Part of

« Monday thread: Halladay falls to 8-and-stinkin'-6 | Main | Tuesday: No word yet on status of Rollins, Ruiz »

Monday, June 21, 2010


cue @Sophist and Raul's numbers.

Honestly, would it matter if they do? If the core players don't start to consistently perform then it wont matter who the 24th and 25th guys are on the roster.

Do the Phillies players care as much as we do?? They certainly don't seem to look like it

"Castro's played very good defense," Manuel said. "He's got good hands. Both of those guys have done a good job at shortstop for us."

Come'on Cholly. I know that you won't criticize players publicly but we do we have to keep hearing this crap about Castro playing good defense. It just isn't remotely true any way you slice it.

****"Castro's played very good defense," Manuel said. "He's got good hands. Both of those guys have done a good job at shortstop for us."****

Has he been watching the same player everyone else has? Castro has been mediocre at the best of times. Outside of a couple of flashy plays, he's been very very weak at SS.

There is no reason to release Ibanez. However, there is no reason that Castro stays on this roster over Valdez (a capable defender who is a marginally better offensive player) or DFA Dobbs.

These two guys have been among the worst offensive players in MLB and even a league average type would be a clear upgrade at this point.

If the Astros and the Pirates aren't tolerating mediocrity and the Phillies are, that speaks volumes about what a poorly managed franchise this is.

Phillies should do this too, but they aren't. IMHO, the club needs a sacrifical lamb right now to show why losing and underperforming won't be tolerated. And the lamb needs to be somebody more important than Dobbs, Valdez, or Castro.

Of course they won't, but it's a nice thought.

I'm recommending sending Utley to Seattle...

heather: agreed, they should cut halladay to send a message.

Heather -

Who should that be? I would be really interested to hear who you think they should release to "send a message" that's "more important than Dobbs, Valdez, or Castro."

They don't need a 'sacrificial lamb.' They do need to makes some changes to the bench which is arguably the worst in MLB with two of the least productive offensive hitters this season. DFA Dobbs and keeping Valdez over Castro would fit that mold.

The obvious thought is that this beerleaguer entry is about Ibanez, but I'm guessing it could just as easily be about Baez and Dobbs.

thephaithful - maybe instead of cutting Doc , we could get a few prospects to "restock the system"

Why does DFA Ibanez keep coming up? His bad start is still skewing his overall numbers.

Ibanez since April 20 (54 games): .261/.350/.438 (.787 OPS) 5HR, 25RBI, 26:30 BB/K.

Yes, he is underperforming compared to his contract, but there is a big difference between underperforming a contract and being detrimental to the team.

There's no way in the world Ibanez should be DFA. The discussion about whether Ibanez's contract is good or bad is a completely separate conversation from what production he is giving the team. We're already paying him, and his production isn't hurting the team. He isn't going anywhere.

personally, i think trading Lee away was a sign that the front office has made a commitment to the current roster as being as competitive as they can be.

I do not envision any trade for a starter or a full time position player at any point in the season unless a major injury occurs. A tweak to the bench or early inning relievers are the only moves this team will likely make(if any).

I happen to agree with them as well - if this strating lineup and rotation can not make the playoffs then there is really nothing the front office should do about it. In my opinion they did their job, and now its sits on the shoulders of the players perform.

Bring up Brown...I saw him Saturday night and he was a triple short of the cycle.

I enjoyed the chuckleheads who were slamming Halladay in the last thread. Yes. Halladay gives up hits. But not at some otherworldly pace that makes him mediocore. Halladay is successful because he does get himself out of jams. He will have many innings where the first 2 get on and they never score.

Halladay's success is because he doesn't walk anyone. He leads the lead in BB per 9. That's why he's in the 6th in WHIP. Moyer's success? He's 10th in WHIP also because he rarely walks batters.

Some Halladay stats:
5 CG. 3 SHO. 1.078 WHIP. 2.43 ERA. 98K.


I basically agree w/ MG. Giving Dobbs the boot would serve the dual purpose of (a) jettisoning a player who has contributed nothing to the success of the team over the past 1.5 seasons or so, & (b) perhaps open some eyes as regards the perils of not producing at a championship level/resting on one's laurels. While Dobbs isn't an everyday player, he has been a familiar face & personality in the clubhouse. Winning teams are meritocracies, & Dobbs no longer fits that bill.

We need someone off the bench who can actually hit.
Gload's HR was encouraging, but YTD the bench has sure looked weak . But when your PH alternatives can't hit better than any of your 7, 8 (& some 9 )hole hitters you have a problem.

re: Brown

I wouldn't be against a Sept. call up - especially if in a dogfight for the playoffs. I know a lot would say to wait until 2011 to keep his service time down, but I think having him on the roster would be beneficial for a playoff push and even the postseason if he performs as he projects.

Getting way aheadof myself: does postseason playing time affect service time calculations?

Ibanez is safe for this year, because his performance is at the point where it's just above adequate, and because it's not clear at all that Brown would be an upgrade.

Dobbs, Baez, and especially Castro should all be considered candidates though. Castro should be replaced by Valdez, for sure. As far as Dobbs and Baez, they're safe for now, but if there's an option that arises that appears to be better for the team, then the Phillies should certainly have no hesitation in doing what's best for team in releasing those guys.

HammRadio: Overall Halladay has been exceptional, & is a true Ace by most any measure. However, I cannot help but be kind of disappointed by his performance vs. AL teams. I believe three of Roy's four most pedestrian outings have come in his three starts vs. the AL, including (by far) the worst two. Reasonable to slam Halladay over it? No. But it is, perhaps, illustrative of the ridiculous hype which accompanied his acquisition.

Clout: Since you think Wins are the best measure of a pitcher, apparently, then you must think Tyler Clippard has been better than Tim Lincecum this year, right?

I can't wait to read your answer.

Also, I know you love Jamie Moyer, but you don't really think he was better than Cole Hamels in 2008, do you? Please explain.

halladay's numbers are right in line with his normal numbers. around a hit per IP pitched. that's normal for him. his HR/9 is lower than normal. his K/9 is up. his BB/9 is 1.3 which is normal and really good. I don't see anything at all out of the norm

These numbers are fun:

Taschner ('09)* - 21G 27.2IP 34H 16ER 20BB 17K 3HR 2HBP 5.20ERA 1.952WHIP

Baez ('10) - 29G 28IP 30H 16ER 15BB 15K 4HR 2HPB 5.14ERA 1.607WHIP

*Taschner's stats through 7/1/09, at which point he was DFA

Rube somehow managed to get rid of Taschner, & then sign Taschner Deportes. Of course it didn't cost two catchers to acquire Danys Baez. On the other hand, the Phillies are on the hook for $5.25 million ($2.5 million in '10 & $2.75 million in '11) in the case of the latter stooge, whereas the Taschner debacle only cost $835K. That there's some shrewd judging of talent/contract offerage by Philadelphia's esteemed GM.

I'd love to see Halladay get to 20 wins and, he'll have 17-19 chances to get the next 12. If there's anything the Phils of hte last 3 years have demonstrated, it's not how you start, it's how you finish. (Ask Carlton- he started 0-4 in his last Cy Young season and won 23). If he doesn't get there, I think everyone here (clout included) knows that isn't going to be the ultimate measure of his performance.

Quick awh impression - Guess hte w/l record of this hall of fame pitcher:

211.2 IP, 2.76 ERA (142 ERA+), 1.139 WHIP, 6.5 H/9, 0.6 HR/9, 3.10 K/BB

Why is Halladay even being discussed? for that matter, why should we even discuss Hamels? They're both fine.

It's the offense that can't scored more than 1 R off of Carl effin' Pavano that was the problem.

It's the bullpen that can't hold a 5 effin' run lead in the 9th inning that's a problem.

Except for the outings against Boston, Moyer and KK have been exceptional - yes, exceptional - for 4th and 5th starters. Ditto for Halladay and hamels at
#1 and 2. The only starter who's been an issue is Blanton, and maybe his mechanical correcton will lead to the same kind of sustained success he had last year. If that's the case then the roataion will be fine, and they can afford to take their time bringing Happ back.

Offensive woes? Well, I thought they had tham solved until yesterday.

Maybe JRoll's return is looming in the minds of players on the team, though I can't fathom how his being back in the lineup is going to help Chooch, Werth and Raul get hot?

The bench? Well, Ben Fran is a guy who looks to have to play a lot in order to hit - he's been just about at his career average since May 20, but with only 3 XBH. the power has not been there.

Gload and Dobbs have had bright spots but have been dead wood overall.

Castro was great for the first ten games he replaced Jimmy (as he has done in the past), but then he returned to being....Juan Castro.

Valdez has made the msot of his opportunity. You expect more?

Schneider, OTOH, has never been a huge power threat and is hitting at just about his career numbers so I don't know why one would expect more from him.

Simply, the two glaring eyesores on the bench have been Gload and Dobbs. If they pick it up and just play to their talent level things will improve makedly and take pressure off the other guys.

Ouch, sorry about the typos.

Is Werth heating up a little?

His last 38 PA:

.300 .395 .533 .928, with 2 HR, 6 RBI, 8 BB (2 intentional) and 6 K.

GTown Dave: Baez is terrible, and this shouldn't come as much of a surprise. His K numbers have been in clear decline for a long time, and he was coming off a series of injuries over the past few years.

People on here (and apparently Amaro) were blinded by the fact that he got a bunch of saves 5-6 years ago, and ignored the fact that he simply isn't a very good pitcher anymore. Thinking that Baez would be a serious back-end bullpen option was wishful thinking at best; it's one thing when fans on here do it, but another thing when our GM gives guys like that guaranteed 2-year deals. It's bad.

There are a few of the most frequent posters (alpha dogs) on this forum who play devils advocate by always siding with the front office (who knows they may work for the front office). If you want to know what the phillies will probably do in each situation (Dobbs, Castro etc) look at what makes the most economic sense in each transaction even if it is a dumb decision. This is the same organization that threw in Drabek for a big cash payment.

Can anyone see a Jamie Moyer/Jayson Werth for Cliff Lee trade? With all the money spent this past season I don't see Werth returning and Moyer is, as much as fans don't want to hear it, nearing retirement. His connection to Seattle is strong and I would imagine he would like to finish there.

Dan - What exactly would Seattle gain from that deal?

Baez is terrible, and I wish CHP were still here instead.

yeah that would be stupid for seattle. he'd just leave there. he'd never resign in that dungeon of a field

Dan - I can picture it. I then picture the Seattle GM being run out of town by a pitchfork-wielding mob. Never ever ever.

****What exactly would Seattle gain from that deal?****

Draft picks maybe? discounts on brunches through Jamie's AARP membership?

I'm lost on it myself.

After we do the Moyer/Werth for Lee deal, we can trade Juan Castro and Danys Baez to the Diamondbacks for Justin Upton, filling the hole in RF.

Jack: The personnel moves this team has made over the past couple of years lead me to seriously question the wisdom of key FO personnel, LaMar & Proefrock in particular. Amaro is on the hook, too, for (presumably) placing so much stock in their opinions that he offers multi-year deals to c-level stiffs. It's a sign of things to come, & not a good one.

LOL at "Taschner Deportes" labeling of Baez by Gtown Dave. Outstanding.

I won't say anything else, since it's all negative-Phillies related anyway.

Agreed, TK, Taschner Deportes is hilarious.

Sorry about the stupid trivia question above - meant to post the answer right after.

That was Nolan Ryan, who finished 8-16 in '87, paving the way for Bedrock Steve Bedrosian to win the Cy Young.

Hugh -
Again, a great argument that wins and losses aren't really indicative of a pitcher's performance.

It still amazes me that Halladay's 8-6...He should have 10 wins easily by now, and maybe even more. He's only had 2 poor games that I can think of off the top of my head. He's every bit as good as advertised.

re: baez

major wake up call to me - before people started posting numbers I really didnt think he was that bad.

The thing about Baez is occasionally his stuff is quite nasty. Often his stuff is pretty ordinary though and he never seems to have any idea where the ball is going. Clearly not a guy you can rely on.

Baez looks like a beast in none pressure situations. In pressure situations, he looks worse than a deer in headlights.

Cipper, here's the 2010 info on Baez:

High Lvg: .367 .486 .533 1.020
Medium Lvg: .231 .313 .538 .851
Low Lvg: .267 .348 .483 .831

So far this year he's looked like a mopup reliever.


High: .269 .353 .421 .774
Med.: .231 .313 .352 .666
Low : .230 .317 .369 .686

Is his new BL nickname "Danys the DITHL"?

Baez has always sucked in pressure Amaro didn't realize this is beyond me. Maybe he doesn't know where the "Splits" tab is on

So in high leverage he is DITHL. When in Low/Med Leverage, he is the Headlights.

I hope to God they don't make a trade just to make one. You have to ride this out. I agree with NEPP that Baez shouldn't be put in high pressured situations right now. Also, I disagree with Heather about dobbs. He has to be outrighted.

Wasn't Baez one of those "low risk, high reward" players Amaro talked about? What does that even mean? Seems like it means, "cheap with a lot of potential to do well," but shouldn't one also add "and with a lot of potential to stink?" I mean, if they had a proven track record - and hadn't outlived their glory days, these players wouldn't be cheap. Which makes them low risk in terms of cost, but high risk in terms of value to the team.

To his credit, everyone admits acquiring relief pitchers is a crap shoot. And further, Contreras was also one of those "low risk, high reward" guys. He's done pretty well, although he may possibly be slipping, too soon to say.

If indeed, it's "low risk," then shouldn't that mean the GM is willing to cut ties and eat the cost if they prove not to be "high reward?"

Of course, that means Amaro would need to have someone to plug in to take Baez' place.

And I have mixed feelings about Herndon, too. He does induce GIDPs, but a lot of his grounders find holes, too, if memory serves me correctly.

Still, our BP has done a pretty good job this season - so far - hasn't it? Or is it simply that they haven't had too many close leads to protect? I remember reading they weren't used too much compared to other teams' BPs this season.

If Baez is "low risk" and "high reward", then why did they sign him to a 2-year 5+ million dollar deal?

For a bullpen guy, that seems like more than "low risk". A true, "low risk-high reward" type guy is Contreras, who has turned out to be more of a reward.

Why GMs go with more than 1-year deals for marginal relievers like Baez amazes me. This was the old Ed Wade special move as well.

Of course, every team needs a mop-up reliever. Maybe Baez should stick around as ours?

"Contreras was also one of those "low risk, high reward" guys. He's done pretty well, although he may possibly be slipping, too soon to say."

GBrett, waaaaay too soon to say. I wouldn't let one bad outing influence your opinion. Those happen.

I was at last Thursday's game in Yankee Stadium. Posted about Contreras. He was absolutely filthy.

Did he regress that much in 3 days, or did a couple of hitters just happen to get ahold of a good pitch? (I didn't see Sat. game.) That happens sometimes too - a pitcher throws a ball exactly where and how he wants to, and a hitter smokes it anyway.

I saw Schmidt do it to Steve Rodgers to win a game. Rodgers threw it right at the catchers mitt - the mitt didn't even move - and Schmidt still reached out and poke a 2 R HR just inside the right field foul pole in Montreal.

Jack: Wins are definitely NOT the best measure of a pitcher. But they aren't as meaningless as you claim, either. Moyer, a guy you wanted to cut last year, has had some big wins for this team.

Clout: Tyler Clippard has 8 wins. Zack Greinke has 2. So yeah, sorry if I think pitching wins are pretty meaningless.

Team wins are, quite obviously, the most important number in baseball. However, common sense shows us how meaningless the pitching win is. Anyone who has ever watched a baseball game knows that at least 9 players, and usually more (10 in the AL), play for each team in a game. The practice of attributing a team win contributed to by at least 9 or 10 players to 1 player, sometimes depending merely on when they were substituted in and out of the game, makes no real logical sense at all. Obviously, the starting pitcher plays a big role in any game. But unless a pitcher Ks every batter in a 9-inning game and hits a solo home run for himself in 1-0 win, it would be impossible to attribute a team win one purely to one individual.

Why don't we have hitter wins? Surely Ryan Howard or Chase Utley has contributed as much, if not more, to many Phillies' wins over the last few years as the starting pitcher. Why don't we give them credit, too?

Clout: Also, I don't disagree that Moyer has pitched very well in some big spots over the last few years. But there are better ways to indicate that than his W-L record.

For instance, you could just mention that, in the biggest Phillies start in the last 15 years, he threw 5.1 IP of 1 R (0 ER) baseball on Sept. 30, 2007, with 6 SOs and no walks. That would inform us all that he was awesome that day (of course, no one needs reminding of that game).

But just to say he got wins means almost nothing at all--last year, he got a win in a July game against the Reds in which he pitched 5 IP and gave up 6 ER. Surely you don't mean to indicate that his performance was just as good in that game as it was on 9/30/2007? Yet when you use the "win", that's precisely what you're doing.

It seems to early in the year to feel the need a Phillies vacation. In other news:

Ryan Madson (fractured toe, ERD 7/1) Carlos Ruiz (head injury, ERD 6/24) I often jokingly keep score in the collisions between players and walls, but maybe we should add chairs to that total. Madson lost his encounter with one back in late April, costing him two months of the season though he's seeing some progress over the last few days. He threw a 25-pitch session on Friday and was scheduled to follow that up on Sunday. While there were no reports at deadline that it happened or how it went, a successful session would mean he's recovering well and showing the necessary stamina for his bullpen job. With Brad Lidge back and seemingly healthy, Madson would likely go right back to the set-up role he's handled well for a couple years. He could go on a rehab assignment this week, though reports have been so glowing that it wouldn't surprise me if it was very short. The Phillies are keeping a close eye on Ruiz after he was hit in the head by a Jason Kubel backswing. The Phillies are refusing to call it a concussion, but given that they are doing some exertional testing before putting him back in the lineup, they're at the very least looking for post-concussive symptoms. That's smart, no matter what they call it. Brian Schneider could be exposed by more than a couple days of catching, so look for Ruiz to be back mid-week or sooner if there are no further problems.

Jack, I'm not getting into the middle of your spat with clout, but don't W-L records tend to average out over time, at least for starters?

Jack - slavish devotion to statistical metrics can ruin the fun of baseball, even though it is hte sport most slavishly devoted to statistical metrics. Wins are fun and wins are a common measure across baseball eras. They are hopelessly inexact but, in the aggregate they can give you a good sense of a pitcher's overall value to his team. With that said, wins are becoming less relevant with each year due to the onward march of specialization, pitch counts and hte like.

dfa dobbs
dfa castro
dfa baez

if happ can return to last yr's form, a starting 5 of roy, cole, jamie, j.a. & k-joe s/ suffice.

now - off course i doubt any of the 3 dfa's will meet that fate, because of raj's contractualcommittment made to those 3 hacks noted above..

I never understand the propensity of wanting to slam the panic button all the time.

You can use the examples of Feliz, Encarnacion, and Suppan all you want but there are circumstances you are leaving out of the equation.

The Astros are 12.5 out of the division and really have shown no life. Also, Feliz is performing exactly as Feliz is going to perform.

The Blue Jays have Jose Bautista who can slide to third and has shown some pop. Also, while Encarnacion's OPS+ is the same as Polanco's. His average is considerably lower, his command of the strikezone is still poor and he is not nearly as integral to that line-up.

Suppan flat out stank this year and down the stretch last year and the Brewers had a surplus of pitchers.

Let's keep in mind as well we are discussing Dobbs and Castro who are the last guys on the bench. This is not replacing a huge piece of the team.

We get Rollins back this week (hopefully he stays healthy), Happ will be back around the ASB probably, and Madson could be starting to throw shortly and probably be back around the ASB. Those are your free agent additions this season and I think you see a team, just like in previous years, that plays extremely well after the ASB

Wins are a statistical metric. They just happen to be one of the worst statistical metrics for measuring the value of a pitcher.

Wins are fun until Bartolo Colon (21-8, 3.48, 1.16) beats Johan Santana (16-7, 2.87, 0.97) for the Cy Young. They were not fun for Curt Schilling, when he pitched to a 3.25 ERA with 300 K and 15 complete games for the 1998 Phillies and was rewarded with a 15-14 record for his efforts. They will not be fun if Matt Cain (6-5, 2.16) loses an all-star spot to Derek Lowe (9-5, 4.77). They will not be fun if Jamie Moyer makes the Hall of Fame with 300 wins over 27 seasons and a 4.35 ERA.

Jack: I couldn't agree more. Wins have absolutely nothing to do with how good a pitcher is. Why, just look at all the 300-game winners in the Hall of Fame? Bums, every one of them.

DH Phils: Is ERA solely a function of the pitcher? Can you think of any other factor that could impact ERA? If so, does that make ERA slightly misleading?

Wins are not the best measure to use to judge a pitcher. However, they are not the worst as so many new age statisticians like to paint them as.

They are fine to use in an argument unless you ignore everything surrounding them.

clout: There are definitely major problems with ERA (non-error fielding issues, inherited runners, batted ball bad luck, rallies that occur with two outs after an error that aren't counted against the pitcher, etc.). Doesn't the pitching win have all of these problems, plus the additional huge problem of being dependent on the entire offense?

clout: I usually side with you in arguments that I read, but wins is the last statistic I would look at in determining the value of a pitcher - you know this too. Pointing to the 300 wins pitcher to back your argument is a joke.

How many games would Sandy Kofax of won if eight clones of a BLer poster were playing the field?

I like how Clout says ERA is flawed, and ignores the fact that the very flaws in ERA also go into Wins, among many, many other flaws, as DH Phils aptly points out.

Clout is on the losing end of this argument, and he knows it as well. He is a sophisticated enough fan to know the uselessness of Wins in measuring pitchers, and yet he's clinging to it because he used it before in an argument in defense of a player he has a very subjective preference for.

Of course, as I said before, there are many arguments in defense of Moyer you can make without resorting to the intellectually inferior use of wins as a baseline metric for evaluating pitchers. In fact, you can make a good argument that actually highlights the subjective pleasures of specific games--see my post about September 30, 2007. Doing that, we can both get rid of the reliance on a useless metric, and actually enhance the fun that Hugh Mulcahy feels is being taken out of the game by a slavish devotion to statistics.

Anybody going to tune into Jimmy and Ryan at 8:00 pm?

Perhaps I am being unclear. Let me repeat what I posted above for those who ignored it: "Wins are definitely NOT the best measure of a pitcher."

I think ERA+ and FIP are better measures. That said, wins are not as meaningless as posters here have been arguing. To amass 300 wins you have to be pretty good unless your entire career was spent with a championship caliber team.

Koufax is an example of a pitcher who took awhile to become a great pitcher and then, once he was great, had his career cut short by injury. Does that make Koufax better than someone who wasn't a journeyman for 6 years but wasn't dominant either?

Koufax was the dominant pitcher in baseball for 5 years. He was a journeyman for 6 years. He won 165 games. Is he better than someone who was neither journeyman nor dominant and won 300 games?

Interesting question.

BTW, I think Koufax belongs in the Hall because 5 years of dominance is a rare thing. But it should be noted that Koufax pitched for one of the best teams in baseball of that era.

Bert Blyleven, on the other hand, spent his entire career pitching for second division teams (with a couple exceptions) and was never the dominant pitcher in baseball, not even for one year. Yet he won 287 games and had an ERA+ of 118 for a huge collection of bad teams. What would Koufax's numbers have been had he pitched for the Phillies in the late 50s and early 60s?

Does a brief flurry of greatness accompanied by the luck of playing for great teams trump 22 years of winning against all odds with bad defenses behind you?

Like I say, interesting question.

Once again we revisit the fallacy that the supposed bottom of the bench is of no importance to a team such as the Phillies. One might think that a dismal 1-19 showing in games that counted, & for quite a few marbles (the '09 World Series), &/or the fact that guys like Rollins, Chooch & Polanco have already missed playing time to injury on multiple occasions (& are liable to do so again during the course of the season) would perhaps change some minds. Alas, this is Beerleaguer, where the ability to admit a mistaken belief or two goes to die.

With Koufax, it should also be noted that he pitched with a great defense behind him in a pitcher's park in the best era for pitching in the modern baseball era. Not to diminish his greatness, but just to place him into some context.

Blyleven should probably be in the Hall of Fame as well. He was one of those guys who just delivered consistent very good value over a long period of time. That deserves enshrinement as well.

Clout is certainly right that over a career, a good pitcher will win a lot of games. But it's a pretty useless measure in terms of evaluating pitcher performance season by season, and it's also generally useless when comparing similarly situated pitchers. Of course a guy with 250 wins was better than a guy with 75 wins--but you don't need to look at their win total to know that.

But a guy with 260 wins against a guy with 220 wins? I don't think the wins really matter there. Is there anyone here who would say that Jack Morris was better than Pedro Martinez? Of course not. But Morris has 254 wins and Pedro has 219 wins.

If there is one move I would make- I would see what the Orioles would want for Ty Wiggington. His contract is for 3.5 million this year but the guy can play all the infield positions (although SS is a little rough) and is due 3.5 million. If we are going to DFA Dobbs- I'd use Gload as my left-hander and try to get Wiggy as a righty off the bench

If Blylevin had been a Red Sock or Yankee he would have been in the hall a long time ago.

I'd get Wigginton as well. Isn't the rumbling that he's on the market?

Roy Oswalt and Lance Berkman for Raul Ibanez, Jon Singleton, Anthony Gose, Trevor May and Brody Colvin. Berkman plays Left for the Phillies and Ibanez plays 1st for Houston. Keep Brown and Cosart. Singleton is blocked by Howard and there is no guarentee he can play the outfield.

Oswalt for Ibanez, straight up. I'm prepared to offer Raul a 5 year 125 million dollar extension immediately on his arrival in Houston.

Fine..Schilling for Daal, Lee, Padilla and Figgy...ohh wait..

Okay, pulling the ripcord... chute open, lookin' good... nice patch of turf to touch down... just steer clear of that sycamore... just steer clear... of that-- oh sh!t, that sycam--

Not of pressing interest, but it's a lot of fun watching Burnett getting absolutely lit up by the Diamondbacks and bitching at Posada. 5-0 in the bottom of the second and three D-backs h

If Bert's mom had named him "Jack" he'd have been in the Hall years ago as well.

Jack Morris was a gutsy winner, the winningeriest pitcher of the 80s. Bert Blyleven was some dude born in the Netherlands whose career win pct. barely touched over .500.

On a happy note: Word today is that Chase Utley and Ryan Howard filmed guest spots today for FX show- It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

Last year they did an episode where the gang tried to fight a parking ticket by using the World Series defense where they said the whole thing occurred because the goddamned Phillies won the World Series.

Dee was going to run onto the field and kiss a player during the game and Mac gave her a letter he addressed to Chase Utley for her to give him. It was a great little spot and I look forward to seeing if they use that as the jumping off point for their appearance.

Dobbs is not one of the "last men on the bench." Schneider and the back-up shortstop are the last men on the bench. Francisco and Dobbs and Gload will all get at bats in big spots late in the season and (hopefully) in the playoffs.

That said, for some reason I still think Dobbs turns it around.

Six or seven posts about the injustice of wins as a statistic and DHPhils has the nerve to suggest that wins aren't fun? I beg to differ. Why that very same Jack Morris was arguably hte best pitcher in 1983 (or Dotson or Guidry) but that stiff LaMarr Hoyt won the Cy Young due to hte most wins. . .

****They will not be fun if Jamie Moyer makes the Hall of Fame with 300 wins over 27 seasons and a 4.35 ERA. ****

Come on now...I think that'd be pretty fun.

***Koufax was a journeyman for 6 years***

That's a bit of a distortion, don't you think? He was a "journeyman" because his ass of a manager never gave him a shot at the rotation. As soon as he was forced too, he showed he was the best pitcher in the history of baseball. Do we need to break out the stats of his run of dominance?

On Blyleven: Maybe if he'd stop crying and whining about not being in the HoF, they'd actually elect him. You can't have an interview with him without him crying about it and all the call-ins and the hosts fawning over the terrible injustice. Shut up already.


The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel