Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Bullpen assignment a career opportunity for Happ | Main | Beerleaguer for breakfast: Phillies bear disruptions »

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Comments

That looks like some kind of nightmare I would wake up sweating from.

A little scary, however, the point is clear.

That is perhaps the most horrifying thing I have ever, ever seen in my 23 years on this Earth.

Thanks you, beerleaguer.

RSB - I still don't get your personal vendetta against Park. 'Entitlement?' 'Sorry ass?' Is it really that impossible to see beyond your parochial confirmation biases?

GM-Carson - glad i could tee one up for you a couple threads back...

wow...

just...wow

My eyes!!! Make it stop!

wtf???

jw - is there something you're trying to tell us about gnome? (at least I think it's gnome, it could be charles manson's bastard offspring - just guessing)

RSB doesn't have anything against Park...some of his best friends are Korean, I'm sure...

source - MLBTradeRumos:

According to Joe Cowley of the Chicago Sun-Times:

The San Francisco Giants are looking to unload the $44 million they still owe Aaron Rowand through 2012. The one problem? The Giants would have to be willing to pick up a big chunk of the deal to even get [White Sox GM Ken] Williams on the phone.

I'd venture to say the Giants would have to assume at least half of Rowand's contract to make it viable to the White Sox. The Sox were reportedly in on Rowand when he was a free agent in December of '07. Cowley also does a little speculating, suggesting the Sox should instead bring Washington's Willie Harris back to Chicago once he's healthy.

------------------------------------------

Any chance that the Phils would bring him back for the right price as their right handed pinch hitting 4th outfielder?

Thoughts?

Fan-freakin-tastic!!!

Scoreboard photo courtesy of RSB.

I dont think Rowand wants to be a 4th OF. And not where he started a little over a year ago.

I do not have a 'bias' or 'vendetta' against Chan Ho Park other than the bias I normally hold against sub-par players I'd prefer not to have to watch. And actually I do have a friend who's Korean. So there.

J, you were just looking for any reason to use that Bruntlett image, eh? What a beaut.

GNOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Rowand: To all those who completely ripped me for saying Vic was a better CF option...HAH!

Charlie...They're after me Lucky Charms!

best post ever, Jason.

Brunt the Grunt!

So um...I'm not sure if someone else posted this but in Prospect News:

Kyle Drabek: 7 IP, 4 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 9 K

He's now 2-0 in 2 GS with a 1.50 ERA.

Now that's a prospect!!!

re: Rowand. The most over rated player on the Phillies in the last 3 seasoons. The concern over replacing Rowand with Victorino was laughable.

Who is the picture of? Matt Cerrone?

Overlooked in the Drabek excitement (finally read the last thread too).

Savery was sitting 89-90 on his FB in his opening start so he's finally healthy. Hopefully he keeps it up and is again a decent prospect.

Jason Knapp had another good outing: 5.2 IP, 5 H, 4 R, 2 ER, 1 BB, 6 K. Totals: 4 BB/16 K in 11.1 IP. 3.18 ERA in 2 GS. Not bad for an 18 year old in the Sally League.

RSB: We can all see Park has a mediocre arm. How do you know he has a sorry ass? (sorry, couldn't resist).


The belief that Park had a sense of entitlement to the starting rotation is ridiculous. He was brought in and told he would be given a shot at the rotation. Happ pitched well in spring training. Park pitched slightly better so he got the gig.

The plus side of the move is it might give the Phillies an "in" with the Far East for players. That is a good thing.

RSB said, "But if the guy's going to turn around and proclaim entitlement to a spot in the rotation...that doesn't sit well with me...And if that wasn't enough to please him, fine, let him take his sorry ass and mediocre arm somewhere else."

Look, I'm all for putting Park in the BP if he doesn't perform over the next several starts. But what is it with you making up stuff about him "proclaiming entitlement?" Essentially the thing that doesn't sit well with you is something you constructed out of your own biased imagination.

And by saying that he should "take his sorry ass and mediocre arm somewhere else", you're begrudging a guy for trying and working hard to improve his position in life?

True Philly fans should be able to empathize with this guy, not try to tear him down.

NEPP: On the subject of our prospects, my vote for the most eye-catching stat of the young season is the following:

Travis Mattair: 20 ABs, 10 walks.

Unless Aaron Rowand improves on his 2008 performance, a No. 4 outfielder is indeed the job that best matches his present skill set. But, even if the Giants ate half his salary -- which is the bare minimum they'd have to eat to even have a prayer of getting rid of him -- Rowand is still WAY too expensive to be a 4th outfielder. Yet another in the long line of Brian Sabean's disastrous free agent signings.

brilliant observation , b-a-p...

I've been bullishly hopeful about Mattair since he was drafted. He's the only thing even remotely resembling a 'third basemen of the future.'

I'm watching Mets-Pads, I've also had a couple beers. I'm thinking this thought: It looks like Citi Field was finalized to neutralize the their No. 1 rival - The Phils. Very cavernous, with deep power alleys to neutralize the Phils power. Also plays to their speed, which might be better than ours. Anyone else think this? Or is it the beer talking?

Probably the beer in all honestly.


How does Sabean still have a job? He's almost as bad as Bavasi was.

Since Moose Mattair can't hit, taking a walk is not a bad alternative.

Sabean is still there because of what he did in his early years on the job, when the Giants put together 8 winning seasons in a row, with 4 playoff appearances. He did make some nice moves during that time (Jeff Kent, Jason Schmidt, JT Snow, Ellis Burks, Kirk Rueter, Rob Nenn), but the bottom line is that none of those playoff appearances would have happened without Bonds. Since 2004, Sabean has made one terrible free agent signing after another -- consistently paying way too much money for players who are well past their prime. I believe he's in the final year of his contract and the managing partner who hired him is no longer running the team. Unless the Giants make a surprising run at the NL West crown, I can't see Sabean being brought back next year.

I'll jump into the small sample size prospect fray...

Zach Collier @ Lakewood: 6 G, 6 for 18, 5 XBH, 3 SB, 1.122 OPS

I read somewhere that going into the season, the Mets didn't know what their park was going to be like, hitter or pitcher friendly.

I guess we're even here. The pro-Park faction can't understand why I'm against him and I can't understand how and why you go to such lengths to defend him.

You seem to think it's as simple as this: there was a competition for the number five starter. Park pitched better so he won. The end.

Here's my take, okay. The guy has been brutally bad as a starting pitcher, discounting his spot starts from last year, since 2003. To me, he's very fortunate that any club would still regard him as a starter. He comes into spring training and pitches okay, but indicates that he is impatient for the team to decide and will be upset and it will be a problem if he is not given a starter's role on a World Series team. Am I really not allowed to not like that attitude? Really, folks: take a good, hard look at his numbers the last four years he was a starting pitcher.

I'm not begrudging him his work to become a viable starting pitcher again. Good for him. More power to Chan Ho. But yes, I did interpret his remarks as a projection of entitlement on his part. The fact is he has a hell of a lot to prove of himself, more than a handful of Grapefruit League starts, and it would have been more appropriate for him to convey a contrite awareness of that. Part of that is the Phillies' fault, because they apparently told him up front he would get a chance to start and then turned around and said there'd be a competition. But here he is, a new player with a new contract, well past his prime. What kind of impression does that make, instead of saying 'I'll do anything the team wants', to imply (and all the writers seemed to interpret it the same way) that there'd be a problem if he wasn't anointed a starter?

It didn't leave a good impression with me, is all. Maybe his teammates see it otherwise. Maybe you see it otherwise. You can agree or disagree with how I view his attitude, but don't tell me I'm pulling it out of my 'biased imagination'. I'm saying this guy deserves a short leash. I'm not rooting against him. I hope he racks up five killer starts in a row. I'm just not impressed with him on the whole right now, and I don't think he deserves anyone's benefit of the doubt.

Kendrick pitched well at LV tonight. 7 IP, 7 hits, 2 ER, and 4 K's. LV won 11-4.

Was that KK's first career AAA win?

Donald with 2 hits, a 2B, a 3B, 3 runs scored and 1 RBI.

Mayberry hits his first tater.

Ozuna continues to hit well, with 3 RBI's.

Brummett got beat at Reading tonight. Bastardo with 2 more very impressive innings out of the pen. He and Escalona have looked very sharp early on, as lefty penmen.

RSB: To start, I've been in the camp all along that thinks the Phils would have been better off with Happ in the rotation and Park in the pen. So we agree on that. I also agree he should have a short leash and if he bombs for 4-5 starts he should flip spots with Happ.

But more than any other regular poster on here (save maybe davthom, who I respect for standing up for Coste-because he is perfectly acceptable as a backup C) you let your emotions cloud your analysis.

The visceral animosity to Park (I won't re-quote some of the things TNA has already pointed out) seems overboard. I think Park's comments have come from the standpoint of a guy who's a competitor and has a desire to play a prominent role, which I completely respect even if I don't think he's the best person for that role. Unlike some other guys (see: Eaton, Adam) I feel like Park is legitimately working hard to be the best pitcher he can be (which may not be good enough to be in the rotation).

And I also think some of his comments may get twisted in translation. Yes, he's been in the U.S. for awhile but at the same time if you're not a native speaker you think in a different language which can result in some misinterpretation.

There are guys on the team you clearly like, Rollins for example and will defend to the hilt even if a criticism is legitimate.

There are guys you clearly don't like: Myers for example (who I agree is a poor excuse for a man for his off-field conduct) and will jump on any chance to degrade them. In fairness, you have given credit recently to Howard for improving his defense/conditioning. On the other hand you were suggesting last year moving him sooner than later when it was clear to most that there is no way to move Howard without significantly downgrading the 1B position on this team.

And I definitely don't think it's an anti-Asian or anti-Korean thing with Park. I feel like I "know" you well enough from BL to know you're just not that kind of guy. And I'll be happy to stand up for you to anyone who accuses you of that type of thing.

But I do feel like you make character judgements about players that tend to keep you from being able to objectively analyze their ability/work ethic on the field. And I guess that last sentence was my point which I just took a long way to get to it. I'm not trying to pick a fight (I'm not a big fan of internet-bickering), I'm just trying to encourage you to look at things from a more objective angle from time to time.

Don't know if it's already been posted, but...

Doug Glanville's article in the NY Times about Kalas:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/15/opinion/15glanville-harrykalas.html?_r=2

Keep in mind that Park had other offers, but signed here because he was told he could be a starter. In fact, he has stated that is THE reason he signed here. If he thought he'd be in the bullpen he would've signed elsewhere.

You can fairly argue, as Jack has, that the Phils shouldn't have signed him at all given that set of facts, but I don't think it's fair to argue that he should be happy to go to the bullpen after 1 or 2 starts given the circumstances of his signing.

RSB - Agreed about Park's perceived entitlement a bit. Yeah, he worked really hard in the offseason and pitched well in spring training. From his comments though he acted like it would have been a travesty if he hadn't been given a starting spot.

He got it. Now he proves he needs to prove he deserves to stay there. He likely has another 3-4 starts to do that because I don't see the Phils continuing to go with him if he can't get past the 5th inning or doesn't give them a legit chance to win. If he can have a couple of starts where he goes 5-6 innings and gives up 3-4 runs, then he likely sticks for a longer audition.

To be fair, Chan Ho hasn't been that much worse than any of our other starters at this point, so why is he getting so much BL posting time?

I'm more worried more about Hamels/health, Moyer/age and to a lesser degree, Myers and Blanton, righ now than I am about CHoP.

"To be fair, Chan Ho hasn't been that much worse than any of our other starters at this point, so why is he getting so much BL posting time?"

I'm speaking only for myself but I think mostly because the general consenus is Park should be on a shorter leash than the other 4 guys.

Steve Jeltz: I get that, but my point was that our rotation as a whole kind of is underperforming right now, so it's getting increasingly difficult to figure out what a "quality start" is for the Phillies.

Jeltzie (and clout): I appreciate your reasonable comments. I admit I've never been a fan of Park throughout his career and objected to his signing. And you may have a point about things being lost in translation. The point I won't concede, however, is that Park ought to have been more willing to say - even if he didn't mean it and even if he had a right to be miffed - 'whatever is best for the team'. It's pretty clear that wasn't his attitude.

It may well be that the target of my disdain is misplaced. I don't object at all to Park as a reliever, but I believe the Phillies were foolish to consider him and sign him as a starter. My immediate thought was, this is Terry Adams all over again, and perhaps worse.

read the article by glanville. thank philliper later....

So I come to Beerleaguer for the first time today to hear the latest, and I get that in my mug. I had a good day today, but that pic made it. Thanks, JW.

JW - Helter Skelter?

Although I agree that there are genuine concerns about Moyer's age, I also think his situation is considerably different from Park's, in terms of how long a leash should be given. Gven how hard he has been hit in his last 4 games, it's easy to conclude that Moyer is just washed up. But pitchers also go through slumps. The dilemma with Moyer is that there is no way to meaningfully tell the difference between a decent pitcher who is in a bad slump & a pitcher who is totally washed up. The reason for the so-called "long leash" is that, with a pitcher who was very good last year, you can't just leap to the conclusion that he's suddenly washed up until you've got a pretty good sample size upon which to discount the possibility of a temporary slump.

On the other hand, when a guy has been one of the worst starting pitchers in baseball over the last 6 years, you don't have the same dilemma. If Park starts off the season with 3 or 4 terrible games in a row, how could any rational person conclude anything except that he's not cut out for starting duty?

"The plus side of the move is it might give the Phillies an "in" with the Far East for players. That is a good thing."

Really? Maybe you're right and I just don't see the connection, but how does that work? You sign one guy from a continent, all the other players on that continent start wanting to come? The Japanese, the Chinese? Koreans and Japanese are different sorts of people; as a (very) general matter they often don't care for each other, due to the Japanese occupation of Korea and all that. I mean, it's like if the Dallas Mavericks drafted Dirk Nowitzki (of Germany) and then they said, "great, now all the French and Russian and Polish players will want to come here!" I can't imagine that Park is going to go barnstorming Japan for relief pitchers.

I was pretty surprised when they signed Park and didn't particularly favor him as a 5th starter option. However, by any objective measure, he pitched his way into the rotation this spring. I don't think one start is sufficient to justify the drumbeat for marching him back out of the rotation. Now that the decision is made, I favor patience over "short leashes", even if htat means some painful starts.

BAP: Park "has been one of the worst starting pitchers in baseball over the last 6 years"???

Let's review the past 6 years (03-08): his numbers as a SP were good last year, but the anti-Parkers say that doesn't count because it was only 26 IP. OK, fair enough. But that means we also must not count his 29 bad IP from 2003. So we throw out 03 and 08. That leaves 04, 05, 06 and 07. Except that he only pitched 1 game in 07. So now we're left with 04-06. His ERA+ in those years (one of which included intestinal surgery) was 93,77, 84. Bad but not one of the worst in baseball.

So, in summary, we have a pitcher who had 3 bad years as a big league starter between 2004 and 2006. It is now 2009 and he pitched quite well as a starter in ST. Yet we are to believe that he will revert to what he was 3 years ago. That's certainly possible, but I don't find the facts particularly compelling.

That said, I'd still rather see Happ in the rotation and odds are that before season's end I will, although perhaps not replacing Park.

Park? I'm a little more worried about the other 4 guys who are pitching like 5th starters.

I go to BL this morning and what do I see, it's the Devil looking right at me! Before I realized who that really was I had already started to give my computer an Exorcism.

Just sayin' BAP - don't forget your evaluation of Blanton, and how that worked out relative to his performance for the Phils last year.

Maybe, just maybe, it makes sense to see how a guy performs before you argue about how bad he is?

Like, you know, I could point out that Burrell is performing at a much lower than Ibanez and make some predictions:

Ibanez = .276 .323 .690 (3 hrs, 6 rbi)
Burrell = .200 .286 .367 (1 hr, 3 rbi)

but with such a small sample size, of course, I'd never do something like that.

Yo, new thread

This picture reminds me of Vigo from Ghostbusters Two btw.

I put up a side-by-side of that Bruntlett photo with the recently released picture of Charles Manson from prison. Upsettingly enough, Brunt is no-doubt-about-it scarier.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG