And the MLB Network is up. Not bad so far (10 minutes I've watched). Kind of like a baseball tonight type of set up. For the Hot Stove time period, its hard to break down any analysis or anything. I'll have to keep watching to see if they go beyond ESPN aside from 24/7 baseball. I'd like to see more advanced stats used, but that may be asking too much.

Haven't been following this thread recently, so I apologize if it's already been discussed, but can someone please tell me why the Mets aren't in the Manny chase? Hell, I live in NY and haven't heard too much about it, just that he's not a Wilpon kind of guy. They remind me of a team I build in FOF that I really like and just cant make major changes to the roster bc i think they can win it every year, but never do. They need an OF, obviously he's not much of one but you do have Beltran in center, and clearly one of the greatest hitters in the game. Anyhoot, i'm just rambling.

Who're the hosts?

I think it was Vasgersian, Leiter, Reynolds, and Larkin.

You are correct. They made a smart decision by hiring Leiter. His color commentary and the way he would break down a play during his limited stints on YES named the Yankee channel worth watching. I hope he does as well as a studio analyst.

It hasn't been discussed and it's a question I wonder about too frankly. I think at some point you have to say "screw it...we think this guy can help us win and put butts in the seats, we'll put up with his shit for a couple years."

There's also the remote possibility (okay maybe I'm being dulusional) that Manny realizes that this is his last significant contract he's going to get and so he behaves himself. Okay yeah, rereading that, definately delusional.

Minaya has tried to sell Wilpon on it, and he won't budge. Bringing him in does make too much sense and I think as the market continues to be nil for him, Minaya could pounce.

I think if the Mets can get him and the price is right for them - ie not this 4 years @ 20m/yr # that Boras is throwing around, but maybe 3/36 or 3/42 with an option for a 4th year, then they could consider it. I just don't think they believe, or anyone believes, that in this market Manny Ramirez is a 20m/yr player. He's a one-tool guy. Given he's a HOFer based on that one tool alone, but he's a one-tool guy.

They're not going to approach those years. They'd pay him $25 million for a year, or 2/40 if it's a team option.

Silly that the Mets are going to tighten their purse strings now, considering the silly deal they gave to Pedro and how much they've paid some people the past few seasons.

very true miked

So because they made mistakes in the past, they should repeat them?

Manny isn't taking 3/36. A 3 year deal would be at least $50 million. I don't see how refusing to go to that length for a guy with obvious issues is being cheap.

Giants are in the Manny sweepstakes, except they really aren't.


Either way...

If Manny were a couple years older he'd be a good fit in San Fran, but I don't see them going with a youth movement right now.

If Manny went to the Mets, I'd be preparing to root for my Phillies to take the wild card.

Sure, Pedro was a mistake, but the Mets in their new stadium can't go 3/50 with a buyout? He's not a big enough upgrade over Church, Easley, or whatever utility-man of the week they have out there (Chavez, etc). He would immediately provide much needed protection for Wright/Beltran and really that's chump change for a team that is spending 10M on a closer that is out for the year. There's no cap, what's the risk?

Was it Vasgersian or Rojas who was the host at the Hot Stove desk?

Of course it'll really show whether its worth it during the season, but I really liked the breaking down of contract numbers they had in the middle of the show with two other analysts.

The Mets still operate on a budget and can't spend in the area that the Yankees do. My point was their payroll is still very high -- how is refusing to add upwards of $20 million being "tight" with money?

I don't see Manny taking less than $20 M per year from anyone, and maybe won't even take a number at exactly that either (likely higher). Remember, he was likely going to get that $20 M per from the Sox for these two years, before he did his whole sabotage thing to get out of it. No way he goes through all that and signs with anyone for less than $20 M per. He strikes me as the sort who will just take the season off before accepting less.

Well, if I were their fans, I'd certainly want them using the money I'm giving them (as well as the government for their new stadium) to try the best they can to win. Adding another 15-18M to get Manny is truly chump change to them. I'm obviously not in a position to spend their money, but they are the second most valuable franchise with an estimated 230+ million in revenue and a payroll of what, 138M? They have some wiggle room and if I were a fan, I'd much rather see Manny out there than Endy Chavez, Ryan Church, Trot Nixon, or whatever 1M scrub they can throw out...especially considering their recent late collapses.

The White Sox are apparently in talks to acquire Brian Roberts from Baltimore for Gavin Floyd. A great deal for Chicago if they can get it.

And a whole lotta Cubs fans are gonna be pissed if the Sox nab Roberts instead of the Cubs.

yeaaaa, so the more i think about, i'm pretty sure i brought up the whole manny to the mets deal earlier in this thread. As time goes on, and the loner he sits on the market, it just gets frustrating that they aren't considering him. Wilpon needs to swallow his pride, and spend the $$$ on a guy who may not fit his scheme. After '06, the yr in which all of us Mets fans thought they would take it all, then the collapses of '07-'08, I think he needs to understand that the fans are getting a little ticked off and getting Ramirez, IMO, could quite possibly make the Mets the favorites in the NL. For the first time in my baseball following career, the Yankees spending finally got to me. By no means have I ever been pissed about how much they spend, but it's frustrating watching them spend all this money, which very well could bite them in the ass a yr or 2 from now, but hey, they are trying to win now. Wilpon needs to take a page out of their book and get this done.

I haven't commented on it yet, but the hiring of Jack Zduriencik as the Mariners GM is looking better and better as the days go by. He obviously has a great track record as the man in charge of the draft for the Brewers in recent years which speaks to his scouting acumen, but he also has a strong appreciation for modern statistical analysis. He brought over Tony Blengino from the Brewers to head the new M's department on baseball analysis, and it's just been revealed that Blengino has hired Tom Tango to be a consultant with the M's.

For anybody that follows sabermetrics, this is obviously great news for the Mariners, as Tango is widely considered the top statistical analyst out there right now.

In the span of one year, the M's have gone from being one of the worst-run teams in baseball to perhaps one of the best. What's certain is they've finally embraced 21st century baseball thinking. I'm finally looking forward to seeing baseball transactions by the M's instead of covering my eyes in disgust.

Burrell for 2/16 to the Rays is a really good signing. At least that small market team gets it.

Once the A's sign Giambi for one year, they'll be there too. Some great bargains out there. What's the latest on Abreu?

What a steal for the Rays

At these rates Dunn is going to be a huge steal for somebody.

Asking for way too much money is the last I heard.

Teams are getting smarter about figuring out defensive value, which is driving down the amount they're willing to pay a guy like Dunn that is well below average as a fielder.

I think it's more of being the right fit for the Rays than a steal.

The Mets need a right-handed bat to play LF. If they signed Burrell to this same deal, or even for lesser money, I'd be pretty upset. But I think it's a great signing for the Rays.

Wow... 2 for $16 mil is a great deal for the Rays!

Seems the Cubbies have signed Milton Bradley as well for 3 years, $30 Mil

Sources: Chicago Cubs, Milton Bradley agree to three-year, $30 million contract - ESPN

Lots of news today, appears Carl Pohlad kicked the bucket too:

Minnesota Twins owner Carl Pohlad dies - ESPN

Any chance the Twinkies start spending more?

I wish the Phillies had kept him at that price. A great signing for the Rays.

That's cheaper than Ibanez!

I hate to speak ill of the recently deceased, but there are a few priceless quotes in this piece:

He apparently didn't want to win badly enough to upset the bottom line of the Twins as a business.

Sure he was a success, but he also demanded public subsidy of his baseball team - thus the public had a right to criticize his ownership.

Why are people so worried about "price"? Phillies aren't exactly a small market team needing to pinch pennies like the Rays.

If the Phillies think Ibanez is a better fit for the team, then so be it. I seriously doubt the 14 million dollars difference is going to hamper the Phillies long-term of short-term plans.

As was said above, the deal is good for the Rays because of "fit". Burrell is a good player for that price range. Did Philadelphia overpay a little bit for Ibanez? Perhaps, but why does that really matter?

Seriously? You don't think teams, outside of maybe the Yankees, pay a lot of attention to their budgets?

Because Burrell is probably the better player ;).

Why overpay?

Simple. I think Burrell is the better player of the 2 and they don't have the resources of the Yankees or Boston even though they aren't a small market team. Every dollar they overpaid for Ibanez could have gone towards securing another player that could have helped the club. Hopefully, the Phillies management made the right call, and Ibanez outproduces what Burrell would have done here. However, I'm not at all convinced that will happen.

Not saying the Phillies to not pay a lot of attention to their budgets, but I doubt that the difference between what they are paying Ibanez and would have paid Burrell will significantly impact future plans of the Phillies.


Some things you can't measure with statistics. We'll never agree on that. :)


I have faith. This was a "Gillick" move, and people have doubted him before (See Jaime Moyer, Joe Blanton, Brad Lidge, etc.)

I dont know much about Ibanez but is he a better fielder than Burrell? I guess a Babe Ruth's corpse would be a better fielder than Burrell so that's answering my own question.

Unfortunately, I don't think he is. Statistically at least, he is not a better fielder.

What the fuck then???

This is interesting...

Burrell leaves Phillies quietly but disappointed | Philadelphia Daily News | 12/15/2008

A portion of the article reads:

There were reports earlier in the season that Burrell had turned down a 2-year, $22 million offer that would have kept him in red pinstripes. He addressed the issue reluctantly.

"This is all I'm going to say about it: Early in the season there were preliminary discussions about the possibility of an extension. And the truth of it is, it never got to be more than that. It just never did," he said. "The rest of the season went on and that was the end of the preliminary discussions. To be honest, nothing specific was ever talked about. Nothing official was offered. There were just some preliminary talks."

The advanced fielding metrics actually had him as the only LFer in baseball last season worse than Burrell. No joke.

Raul Ibanez is bad in the field. One of the very worst LF by virtually every advanced defensive metric.

I saw one local news story that said it was a shame that he never got to see the Twins open up their new stadium, which I thought was completely ridiculous. If it were his life's dream to see the Twins play in a new outdoor stadium, as MLBs richest owner he could have built a new one years ago. Though in the past he showed that recieving millions would have meant more than seeing the Twins stay in Minnesota, and then seeing them ever play a game again. If it had mattered to him he could've used his own money when he was 'only' in his 80's, instead it was more important to recieve $400 million from the tax payers. I can't fault him as a business man when few other owners in sports will build a stadium without public money, but I don't think it's something to bemoan that he never saw the new stadium when it clearly wasn't a major priority of his.

Phillies' Romero Suspended 50 Games
By Ben Jones [January 5 at 9:26pm CST]

The Philadelphia Phillies might need to pick up some help for their bullpen after reliever J.C. Romero found out he has been suspended 50 games by Major League Baseball.

Romero failed a drug test, though he denies doing anything illegal.

"I still cannot see where I did something wrong," Romero told ESPN.com's Peter Gammons. "There is nothing that should take away from the rings of my teammates. I didn't cheat. I tried to follow the rules."

Oh. Shit.

What's more surprising is that this has been relatively kept quiet.

The Philly Inquirer is reporting that the arbitator's hearing was shortly before the World Series. I'm surprised (and relieved) this wasn't released until now.

Man. I'm horrified at hearing about how bad Ibanez is on D. We may as well have signed Dunn.
Sounds like Romero is getting a raw deal here.

sounds like romero is getting a massively raw deal.

fuck you MLB

It's also possible that Romero is just a liar.

But regardless, drug testing and the consequences of a positive test have to be 100% black and white, no exuses, no intent requirement, just strict liability. Otherwise the whole drug testing program is pointless, you can just put your personal trainer in charge of everything and claim ignorance. To the extent MLB offered to cut him some kind of deal during the season, it was a mistake. He should have been suspended immediately.

yeah, but if MLB said that it was okay before he started taking it that's their fault not his

I thought it was the MLBPA that said that (maybe I didn't catch that part).

"Meanwhile, according to the arbitrator's report, Lien sent a sample of the supplement to MLB for testing. The tests showed the supplement contained a substance that could result in a positive drug test. A copy of those results was sent to commissioner Bud Selig's office in July.

Considering it was the first time a banned substance was found in an FDA-regulated, over-the-counter supplement - one available to every major-leaguer and millions of youths - that should have sounded alarms. But no one from MLB, the players' association or the Phillies told Romero that there was a problem with the supplement."

That part's just weird....So Lien got the results and he didn't tell Romero, or Romero wasn't interested in following up with Lien to find out what the results are? He just assumed that somebody would tell him if the drug he was using would cause a positive test?

If a player is trying weird shit they've never tried before, they're playing with fire.

Isn't that what the NFL did to the eight players who were targeted for suspension a few weeks ago? If I recall right, most of those players fought that suspension in court and won (or at least won a stay, it may not be settled).

BBTF's Transaction Oracle Discussion :: Rays - Signed Burrell

ahahahahahha.

Serious - Pat at 2/16 makes Ibanez look even dumber than before.

This is correct.

Plus, With a lineup of Utely/Howard/Ibanez, you've just given every manager the advantage to pull out his LOOGY for just that one sequence; while handedness is often overrated, tactically, this was an awful decision. Its made even worse by the fact that Howard should be sitting on the bench for LHP's - he's that awful. Now, Chase Utely is the best player in baseball, and hit LHP's pretty well last year, but in his career, has lost about 50 pts of OPS to them. Ibanez actually hit LHP's better last year but career wise, he's about a 120 pts of OPS worse. You've essentially reduced one of the best lineups in baseball to league average come late innings.

Btw, on the Howard bit: Howard vs LHP: .224/.294/.451; seriously, to put this in context, the league as a whole hit .264/.336/.417 vs LHP. Given his "defense" and his position, Howard should never be out there.

Jason Giambi, Oakland Athletics on verge of one-year deal - ESPN

Sweet Jesus. The A's get Giambi for 1/5.25 with an option year at 4 (with a 1.25 buyout).

His OPS+ last year was 128.

Oh my lord! Looks like the Burrell deal already has had an effect!

Love this move...Giambi...Holliday...Cust...definitely looks much better than anything the A's penciled into their 3, 4, and 5 spots last season...or the season before, for that matter.

Carl Pavano to the Tribe.


Championship!

Apparently Romero will not appeal his suspension:

Philadelphia Phillies' J.C. Romero suspended for 50 games - ESPN

I think the next change we're going to have in sabermetrics is a readjustment of the value of defense. The rage right now is to greatly overvalue it in statistical analysis and claim you're being cutting edge by including defense- I saw a figure that Willie Harris and his barely-a-bat-in-a-corner-outfield-spot was worth $15M.

That's different than in the game where a some GMs are coming around to defense but many still just look at the offensive numbers.

SI

From BP

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=1141

*sigh*

*eyes the taint on the Phillies accomplishments last year* didn't he get the W in a couple games?

clarifying: not saying that I'm bitching and moaning about it. more like waiting for the other shoe to drop and columnists and talking-heads to start freaking out about it. wondering what MLB's response will be then, if any.

Dude, never do that.

oh i'm not saying that i am doing that. more like saying that i can't wait for the inevitable articles freaking out about it.

prolly should have been more clear. just wonder what baseball's response to this is going to be - if any.

Well, there's a few things at play here:

- Defensive value is still much harder to gauge than offensive value (or pitching value), but sabermetrics is getting better at it

- If you have a value you can assign to a player defensively, you can add that to their clearly definable offensive value to come up with an overall value that can then be compared to a baseline of replacement level performance

- With said comparison to baseline level performance, you can then determine what teams are paying on average for each additional "win" value, and get an idea of whether contracts are at, above or below this current standard

Now obviously you can argue defensive metrics. The current advanced metrics like RZR, UZR and +/- don't always agree with each other, and of course they often don't agree with "convential wisdom". But unless they differ greatly, they do provide some range of probable defensive value, especially when you look at a player's performance over multiple seasons.

To me, that's the only questionable thing about current analysis that attempts to rate whether signings are within current standards of dollars per additional WAR (wins above replacement).

Maybe it's crazy to think that a guy like Raul Ibanez could be giving back 20 runs of defensive value to counter the 30 runs or so of offensive value he provides. But the great thing is that as technology advances and we get more and better data to cull from, we're consistently getting closer to having accurate assessments of defensive value.

Here's the interesting thing - as more and more teams are getting on board with valuing defense, what's the next undervalued area for a "Moneyball" approach? If bad glove/good bat guys like Pat Burrell, Adam Dunn, Jason Giambi, etc. are now in fact undervalued, will we see a rush by teams like Oakland and Cleveland to snap them up? Obviously Oakland thinks that Giambi is a good value at 1 year/$5.25M. Given that he's likely to be a DH and not give away any value defensively, that deal makes a lot of sense for them.

I think that's where we disagree. I think far too much values is given to fielding WAR because, again, fielding stats are in their infancy. As they should, the stat community is gobbling these up and trying to draw conclusions off of them. However, they are then putting them next to much more "mature" batting and pitching stats and saying they hold equal value, which just doesn't work when there's a lot of disagreement even among fielding stats.

We're going to find out in a few years that "Oh, yeah, you know how we said he was worth -30 runs in the field and that equates out to X wins. Well, X is now 1/3 what we used to think for fielding runs"- something that drastic.

And, yeah, I think we're going to start seeing some iron gloved guys get signed for a lot less. However, I think this year is an aberration. Don't mistake an industry wide pulling back of salaries for people all of a sudden wising up to these things. I think in the next couple of years, you'll see more of an adjustment and then there will be a chance for bargain hunting. But right now, there are still a lot of teams working off of "old school" baseball thinking so it's not like these guys would have been falling through the cracks in last year's economic climate.

SI

No, I think we're on the same page on fielding - it's not the WAR to $$$ formula that is really in question, it's the defensive values that go into calculating an overall WAR value. I agree that the metrics are new and are bound to improve in coming years as technology advances and more and better data is available to be analyzed.

As for the current market, I think it's probably a combination of a greater number of teams becoming sabermetrically inclined (and the commensurate adjustments in computing defensive value in overall value) and the current economic market. While there are still some old-school front offices (hello Phillies), they are fewer and farther between than ever - see the huge change in culture with the M's this off-season.

Teams have always valued defense to a certain extent in contract offers; what's changing is the amount of value they place in defense and, more importantly, how the judge defensive value. Perhaps the defensive values spit out by measures like RZR, UZR & +/- are exaggerated, but I have little doubt we're a lot further along in understanding fielding value in baseball than we were even 5 years ago.

Interesting off-season. 2 things stand out to me in terms of the next collective bargaining negotiations.

1. Too many free agents. There's so many OF/1B out there that you get them for nothing. I think the MLBPA will be willing to push back free agency a year and try to pass it off as some kind of concession that they should get rewarded for.

2. I've never, ever, heard such emphasis on the draft pick compensation for signing free agents. I don't think the MLBPA expected this at all. I mean, who in the world is going to give up a draft pick and even $8 million for Jason Varitek? It's just not going to happen. He could have gotten $10-12 million in arbitration, and what is he going to have to settle for? Will he even get a job? The MLBPA will make a big stink over this at the next negotiations (and try to keep more revenue sharing off the table).

Jebus...Smoltz to the Red $ox. That is going be be almost as distasteful as seeing Greg Maddux play his home games at Chavez Latrine. :banghead:

great pickup for the Sox.

You obviously mean picking up Baldelli, not Smoltz, right?

After last years major injury and Smoltzy being 42... well, that's just screams "Danger" all over.

what are the contract terms? I haven't seen yet.

From ESPN.com:

yeah - i like that deal.

$5.5mil on a flyer for a guy who could spot-start or come out of the pen is fine. The team had plenty of $$ come off the books, I want to see them spend some of it. And if he earns the incentives then he'll be worth them.

love love love the baldelli deal if it goes through and assuming it's for sane-$$. Local kid and if there actually is medically light at the end of the tunnel now he's a 5-tool guy. worst-case he's a pinch-hitter

Both pickups. We now have 6 veteran starters (Beckett/Dice-K/Lester/Wakefield/Penny/Smoltz) with Buchholz and Bowden at AAA. The Sox aren't counting on Smoltz staying healthy and making 35 starts. In fact, they're counting on the exact opposite - that all 6 guys, Smoltz/Penny (and I think Lester) in particular will need some rest/DL time this season. Smoltz probably won't even debut until late May/early June.

In the Varitek situation, first of all he's a dumbass for turning down arbitration. Beyond that I've heard rumors that Henry is so disgusted with Boras and his negotiating tactics that he's willing to go into next season without Varitek, even if they don't trade for a veteran.

The Braves offered Smoltz $3m according to the AJC (or $1m more than that POS Mike Hampton was offered). Some off-season we're having, ugh.

Losing out on AJ Burnett is a good thing. Braves aren't winning anything this season anyway. Not sure what the fuss is over a 42 year old starter who will probably only make 20-25 starts anyway. The guy's been great, may as well let him finish his career with a good team.

Looks like Hoffman will be the Brewer's closer next year. I'm not sure how that is going to work out.

Better than Eric Gagne we can hope. That will at least put Carlos Villanueva in a role that won't waste his ability to go multiple innings.

Not that that was a bad offer.

http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomi...o-long-smoltz/

I didn't see it mentioned anywhere but John Patterson retired at 30 or 31. He was filthy when healthy, which was rarely. Really helped me in fantasy baseball his one "full" season. However, he was one of the Boras loophole guys so that's a bit of a strike against him in my book.

SI

Chipper, incidentally, blasted the organization over the Smoltz thing in the paper today.

A couple of things stood out to me in the Q&A.
talking about the absence of a contract extension for himself
A. We’ve got over a month until spring training. Yeah, it could certainly happen. I’ve just been chalking it up to the Braves have bigger fish to fry. But it seems like somebody keeps coming along and eating all our fish.

So far this off-season, Frank Wren looks extremely inept to me. Maybe that's the wrong word though, maybe more like completely out of his depth.



Q. For those who say Smoltz’s taken less money to stay with the Braves before, how do you explain why this time is different?

A. It’s easy. If the Braves would have handled this right from the beginning and gone ahead and bitten the bullet and offered him a contract, knowing that when John Smoltz sets his mind to it and says he’s coming back and is going to be back at full strength, that the second another team came into this, the Braves should have taken him aside and said ‘What do we have to do to make this work.’ John Smoltz has earned that respect. We’ve all taken less money to stay here, but the fact of the matter is that John Smoltz has nothing else to prove individually. He wants to win. Who has the best chance to win right now? Boston.

At no point since the worst-to-first year could I imagine any Brave saying that out loud. Just really hits home how far down they are at this point.

chipper can come to boston too if he wants

FWIW, I'd rather you have taken him than Smoltz.

At least Smoltz is a guy I find pretty likable, whereas Chipper (correct though he may be on this subject) is a guy I've been tired of for years. When he's hot he can really rake but he's the least durable position regular we've had since Bob Horner.

Reading this reminded me of discussion past on this board.

Bloomquist To KC | U.S.S. Mariner

Poor Royals. I like Kyle Davies, though, he works construction in the off-season.

Why is that a bad thing? This seems like another version of blaming the best player when the team sucks. For the 130 games a year Chipper's out there, he's the best hitting 3B in baseball. You're tired of that??? You'd rather have someone who sucks but plays everyday?

i do not understand.

Yeah, I hate a 3B/OF who averages 530 AB a season over a 15 year career. Especially one that had 530 PA last season and put up an OPS+ of 175. His career OPS+ is 145, insane.

yeah. i'd take him in a heartbeat

What a whiner. The Braves were given Smoltz what he was probably worth. Just because they didn't want to overpay, he's selling his loyalty? I thought we wanted our teams to not overpay. Smoltz just chased the money. That's all.

Considering the amount of money the Braves just wasted on acquiring a pitcher who at best is worth a damn for half a season, and that the f'n idiot GM actually made an offer to the useless p.o.s. Hampton, I don't blame Smoltz one bit.

I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that our own Senator & Poli are better judges of talent for their respective teams than Wren.

About all that's left would be for him to add further insult to injury by wasting a dime on Glavine.
edit to add: And then most likely overpay for the round mound with no rebound to return as a rally killing doubleplay & strikeout machine. And by overpay I mean giving him the major league minimum.

And what I was saying was that would be fine by me. I've found Chipper to be an incredibly unlikable personality for several years now (his take on Smoltz is akin to a blind squirrel finding an acorn AFAIC) and he's about as brittle as the legendary Bob Horner.

Somebody tell that guy about Curt Flood and Andy Messersmith, he seems to be a little behind the times.