. He's getting paid $750,000 (an unbelievable sum for the amount of work he'll actually be doing), but at least he's a credible offensive threat when he's in the lineup and it's not much money in the overall scheme of things for the team, so it's not much of an issue. They also offered arbitration to Roger Clemens, who appears to be coming back, and Ron Coomer, who performed quite well last season in limited time and probably won't be too expensive. There's no reason to believe he can't continue to be a good pinch hitter and spot starter at first and third, and he seems content with that role at this point in his career. As far as Clemens is concerned, I don't really understand his ridiculous contract. But apparently he's going to be paid a whole bunch of money anyway by the Yankees no matter what, so I'd rather him be pitching for them than against them. He's still a quality major league pitcher who continues to show flashes of brilliance, albeit not quite as bright as those from a few years ago. Still totally capable of winning 15 games or so for the Yankees, I've got no problem with him in my rotation and see no reason that he can't pitch for a few more years yet if he wants to (I think he will).
posted by VZW Watcher at 12:45 PM -