Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Flash leaves camp with forearm, elbow stiffness | Main | Phillies resume play tonight against Blue Jays »

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Comments

Sorry for the delay in posting. Great thread in the previous entry, as usual.

I'm surprised no one picked up on Miller's top 10, which was a more inspired and insightful assessment than Zolecki's roundup from yesterday. Zolecki listed Bisenius and Happ as the two surprises, but that's all I got from it.

JW: Perhaps I am wrong, but I still think that Randy Miller has some sort of vendetta with Burrell. I seriously cannot remember the last time that Miller wrote anything positive about Burrell. Even Mr. Congeniality Marcus Hayes has written positive things this spring about some of the defensive plays that Burrell has made. Of course I am 7000 miles out of the loop, but I'm still under the impression, perhaps incorrect, that Randy Miller is more interested in being on WIP and DNL than he is on being an objective reporter on all facets/members of the team. Just my opinion. Individual mileage may vary.

that was a pretty depressing article. low points:

"Look for the Phils to take the best deal they can get for Lieber in the next two weeks, but Rowand will stay unless they can land an established late-inning reliever in return."

neither of those statements inspires any confidence in me.

"...they could get by moving Shane Victorino from right to center field and platooning Karim Garcia and Jayson Werth in right."

don't think that needs any explanation.

"Werth has a guaranteed contract, which always means something in these parts."

thought one of the great things about Gillick was his willingness to admit mistakes?

"The Phils haven’t forgotten Smith’s body of work during his standout rookie season in 2006."

defining 20 innings as a "body of work" is pretty bold.

"The Phils are looking for their best 25."

could have fooled me...

i agree with MPN. miller strikes me as a guy who is prohibitively concerned with raising his profile at times. that said, any of us are fooling our selves with think things with burrell will just work themselves out. he doesn't seem to publicly display any of the qualities of a guy who can fix things on his own or make adjustments to his approach. i think burrell's 07 will look alot like his 06. and that's bad news for those of us hoping for his 05.

MPN: That may be true, but more importantly, the Phillies aren't high on Burrell, either. Clearly.

Although it's been a dead issue for months, there shouldn't be much doubt that Gillick craves top-flight protection for Howard, and that he would consider trading as much as Brett Myers to get it.

and seriously, the matt smith illusion, based soley on that late-season astros game, needs to come back to earth. anything we get from the guy is a bonus, not a guarentee.

"Privately"???

their concern could be described a lot of different ways, but is "private" even close to accurate? who haven't they told about their concerns?

i said this before - this pen will be fine if one guy steps up and gives what madson gave two years ago.

The Phils aren't high on Burrell? Wow.

This could get ugly. If Gillick, Manual, etc. decide to treat PB the same way all season that they did to wind up last season, Pat could significantly devalue himself to any potential suitors (not that he hasn't already).

Just halfway through ST and I think we can already put to bed the "Burrell may just show up and surprise people" mentality. It doesn't sound like the Phils are going to give him much of an opportunity.

Miller is a tool.

Burrell had a funny offseason in how he was written in the media. It's like I woke up one morning and the idea that Burrell was sufficient protection for Howard was the new black. Then came a lot of easy fixes, like contacts and the like. Whether you agree with the protection theory, partly agree, or totally disagree, it was a bizarre turn from where most were on Oct. 1, after watching Burrell battle in the clutch and Howard get nothing to hit.

40 good swings a year...

I read it as: "Rios Rios Rios".

Have you thought about linking Miller (and other local beat writers besides Hayes and Zolecki) to the sidebar, Jason?

We tend to end up talking about them as much an anyone else.

I have to say, if there was one place where my standard defense of Burrell breaks down, it has to do with injuries.

I don't care about the called third strikes.

I think the protection argument is bs, and numerous studies prove this.

I don't care that he walks too much, which I always find to be an asinine argument.

What I do care about, however, is the injury concerns. Burrell's biggest problem last year was not some lack of "clutch", but the simple fact that he couldn't stay on the filed because of his foot.

I'm not sure why the lack of surgery in the off-season wasn't a bigger story, but right now, our OF could be an absolute joke. At this point, I would take Rowand off the trading block.

I know what you mean about trading Rowand. If you don't get another OFer back, what's the point? Unless you're content with Werth/Garcia. Can't just trade him for anything. PG won't do that anyway.

the only problem, BB/kdon, is that this column and several recent others suggest just that - that Gillick etc. ARE content with Werth/Garcia. which I know, seems completely crazy, especially if they're not confident in Burrell. but when you hear something this many times, the fact that it's stupid doesn't necessarily make it untrue.

Bureel -- The called third strikes are very frustrating. It shows me Burrell at age 30 is still a guess hitter with 2 strikes, and has not made adjustments to make himself a better player. That said, he's still darn productive.

Isn't Jody Mac on 950 am? Randy Miller is a Burrell Basher and the biggest thing i got from the article is that Coste isn't going to make the roster. i thought people on this blog would have been all over that already.

A few Comments:

Lieber: A lot of people are saying that they think that Lieber was horrible last year, and that he is worth little in trade value. Some of the time he was, but he was not horrible all of last year. About half the time he was damn near dominant. Remember he was injured for much of last year, and there is no telling how this affected him.

Stats: 168 IP, 90.7 IP (allowing 3 ER or less), 138.9 IP (allowing 4 ER or less).
I'd say he was good-great 83% of the time, attrocious 17% of the time.

Bottom line, there is a possibility that he comes back this year and is a 17 game winner, if healthy. I think that there are a few teams that would give good value for even the possibility of his cutting the amount of attrocious pitching in half.

Burrell: Will be a DH (and a valuable asset as such) as soon as the Phils get rid of him. If the NL had the DH rule, I would have a lot less problems with Pat the Bat, but as an OF he is a major liability. If the injuries start affecting him as a hitter, he might as well be a highly paid club bouncer.

PG could also be talking up Garcia/Werth tandem so it doesn't look like he's desperate for an OFer.

On a different note, the Baseball Analysts recently did some analysis on third base coaches. You'll never guess who came in first. Tom Foley of the Devil Rays. Who came in second? None other than the much maligned Bill Dancy.

The article went on to conclude that there seems to be very little correlation between year-to-year performance of third base coaches so the data probably doesn't mean all that much, but nonetheless it's worth a read.

Some of the hyperbole here is based on the assumption that losing Rowand's at-bats for a platoon of Werth/Garcia is a dire scenario. Why?

There's almost no difference in offensive production between Rowand and Werth.

Dajafi made a point over at The Good Phight - Coste has had fewer at-bats because Coste has a place on the bench. The guys who have had the most at-bats - Dobbs and Garcia - are having the rule run over them for that last spot.

This makes sense to me because it fits with Charlie being a fan of coste's hitting, and he does seems to like the guy. so long as Coste is exhibiting no major mechanical problems with his swing, Charlie knows what he's likely to get out of Coste.

"There's almost no difference in offensive production between Rowand and Werth."

Hard to justify that comment, unless you want to ignore the fact that Werth didn't play basball in 2006.

Additionally, in a platoon, Garcia, not Werth, would be getting the majority of the ABs, and there *is* quite a difference between Garcia and Rowand offensively.


I'm surprised at all the Randy Miller bashing. Whenever I do my morning Phillies surfing on the web (with most articles discussing the same topic), Miller almost always approaches that days topic with more creativity and interest than anyone else. I like him. And I agree with him for that matter - we're in trouble with Pat Burrell. I think the thing that bothers me most about PB is that he just doesn't seem to get it mentally. He thinks he had an okay year last year. He doesn't admit, at least publicly, that his game needs work.

I agree with other posters. All Miller did was cobble together a couple of obvious observations from spring training. Big deal. Not so much reporting as summarizing.

As for the Burrell thing, Miller seems like he has an ax to grind and didn't saything new there either.

The only thing that I really agree with Miller on is that the Phils are going to move Lieber in the next two weeks regardless of what they get in return. At this point, this is really a salary dump disguised as a move to help the pen.

In reality, it is a move to get back down below the $90 million dollar threshold for the team. The only thing the Phils won't do in a Lieber trade is accept a big salary back in return.


Dukes=Randy Miller

Per my point in the story (http://www.thegoodphight.com/story/2007/3/14/22269/8120) that Oisin referenced, I was surprised that Miller figures Coste is on the outs. A more likely scenario was in (I think) Hagen's piece from earlier today: that Coste goes to Texas for a reliever.

As for Rowand replacements, I don't think it's impossible that the Phils would deal him in the right trade and see what Bourn could do. He's having a really strong spring, and offers a lot more on-base ability than Rowand--though far less power.

I'm agnostic on Burrell at this point. I agree that Miller's a jerk, and it wouldn't shock me if he had the blade out for Burrell, but that doesn't mean the team isn't concerned with Pat.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG