Game chat: Rollins rejoins club for San Fran series

Shortstop Jimmy Rollins could be in the starting lineup tonight when the Phillies open a weekend set with the San Francisco Giants. Game time is 10:15 ET from AT&T Park.

Fresh off his minor league rehab, the reigning National League MVP will be evaluated prior to tonight’s game to determine whether he’s fit to come off the disabled list. When ready, infielder Brad Harman will be sent back to the minors to make room on the active roster. ... Tonight’s game will feature a pair of southpaws as Cole Hamels (3-3, 3.10 ERA) squares off with Pat Misch (0-0, 5.40). Tomorrow at 4:05, it will be Jamie Moyer (2-2, 4.15) and Tim Lincecum (4-1, 1.49), then Adam Eaton (0-1, 5.63) and Jonathan Sanchez (2-2, 4.74) in the series finale, also at 4:05. Needless to say, there will be plenty of chances this weekend for manager Charlie Manuel to sit struggling slugger Ryan Howard, who’s hitting a mere .165.

Comments

[mike cunningham]

It will be worth staying up past the Flyers game to watch JRoll return.

Prediction. Even though for some reason Rollins doesn't do particulary well in San Fran (.220/.262/.652), JRoll hits a triple tonight. He has 4 career triples at At&T/PacBell/TheStadiumFormerlyKnownastheHouseBondsBuilt Park.

[bay_area_phan]

I guess jason concluded that, when the discussion turns to hot Heidis and fake trade proposals, it's time to write a new thread.

[laramie]

It's hilarious that clout keeps bringing up this Abreu trade, and RSB's reaction to it, as some sort of barometer of baseball analysis skills.

This is the trade which prompted clout to state that the Phillies would lose 85-100 games in 2007 (they won 89 games), would be out of contention until 2010 (they made the playoffs the next year), and would see a big drop in attendance (they drew over 3,000,000, in line with the 1993 season and the 2004 CBP inaugural season).

Ahem.

In the spirit of wild prognostications, $5 says Howard puts one into the water in this series.

[bay_area_phan]

Speaking of hot Heidis, this is a nice opportunity for the Phillies to grab some momentum by finally sweeping a 3-game series, which they haven't done yet this year. Rollins' return should inject some life into the team and the Giants, after a better-than-expected start, seem to finally be playing down to everyone's expectations -- having just been swept by the awful Pirates. Other than tonight, the pitching matchups aren't great, but if there was ever a lineup that could make Moyer & Eaton look like Roy Oswalt & Brandon Webb, the Giants are it.

(I realize that had nothing to do with hot Heidis, but I figured a little titillation at the start of the post would ensure that everyone read it).

[J Roll's Unhealthy Man-Crush]

I miss J-Roll. It will be great to see him again.

[TK]

Back to the Kingdom of the Gnomes for Eric Bruntlett

[clout]

laramie: You're confused. Pat Gillick said the team wouldn't contend in '06 or '07. But, yeah, I hated the trade. Did you like it?

[Hot Heidi]

Mr. Clout, sir, please do not say bad things about that trade! I live in Clearwater and it brought Carlos Monasterios to my town.

And Carlito is such a stud, in so many ways!

[TK]

It was a culture-changing trade, Clout. It officially handed the leadership reins over to Utley, J-Roll and Howard. And they were out of contention that year if I recall correctly and wound up missing the playoffs by 2 games (thanks to the friggin' Nats series that I went to). The next year, they won the Division. I'm sure you'll say we got nothing back for him. But it was past time to officially turn the page on the infuriating underachieving core of Abreu, Lieby, and Pat Burrell (pre-Utley friendship). So I don't regret them making that trade at all.

[Live Arm]

Well said TK .. I'm so tired of how all of that gets minimized on BL, when that trade is evaluated purely in terms of "player-for-player" numbers

[MPN]

clout: Do you know anything about this Jared Simon guy at Lakewood? He seems to be a little old 24) for A ball, but his numbers look good -- sub 1 WHIP, 15:1 K/BB, 1.40 GO/AO, etc.

[college phan]

You did it TK. Now we can get into another battle over whether it was culture-change or an aberration of a deal. This has been debated about oh, I don't know, 8,000 times since July 2006. But we could discuss it again.

Personally, I look at it this way. We gave up nothing to get Abreu (the first great slugging shortstop in MLB history: none other than Kevin Stocker) and we got nothing in return (Matt Smith, CJ Henry, Carlos Monasterios, and I don't care who the last one was, they all suck). It's karma I guess.

[clout]

So the team, which fell 2 games short of the playoffs after the trade, would not have made it had they kept Lidle & Abreu? Because their replacements did so much better the rest of the way, right?

It's amazing how simple facts can get trumped by nonsense like "Oh, they had to turn the page." Good grief. Gillick himself said he would never have made the trade had he known the team was going to get hot. He said he didn't think the team could contend either that season or next.

[clout]

MPN: Yeah, he's lighting it up. He's a college pitcher, indy league guy who went undrafted. He's not on any prospect list but his numbers suggest one of those good-control, no-stuff guys who can dominate the lower levels especially at age 24.

[clout]

And I think he might also do Subway commercials with Ryan Howard.

[TK]

Well I discovered Beerleaguer last summer so I didn't miss that fun. But here's my take:

I don't think the Phillies miss Abreu or any aspect of his game, regardless of what we got back for him. They played well over .600 ball the rest of '06 and won 89 games last year. Would they have won the division if he was still batting in the heart of the order and playing RF and gracing everyone with his 'good enough' presence last year? I for one doubt it. Would Utley have ever gotten a chance to become the best 3-hole hitter in baseball if Abreu never got traded?

Their replacements, numbers-wise, have been adequate. Their RF platooning has certainly not equaled Abreu's production at the plate,but it's not like our lineup production suffered at all and it has surpassed it in the field. Victorino (last year)'s arm and willingness to actually hit a fence, above average defense of Werth and solid play of Jenkins trumps Abreu's defense for sure.

But the bottom line is Bobby Abreu is not a winner. Chase Utley and Jimmy Rollins are. And now they are the faces of the franchise. Call me crazy, but I think good leadership does make a difference in the success of a team. Or anything, for that matter.

And that's all I'm gonna say about that. I'm doing a power hour pretty soon for the Flyers game so I may be back here later tonight overly-emotional about the game tonight.

[Phil Collins]

Too many Tonights in that last sentence there, TK. Su su sudio.

[bay_area_phan]

clout: I was certainly among the appealled at the time of the Abreu trade, and I won't try to defend the indefensible. But I will at least defend the timing of the deal and the assumption that they would have finished 2 games out of the playoffs if the deal had never happened.

In terms of timing, the Phillies had a losing record & were 8 games out of the WC, with 2 months left in the season & no precedent of having ever been good enough to make the playoffs. Viewed without the benefit of hindsight (and maybe even with it), I have no problem with the decision to be a trade deadline seller. My problem is not with the decision per se but with the execution. If they could have gotten a top prospect or two for Abreu, I would have supported it.

I'm also not sure I buy this notion that, if Abreu had been around, they would have made up those 2 games. That MIGHT be true, but it's certainly not provable, and I could easily make a contrary case. When Abreu was traded, he was replaced by Dellucci and Victorino. Dellucci hit like gangbusters during the Phillies' surge, & Vic hit .307 from August 1 on. Plus, when the Phillies started to get back in contention, Gillick went out & got Moyer -- which our cheap ownership probably wouldn't have approved if it weren't for all the salary that had been shed in the trades. Moyer was much, much better down the stretch than Corey Lidle had been.

Anyway, I'll stop before I start sounding like Sir Alden. Suffice to say, I hated the trade -- but not necessarily the idea of the trade. And, while not foreseeable and not by design, I think the trade did have a short-term positive effect on the Phillies' play.

[CJ]

Screw Bobby Abreu. He's not a Phillie now. He'll never be a Phillie again. He hit the cover off the ball while he was here but I've always believe that if he had shown a little more fire it could have made a big difference, both on the field, and in the way he's remembered.

Now, he's remembered by Phillies fans as a guy with a great bat, who was scared of the wall, and didn't care if we won or lost.

Doesn't matter if it's right or wrong... that's the way it is. Now let's all turn the page.

[Morty]

CJ:

Thank you. You know who is not on the Phils' roster? Bobby Abreu. What's done is done.

[clout]

BAP: Abreu's production after the trade was far superior to the Dellucci/Vic platoon. Not even close. He had an OPS+ of 138 after the trade.

Moyer went 5-2 in 8 starts down the stretch. Lidle went 4-3. That's a 1 game difference.

On a factual basis, it is impossible to argue that th team could not have made up those 2 games with that much more offense on their side and only a 1 game difference in the quality of their 5th starter. That's why the trade defenders have to use ignorant arguments like "willingness to hit a fence." Screw you. Give me Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols and I could care less about running into fences.

[bay_area_phan]

clout: I'm not a trade defender, and agree about the significance of "running into fences." But, at best, it's unprovable and, at worst, downright dubious: (1) that Abreu would have hit as well with the Phillies; and (2) that such success would have translated into at least 2 more wins. There are literally dozens of confounding factors here, if not hundreds. The methodology of taking Abreu's post-trade stats & assuming he would have done the same with the Phillies is certainly no more logically sound -- and probably less so -- than taking the Phillies' pre-trade record (47-54) & post-trade record (38-23) & arguing that the trade made the team better.

My final point on this debate is that, on Lidle v. Moyer, you can't use Wins as your index when one guy pitched for a 97-win team and one guy pitched for an 85-win team. Moyer had an ERA+ of 116 over the last 6 weeks of 2006; Lidle's post-trade ERA+ was 88. Moyer was a vastly superior pitcher.

[CJ]

Screw Bobby Abreu. He's not a Phillie now. He'll never be a Phillie again.

Oh... sorry... thought my first post didn't go through ;-)

[Hot Heidi]

CJ - I'd like to take your suggestion more seriously; do you have Bobby's cell number?

[clout]

BAP: Actually, I'd argue that what he actually did the rest of the season, i.e. factual evidence, is a better indicator than speculation of what he might've done.

[Hope Springs Eternal]

Does anyone know what this statement on mlb.com about Feliz is about?

"Despite a better financial offer this winter, Feliz signed with Philadelphia."

[TK]

Clout indirectly said screw you to me. Does that mean I'm initiated into this blog now?

BTW, I guess I'm just not as empirical as you, big guy. I'm a fan of having winners being the leaders of the team. You also didn't address anything else I said.

[clout]

TK: No it was not directed at you. It was directly at the nonsense argument that the Abreu trade was a good one because he was bad for the team's karma etc.

[RSB]

Screw obsessing over 2006. Jimmy Rollins is leading off and playing SS tonight.

[AWH the RBP]

clout, I usualyy agree with you (and I hated the Abreu trade - nothing in return), but now you're being a bit disingenuous.

You can't be the SABR guru on this blog and then quote the post trade W-L records of Moyer and Lidle (RIP) as though they have a great deal of significance.

YOU KNOW BETTER!

The Godfather of statstical analysis, none other than Mr. William James, in his 1998 Abstract:

"Primer #8. Single-season won-lost records have almost no value as an indicator of a pitcher's contribution to a team."

That, and bap's well reasoned disagreement above using ERA+ should put that issue to rest.

Nice try, but you can't have it both ways.

[clout]

RSB: That is good news we can both agree on.

[clout]

AWH: Except that the argument was about wins, not who pitched better. Other than that, you're right on the money.

[drake]

j-roll is back tonight, leading off.

ss rollins
cf victorino
2b utley
1b howard
lf burrell
rf werth
3b feliz
c ruiz
p hamels

[AWH the RBP]

clout, the argument about changing a team's culture does have some merit. Stats and production don't tell the whole story, and you would make a fool of yourself making that argument, even to Bill James.

Just look at Barry Bonds. He can't get a job, mostly because he's considered to be a cancer in the locker room.

[Sophist]

Rollins
Vic
Utley
Howard
Burrell
Werth
Feliz
Ruiz
Hamels

[AWH the RBP]

clout, you're bing disingenuous AGAIN.

The argument was about TEAM wins, not individual pitchers'.

Besides, even if it was, if you were being completely honest you would have guided the discussion in the right direction.

[Tray]

I have to say, I think Howard for Lincecum's an interesting idea. We'd have a solid rotation, and it's not as if we need Howard's offense, we've done pretty well without it so far this season. And financially we'd be a little more flexible. On the other hand, I suppose it's risky to count on Utley and Burrell to carry you for a full season.

[RSB]

If the Phils win anything this year, I'm betting they'll be able to say it was because they kept their heads above water while Rollins was out. Considering their usual foibles at this time of year, losing Rollins for over almost four weeks was reason to worry, and thensome. They've missed him, obviously, but the team has played solidly without him. Now the stage is set to begin pulling away from the pack. It would help if Myers and Howard would starting pulling their (considerable) weight toward that end.

Having said that, no one should expect them to 'dominate' SF this weekend. They were damn lucky to even win the series last week.

[Sophist]

"Just look at Barry Bonds. He can't get a job, mostly because he's considered to be a cancer in the locker room."

AWH, not sure I disagree with your conclusion. But this is not evidence of chemistry's effect on team performance. It's evidence of chemistry's effect on one player's chance of getting a contract. clout is just going to say that team's fail to sign Bonds to their own detriment.

Damn Flyers without Kimmo.

[clout]

AWH: I see. So Bonds was such a cancer no teams ever wanted him. That's why there was such little demand for his services. It has nothing to do with the felony hanging over his head or the fact he's just about done. Man, when you go stupid, you go all the way.

[RSB]

Tray: no way the Phillies would get anything near someone like Lincecum for Howard. Nothing remotely near. A young, high-ceiling pitcher, for an expensive, slump-prone, one-dimensional slugger already pushing 30? You can forget it. They could get something decent for him, but not a Tim Lincecum.

[clout]

RSB: If Howard is indeed an "expensive, slump-prone, one-dimensional slugger already pushing 30" then why not trade him for CJ Henry? Henry was a 1st rounder!

[Inside/Outside the Parker]

Tim Lincecum is not equal value for Howard. Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum, plus a prospect, maybe, but not Tim Lincecum. The guy is 5'8 and throws 98 MPH. Maybe he is that freak of nature that will continue to throw that way without any suggestion of injury, but I doubt it. Justin Verlander is losing velocity, and he is a much bigger man. The number of guys that have started and thrown the ball that hard is a small number to start with. The number of guys that have done it and stayed healthy, is microscopic.

A great justice once said: "Make your comments soft and tender today, because you may have to eat them tomorrow." I have a feeling that a bunch of people will have some major grizzle to chew on very shortly with regard to Howard.

[drake]

my two cents per mr. howard: while he's bad, he has a terrible trade value, while he's good, we still want him. $10M is still pretty cheap for a slugger, he's not yet 30, and compares favorably to david ortiz. i could see trading him over the winter after he hits 40+ homers (which he will) and trying to restock the farm, but only if we get a serious haul like the marlins did with the cabrera trade. nobody's going to want him to play first, only DH. the upcoming free agent class is weak, so he could have higher than warranted value this winter.

[curt]

What a pretty lineup that is.

[clout]

Why would you start Feliz against a young, hard-throwing RHP? A kid who's best beaten by patient ABs? By lefty hitters?

[clout]

Oh wait. Misch is pitching. Good move.

[Bedrosian's Beard]

Right the Giants would train Cain and Lincecum AND a prospect for Howard....

[Sophist]

Clout - Feliz' sentimental return?

[AWH the RBP]

clout, you're right, there are other factors regarding Bonds, but IMO, the 'cancer in the locker room' is the most important. Any trial is likely to be after the season.

What's "just about done"? Are you saying he can't hit at all anymore - that he couldn't help any team?

I like the way you ignored my other post. I can only assume you did so because, indeed, YOU KNOW BETTER.