Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Tuesday: National stat analyst looks into Phils' future | Main | Report: Durbin placed on waivers, 10 pitchers remain »

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Comments

It's reported that the Phils have absolutely no interest in Fultz . . . so expect him any minute now!

If Gillick doesn't have interest in Fultz or Kline he's a moron. They are far superior to JD Durbin. If JD does make this team I'll be disgusted, and it'll be simply another example of why fans get so pissed at the organization.

GM: Well-put. How can a team which has only 6 relievers, one of whom just went 0-4 with a 12+ ERA & 8 homeruns allowed, express "no interest" in any available, experienced, able-bodied major league reliever?

The only way the Phils will make a move is if they can sign a pitcher for the absolute minimum. That is what is so frustrating.

But he's the Real Deal!!!!

Jobbers... any source on this "uninterest?"

As Pat Gillick has attempted to shove down our throats since day 1, one man's garbage is another man's gold. Thereforer, even if they don't end up signing Fultz, it's beyond ridiculous to say they "have no interest."

I'm reposting this from the end of last thread. I don't know how relevant it is to Jason's new subject matter, but I would hate to waste a good tirade . . .

I still think it will be very hard for the Phillies to move Helms. No team will be willing to pay $2.9M to a bad-fielding utility infielder, who can't play the middle infield positions & who didn't even hit .250 last year. And, remember, that $2.9M turns into $3.75M next year unless the team exercises a $750K buyout option. This turned out to be yet another catastrophically stupid FA signing by Gillick. Gillick took a career backup and paid him way more money than backups make, but substantially less than starters make. The theory was that Helms would somehow transform himself from a career backup into a starting caliber third baseman, thereby giving the Phillies an inexpensive 3-year solution at third base. Instead they wind up being stuck with a very expensive backup, who is clogging up the roster and can't be traded. The irony is, I can already envision this same scenario playing out at this time next year with Pedro Feliz.

"I still think it will be very hard for the Phillies to move Helms. No team will be willing to pay $2.9M to a bad-fielding utility infielder, who can't play the middle infield positions & who didn't even hit .250 last year. And, remember, that $2.9M turns into $3.75M next year unless the team exercises a $750K buyout option. This turned out to be yet another catastrophically stupid FA signing by Gillick. Gillick took a career backup and paid him way more money than backups make, but substantially less than starters make. The theory was that Helms would somehow transform himself from a career backup into a starting caliber third baseman, thereby giving the Phillies an inexpensive 3-year solution at third base. Instead they wind up being stuck with a very expensive backup, who is clogging up the roster and can't be traded."

Continued comment from BAP last thread. Best synopsis I have seen on Helms. Helms' salary and losing the Howard arbitration case really have put a pinch on this team making an additional pitching move.

Maybe they wouldn't have done anything anyways (which I suspect is pretty likely) but the Phils would have at least had some more flexibility down the road.

Here is hoping that a veteran lefty for the pen shakes loose and the Phils can get some useful innings out of him for the first couple months of the season.

Pretty much guaranteed though the Phils will once again begin a season with a roster that has some of the greatest talent in the majors and arguably the most marginals guys to make a roster for the last 2-3 spots (which unfortunately are all on the pitching staff).

In defense of Gillick on Fultz:

- If Fultz is really damaged goods, I can see the Phils not having much interest there. Phils don't need a pitcher who spends a majority of the season on the DL.

BAP: Let the record show that the reason Gillick signed Helms is because a year earlier he'd signed Nunez as a cheap solution to the hole at 3B. Nunez was a career backup who had one good year and he predictably reverted back to his career norms. So, by going cheap, the final cost wound up being quite expensive.

Last point:

- The Phils' chances of making the playoffs heavily depend on what they get from Eaton and Gordon. If these guys both struggle/injured this year, then the Phils aren't going to make the playoffs. Either way these were both Gillick's moves and the blame solely rests on him. No longer have Wade's contracts/moves to throw around as an excuse.

If the Phils' have a counterpart going into the season, it is the Tigers. Both teams have:

1. Very strong offenses that are likely to lead their league in runs

2. Strong benches that give their managers options

3. Injury problems/concerns with their top relievers

4. Extremely suspect middle relief

5. Starting rotations that are very top-heavily and have big questions though

Clout: That's absolutely right. I was actually going to make that point in my post, but I didn't want to get started on a whole new diatribe. But this is now the third year in a row that Gillick has signed a backup caliber third baseman to be a starter, with the salaries getting progressively higher with each new guy he brings in. Of course, $4.25M is still low by the standards of starting caliber third baseman (which is why Gillick signed Feliz). But it's exceptionally high by the standards of backup third baseman which, Gillick will soon find out, is what Pedro Feliz is.

BAP:

Was it you who suggested, at least initially, keeping Helms and carrying one less pitcher?

If so, I am seeing your point. Unless Gillick is able to swing a trade, the team simply does not have enough quality pitchers worth carrying, so why not have an extra bat on the bench? Additionally, perhaps Helms hits decently when he gets a chance and generates some actual trade value.

I'm tired of the Phils getting no return on our assets.

Sorry guys, I am sure I read that about Fultz earlier today (I even recall Amaro's name was next to the quote) but trawled through the pages I've looked at and I can't find it. Either it has been removed because it was incorrect information or my memory is deceiving me (more likely)

Morty: I did suggest it and it seems that's what the Phillies are likely to do. Color me skeptical that they would just eat Helms' salary by releasing him outright and keeping Snelling. Besides, Snelling has shown nothing this spring to suggest that he would be a better bench player/pinch hitter than Helms.

The Indians released former Phillies reliever Aaron Fultz yesterday, but don't expect him land in Philadelphia. Ruben Amaro said the team has no interest in bringing back the lefthander, who pitched for the Phillies in 2005 and 2006.

via

also, only speculation, but:
Rudy had considered retirement a year ago before the Dodgers signed him to a minor-league deal, and he was going to retire last spring if he hadn't made the team, so my guess is that's what he'll do now. He's 38 and has had a nice career, in the majors off and on since 1989.

via LA Daily News reporter Tony Jackson

In modest defense of Gillick... he inherited a hole at third base. There weren't a lot of serviceable options in free agency or our barren farm system, so he decided to plug in some short term vets. Helms was an average hitter for his career, and that's what he was paid to be (no one expected him to be THAT bad).
Now if Feliz is a disaster then it makes sense to scream "why not just stick with the Helms/Dobbs platoon!", but as for the Nunez/Helms signings, what would you have preferred him to do?

Morty: I think I also wrote -- and still believe -- that if they find themselves totally unable to trade Helms, they should consider trading Dobbs, who no doubt has more value. That would leave them without a left-hander off the bench, particularly on days when Jenkins starts (i.e., most days). At least in the short term, they could fill that void by keeping only 11 pitchers, which would leave room on the roster for Snelling. In the longer term, though, you do probably need a 7th reliever.

Would I be happy about not having any left-handers off the bench? Absolutely not. But the advantage a right-handed pitcher has against right-handed batters is not nearly as great as the advantage a left-handed pitcher has against left-handed batters. For that reason, I think the need to bolster our bullpen outweighs the need for a left-handed bat off the bench.

The hole was filled THREE TIMES with veterans coming out of career years - Bell, Nunez, Helms. The FO bit three times on this and got burned. Isn't that the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the same result?

MG nailed it with the Tigers' comparison comparing deep lineups (Detroit's deeper because of the DH) and even the rotations kind of stack up - (Verlander = Hamels; Bonderman = Myers, Rogers = Moyer). I suppose you could compare Kendrick with Robertson, but Nate has been around longer. The 5th starter for comparison's sake, Willis is obviously stronger than Eaton, but certainly can be knocked out very very early. The Phils' one bullpen advantage is that they can at least hope to have guys healthy while the Tigers KNOW they are without Rodney and Zumaya for a substantial period of time.

BAP:

That's harder to agree with. For myself, it would depend on the quality of pitcher they got back, and I don't know if Dobbs has enough of a MLB track record to command a quality reliever in exchange.

One difference between the Tigers & Phillies, though, is that it's pretty hard to be critical of the Tigers' off-season.

Wow, clout & Jack. This second inning by Wang is the perfect, most timely example of what you talked about yesterday. If Wang gets his sinkers down, this inning is over. But he's leaving them up, the Phils are hitting him, and it's now 4-0, Phils.

Mike: Right.. but what were the other options? Going into the season with a hole at third base? The Bell contract was bad but my point is that neither the Helms or Nunez contracts were/are crippling. They were short term and not a ton of money. We could be paying Rolen or Glaus 12 mil/yr to be hurt, or Brandon Inge 6 mil/yr to stink.

Brian G: "as for the Nunez/Helms signings, what would you have preferred him to do?"

Well, they could've traded for Mike Lowell, which is what the Red Sox did.

no-one going to mention Polanco ?

Yes, Clout. That would've been a phenomenal move in hindsight. But I find it hard to believe you or anyone was advocating it at the time. As I'm certain you're well aware, he was a 31 yr old coming of an extremely down year, the cause of which was assumed to be the end of steroid use or a bum shoulder that was going to make him damaged goods the rest of his career, replete with two years left on a hefty contract. The Red Sox reluctantly took him as a throw-in. He could have very easily ended up in the Glaus or Rolen category.

Lowell was thrown in that trade as an after thought. He was nowhere near the centerpiece of that deal - that distinction goes to Beckett. He had been coming off a terrible year and was included as a way for the Marlins to cut salary, he was never expected to have the career resurgence that he has had.

B.G. and Y.C.: You make my point for me. He was indeed a throw-in in that deal, an offload of salary, in other words, he wouldn't have cost the Phillies all that much beyond his $7.5M salary.

As I recall -- Placido Polanco said he was happy to stay with the Phillies and play third and they traded him anyway

That's fine, he was a throw-in, an afterthought in that deal...but what YOU fail to mention was that the two principals in that deal were a frontline starter in Beckett and arguably the best position in baseball for the next ten years in Hanley Ramirez.

Good to see Myers throwing well against a Yankees lineup with some regulars.

Neither of which the Phillies have or are willing to trade.

Besides if Lowell had continued to play at the same level and was costing $7.5 million a year, then I think this fan base not to mention most of the posters on this site would have completely exploded about the Phillies FO wasting money on an aging thirdbasemen when time and again its been proven that the best way to build a team is through smart drafting.

Worst trade ever??
6/8/05 Acquired RHP Ugueth Urbina and INF Ramon Martinez from the Detroit Tigers in exchange for INF Placido Polanco.

Y.C.: Wait, let me see if I get this straight. First you say Lowell was a throw in and now you say the Phillies couldn't have gotten him without a Beckett-quality starter in return?

Anonymous: It was a horrendous trade, but I wouldn't call it the worst ever. They got a small bit of value from Urbina. You can run down the list of quality players the Phillies have dealt in the past decade and you will see that in every case the Phillies got nothing close to equal value in return.

Myers has looked dynamite this spring. Couldn't ask for anything more. He has really become a "pitcher", and not just a "stuff" guy, trying to strike everyone out. And, his stuff is still good enough, to strike guys out, when he needs to.

I still don't worry about Kendrick. Had a bad 1st inning yesterday, but was pretty good after that. As it is with most sinkerballers, the more innings he gets, the more his ball will start to move. Wang has also had a bad spring for the Yanks. Not saying KK is in Wang's league, but they do pitch similarly. KK will be a solid #4 starter, who will keep the team in the game most nights. He'll have a few games where he gets lit up, when he is not locating, but that happens. Moyer will likely do the same.

And, the Mets are now talking about possibly starting Jorge Sosa as their 5th starter, instead of Pelfrey. The 5th starter thing and 11th or 12th pitcher on the staff, is a problem for a whole bunch of teams; not just the Phils.

Clout, Probably not the worst.
But just picture the Phil's infield with Polanco @ 3B now!

Clout: The point was that Lowell was included in a deal for Josh Beckett. We had no prospect near the level of Hanley Ramirez, and possibly even Anibal Sanchez, the young pitcher who was part of the deal. Now, it certainly is possible that the Marlins would have offered Lowell in a separate trade as a salary dump, which I think is Clout's point, no? Either way, hindsight is nice, but the fact is no team was willing to trade for only Mike Lowell and his salary at that point. There is plenty to criticize for the Phils in their handling of 3B over the last few years, but its tough to expect them to have done that.

This couldn't be more typical clout. Knows perfectly well what the situation is and what Y.C. means, but he just can't help being completely disingenous when arguing with someone.
"Y.C.: Wait, let me see if I get this straight. First you say Lowell was a throw in and now you say the Phillies couldn't have gotten him without a Beckett-quality starter in return?"

I just hope that one of Cardenas/Donald/Harman is good enough to hit well and be moved to third base. If two of those 3 can then we could trade Howard and move Utley or one of them to first, or put one in the LF if Burrell is gone.

It really is good to see Myers dominating like this. If he and Hamels both keep their head and stay healthy, that would greatly make up for our other pitching deficiencies. Both could be 18+ game winners.

There was no indication that Lowell was ever available to be had strictly for cash or minimal prospects. With that trade the Marlins were able to:

Cut payroll; and
Bring in high ceiling talent.

There was no way a salary dump of Lowell was going to come close to that haul, even just in salary relief.

Only the Phillies seem to be able to trade their best pieces for nothing.

In hindsight, the Polanco trade isn't great, but at the time, Polanco wasn't considered to become a .315 hitter, and Urbina was a solid 7th/8th inning guy. Nobody thought he'd help kill a guy.

I can't slam the Phils for that deal.

Jack/Brian: Clout is right about Lowell. At the time the Marlins traded him, he was coming off an injury-plagued season in which he had hit .236 with just 8 homeruns. He had a big salary (for the time) & was widely considered to be washed up -- though there was little basis for this belief, since he was still only 31. I distinctly remember that, at the time Lowell was having his horrible season, I was thinking that the Phillies should trade for him.

The Marlins didn't throw Lowell into the Beckett trade as a way of sweetening the offer for the RedSox. It was the other way around. They gave the RedSox Beckett as a way of inducing them to take Lowell off their hands. In other words, they were literally giving Lowell away, in the same way that we gave Abreu away, because they perceived that he had negative value. Literally ANY team could have traded for him, just by agreeing to take his salary.

Conscience: The RedSox would happily have traded Hanley Ramirez straight-up for Josh Beckett. I would venture to guess that, at the time, they might have even preferred that deal to the one they made, since Lowell was perceived as more of a liability than an asset.

Mets opening day roster from metsblog:
Starting Pitchers: Johan Santana, Pedro Martinez, Oliver Perez, John Maine and either Mike Pelfrey or Nelson Figueroa.

The Bullpen: Billy Wagner, Aaron Heilman, Pedro Feliciano, Scott Schoenweiss, Jorge Sosa, Matt Wise and either Joe Smith or Brian Stokes.

Position Players: Brian Schneider, Carlos Delgado, Luis Castillo, Jose Reyes, David Wright, Carlos Beltran, Angel Pagan and Ryan Church.

Bench: Raul Casanova, Damion Easley, Marlon Anderson, Endy Chavez and either Fernando Tatis or Brady Clark.

April 8th is so close...FERNANDO TATIS!

Who's this Carpenter guy that is pitching?

Now that I will go back to ignoring clout:

Myers throwing well makes me remember why I was happy about the Lidge trade initially. His presence in the rotation was better than any free agent we could have signed or piece for which we could have traded (because that involves having your own players to trade).

Here here on Myers - he's really been spectacular this spring. But how about Drew Carpenter stepping in and getting three groundouts, then three strikeouts, to the meat of the Bombers' order?

I'm sorry, but the worst trade ever was Lenny Dykstra, Roger McDowell, and Tom Edens for Juan Samuel. The Mets got half a season of Sammy batting .228.

Ankit: Andrew Carpenter was a breakout star for Clearwater last year, winning 18 (?) games and leading them to the FSL title. He'll start in Reading this year.

BAP say it ain't so:

You are right that the Red Sox would have traded Ramirez for Beckett straight up. The Marlins on the other hand would have laughed them out of the room.

You are right ANY team could have had Lowell, but NO team in their right minds would have.

The Red Sox took him because it was a part of the transaction to get them the frontline starter that they needed. Call it whatever you want but no team in the league was going to take a risk on a .236 hitting 31 year old third basemen who had steroid rumors around him...even just for cash.

BAP: Helms is making $2.15 million this year with a $750K option for next year, so the Phillies are on the hook for $2.9 million, not $3.65 million if we cut him.

Mike: To be the worst trade ever, it would have to be both bad at the time it was made and bad in hindsight (like, for instance, the Abreu trade). At the time of the Dykstra trade, Samuel was one of the most dynamic players in baseball & Dykstra was a No. 4 outfielder. There was really no way to foresee that Samuel would decline so far, so fast, at such a young age. Nor was there any way to foresee that Dykstra would become the game's best leadoff hitter.

Thanks Malcolm!

YC: I've lost track of what the original point was about the Lowell/Beckett trade, but I disagree with this statement:

no team in the league was going to take a risk on a .236 hitting 31 year old third basemen who had steroid rumors around him...even just for cash.

Lowell was coming off a terrible year, but 31 isn't old enough to be considered washed up and he was still a solid defensive 3B. Hitters have down years just like they have career years sometimes; and pretty much every successful hitter over the last 10 years has had steroid whispers.

I'll grant that his salary would be difficult to move as a stand-alone transaction, but I don't agree that none of the 29 other teams would have interest. There's teams that had far worse 3B situations (see Phillies).

The Phils management has done some pretty bad things, but it's hard to rip them for not trading for Mike Lowell.

Not only was he statistically awful, but he just looked brutal at the plate in '06. I for one didn't want anything to do with him after that year.

But if someone would like to repost their comment from the offseason after his 2006 saying the Phils should go after Mike Lowell, I would give them much respect.

That should read after his *2005* season.

Jack: "but the fact is no team was willing to trade for only Mike Lowell and his salary at that point"

Really? No team made an offer to take Lowell in a salary dump except for Boston? I recall the fish trying to deal him then and he was coming off a career bad year, due to injuries, but I can't ever recall reading that baseball people throught he was washed up.

In any event, I'm not listing this as a major offense by PG. It was simply an answer to Brian G's contention that there isn't anything PG could possibly have done to fill 3B except sign drek like Nunez and Helms.

I agree, hindsight on the whole situation is 20/20. I just disagree with the statement that "no team in the league" would take the risk of dealing for him.

Wait: not only is Nelson Figueroa back in the majors, he's in competition for the no. 5 starter spot in New York? How has this slipped past our radar? Is Omar Daal back as well?

Andrew Carpenter - very impressive, albeit against mostly minor leaguers.

Malcolm, I strongly disagree. At the time of the trade Polanco was hitting .316. Since achieving more than 300 PAs in 2000 his batting averages were .316, .307, .288, .289 and .298. I'd say just about anyone knew he was a damn good hitter capable of hitting .315 at that point.

Nice win today in Clearwater. Nice to see the bats pay for Chien-Ming Wang's mistakes. They are the best in the league at making them pay.

You're more right than wrong, BAP. Not worth picking nits. The trade was one of many of Frank Cashen's plan of taking a World Champion and selling it for scraps.

I thought the Phils asked Polanco to play third, but he refused. I'm %90 sure that's how it went. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been traded.

Your Conscience: There is absolutely zero evidence to support this statement: "Call it whatever you want but no team in the league was going to take a risk on a .236 hitting 31 year old third basemen who had steroid rumors around him...even just for cash."

I remember Polanco was more than willing to play 3rd. It was gooch who wouldn't move

Ah, the whole discussion is messed up anyway!

Trying to get my years straight, I realized that the Phils signed Helms after the 2006 season, when Lowell was already on the Sox.

So yes, he might have been available from the Sox, but it would not have been a salary dump on their part, since Lowell's 2006 was pretty good.

Brett: That's false. Polanco did not refuse to play 3B. In fact, he played some 3B in every season as a Phillie.

Looked up his career -95 games @3B for the Phils

I have heard in the past that Polanco preferred playing 2B to 3B; not that he ever outright "refused" to play 3B. But I think for the right amount of $$$ he could have been convinced to be the Phils everyday 3B. And that would have been money much better spent than what they subsequently threw to Nunez/Helms/Feliz.

Nice job today by Drew Carpenter. He induced a DP grouder to the best hitter in baseball, so it wasn't just minor leaguers he was pitching against. I doubt "Real Deal" would have put up 4 IP, 2 hits and 6 K's today, against an A ball team; let alone the Yankees starters and scrubs. You don't win as many games as he did last year; no matter what level of baseball you are pitching in, without having some ability.

If Carpenter, Outman and Carrasco stay healthy, I'd look for Reading to be a championship contender in AA this year. That's of course, if the Phils don't need one of those 3 guys in Philly at some point in the year.

Before we got sidetracked discussing Mike Lowell, the point whichh Brian G. raised was: "There weren't a lot of serviceable options in free agency or our barren farm system, so [Gillick] decided to plug in some short term vets."

That's an entirely valid point and, for that reason, I never criticized Gillick for the Wes Helms signing (until today, that is). Helms & DeRosa seemed to be the 2 best guys available in a weak FA market and, while DeRosa was coming off a very good year, it was a year which had every appearance of being a fluke. So Gillick signed Helms. I was fine with that at the time & I still am today.

My problem isn't with the Helms signing but the Feliz signing. If we hadn't signed Feliz, Dobbs-Helms would have platooned at third with Bruntlett playing the Abe Nunez role as late-inning defensive replacement. I won't restart the debate about whether Dobbs-Helms is better than Pedro Feliz. I'll only say that it was the Feliz signing which created the roster mess that we now have -- i.e., a $2+M utility player who is too expensive to trade & for whom there is no spot on the roster. If you want to sign Feliz, shouldn't you first make sure that you can find a taker for Wes Helms? Didn't the Garcia-Lieber situation of last year teach Gillick anything about making moves which leave you with a superfluous but high-priced player, who it might prove difficult to trade?

"BAP: Helms is making $2.15 million this year with a $750K option for next year, so the Phillies are on the hook for $2.9 million, not $3.65 million if we cut him."

MPN - probably cheaper than that. If the Phils waived him, he probably wouldn't clear waivers. Someone would pick him up for $380K - and the buyout or second year, I believe. So the Phils could potentially dump him for just (I cannot believe I just said "just") somewher around $2MM.

BAP: Well stated point about superfluous players being signed/traded for at contracts that make them difficult to trade.

While we're beating dead horses, that was made me so indignant about the Barajas signing last year. They already a backup C (Coste) and a guy who could be called up from AAA in case of an injury (Jamarillo). And the money spent on Barajas solely because of his "veteran" status would have been better spent on pitching.

clout: My mistake; call it a moment where I didn't actually do research, which is highly rare. As I remember, the move was more a reason to bring Utley into the fold than anything, and since they couldn't move Bell, this was the deal they had to make.

Urbina was still the right move at the time, though, as he was pitching well in Detroit. It all goes back to throwing big bucks at David Bell. Ugh. We're still paying for that move today.

Fun stuff reading the Helms comments from Beerleaguer archives:

http://www.beerleaguer.com/beerleaguer/2006/11/rosenthal_phils.html

http://www.beerleaguer.com/beerleaguer/2006/11/phils_agree_to_.html

The usual kool-aid drinkers, but also the rare instance of me, clout, and RSB all being in agreement that Helms was a bad signing.

That thread also reminded me of another option that many, including myself :-), suggested Gillick pursue:

Iwamura, who is getting about 2.5 per year and only cost a 4.5M posting fee.


kdon:
Iwamura would've been a very good option.

""There weren't a lot of serviceable options in free agency or our barren farm system, so [Gillick] decided to plug in some short term vets."

That's an entirely valid point"

Sorry, I just posted my point above, but Iwamura was a much better option, and it isn't hindsight.

To give Gillick credit, the Phils were in the bidding, but it's almost worse if they lost out to the Rays - the Rays!!! - over a few hundred thousand.

Also, kdon, I wasn't around then, but I would've been drinking major kool-aid on Helms. At the time, I thought he had great potential. Kinda makes me glad I wasn't posting yet...

"Iwamura would've been a very good option."

What?

Ah! Sorry, Andy, maybe I'm looking for confrontation, but somehow I read the "'ve" of your post for "n't"!

Thanks. I was wondering why you were disagreeing with my agreement.

Well, that makes even less sense, so let's just say I thought you were questioning my wisdom on Iwamura.

It made 1.6/∞ sense.

Shut up Andy, you're wrong! Stop making me look foolish with your clearly worded agreements!

Ah, that's a much better beerleaguer response: invective with hints of ad hominem argument. I feel better now.

kdon: The discussion began with the signing of Nunez after the 05 season, a mistake which led to the second mistake, the signing of Helms a year later.

I do wish to clearly agree with whomever it was above who stated that the Reading Phils should be very strong this year. Clearwater, as well, could have strong pitching and hitting.

clout - the mistake began with the signing of Gillick, whenever that happened.

Just checked. It was denny b that I was agreeing with.

I'm not sure Nunez led to the mistake of signing of Helms. I don't think he was signed in with the intent that he would take over for Bell last year, just as insurance in case Bell completely fell apart.

Not really a disagreement, I just think they were two separate bad moves.

Andy, you are an idiot. The Reading Phils are going to be very good this year.

And to think that Clearwater won't be able to hit or pitch well is absurd.

Nice outing for Andrew Carpenter to get credited for a four inning save: 4.0IP, 2H, 0R, 0ER, 2BB, 6SO. He struck out Giambi, swinging, Posada, swinging, Betemit swinging; Jason Lane swinging; Nick Green swinging; Plus inducing A-rod to hit into a DP in the 7th and pitching out of a bases loaded no out situation in the 9th with no runs scored. Think he could be a long man out of the Pen?

And Coste continues to be a good handler of young pitchers.

kdon: I just booked you a flight on Expedia to Guyanna so you can enjoy the Kool Aid with the rest of "us."

Seriously though, if it was even worth it for anyone to waste more than two seconds to cherry pick evidence from the site to prove that you'd posted something that wasn't awesome in 20/20 hindsight, we'd do it. But it isn't worth it. You get a gold star for today.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG