Phillies

Transactions & Such

Winter leagues

Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Phillies' once-elite defense trending down | Main | Halladay wants to stay with Phillies past '13 »

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Comments

I read the article posted yesterday in the comments by Joe D regarding Rick Peterson's analysis into 39 batters faced being the inflection point between winning and losing.

While the article went out of its way to insist that such was due to the individual performances of 3rd and 4th hitters coming up for the fifth time, they didn't support the case well enough in my opinion.

Subtracting 27 outs, that leaves 12, or the number of guys who got onto base and didn't make outs on the base paths. Across 9 innings that's 1.33 runners per inning. This number doesn't exactly equal WHIP but it would be close. If team WHIP would be around 1.33 I would expect losing team performance even if the rest of the team's components (hitting, base running, defense) performed above the mean.

If you want to see what 1.33-ish WHIP pitching performance looks like, refer to the 2012 Marlins or Padres. If you add two more batters faced per game, totaling 41, you look like the 2012 Rockies. I don't think anyone is specifically blaming 9th inning hitters on opposing teams for those teams' pitching problems.

Ruf looks he's running a good route there. :-)

Boy, it really was a long off-season.

Kyle Kendrick is going to pitch the second game of the season?

I know that all 162 games are equal. Pitching rotation order is completely irrelevant during the regular season. None of this matter. I know all this.

But still. Really?

anon: my takeaway from the article was to supress the number of PA the other team gets. Obviously thats far from ground breaking, but it challenges many traditional thoughts such as issuing IBB to players early in the game that can result in a lineup flipping over more easily later on in the game. It also specifically mentioned going to a specialized reliever earlier in the game to get an surer out - because not only does it get the out that inning, but eliminates the extra PA later on.

Also makes you value a defensive play differntly, such as a player being conservative on a 2out bases empty blooper. They sacrifice the chance to make an out because it doesn't hurt the ability to score that precise inning too much - but it gives the opposing lineup one more batter to flip it lineup later on.

Jack, it does say "Salisbury opines"

Based strictly on ceremonial factors, I'd have Hamels and Halladay pitch the opener and home opener - either order works for me. If that means KK being 'ahead' of one of those two, so be it.

What day do the starters practice riding a tractor safely?

"The ability to obtain Revere, who will be an elite defender and baserunner through his arbitration years, for pennies, instead of signing Bourn, who has a similar skill set on the downside of his career, to a four-year contract, will be seen as a huge win for the organization a few years down the road."


Iceman, it's too early for youto say that. Let me know how well Worley is going to do the next 4 - 5 years and I'll let you know whether it's a "huge win". As you know I'm on record stating I hated giving up Worley.

We'll see who the 'winner' is in that trade.

Any word on how Utley's lawnchair was adjusting to his new bench role?

Kendrick pitching in the second game against a team he's dominated in his career (Atlanta) is actually pretty smart. The Braves also added two RH hitters to their lineup in the off-season, meaning even more favorable match-ups for Kendrick. Halladay, conversely, got bombed by Atlanta last year.

We always complain that Manuel doesn't put his players in the optimal position to succeed. Starting Kendrick in Atlanta and pushing Halladay to the home opener would be doing just that.

DISCLAIMER: I think the concept of splitting the lefties is stupid. But starting Kendrick against Atlanta would be unusually smart on Manuel's part, even if he stumbles into the decision because of another motivation.

anonymous, I thought it interesting that you calculated a team WHIP of 1.33.

NL WHIP last season was 1.311, and AL WHIP was 1.308 (go figure?).

rolo: yes, we will see. But I also think you have to evaluate, in addition to Worley's performance, A) How the alternatives in CF pan out (Pagan, Bourn, Upton), B) Who the Phils have in their rotation going forward in the slot Worley would have occupied, and C) If Revere can actually improve on the player he's been to this point.

I think it was a steep price to pay, as I also like Worley, but I think the depth of starting pitching in the system made this move a lot more possible than it would have been for another franchise.

lorecore, good point. IBB is like the bunt of pitching so anything that diminishes its viability is a good thing.

That one aspect is the only problem I had with the article. I was interested in the figure itself and how to avoid reaching it (which you explained) but the stuff about batting order rather than a general acknowledgment that there's a tipping point in base runners when it comes to wins and losses stuck out as suspicious.

BUT IS ANYONE IN "THE BEST SHAPE OF THEIR LIFE"?

THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW

rolo, I had trouble finding that info so thanks for posting it.

anonymous, I thought it interesting that you calculated a team WHIP of 1.33.

NL WHIP last season was 1.311, and AL WHIP was 1.308 (go figure?).
Posted by: rolo | Tuesday, February 12, 2013 at 05:03 PM

Very interesting. Suggests that an average team (.500 WL) would have a WHIP of between 1.308 and 1.311, which means that anonymous is probably pretty close in his reasoning. Might be a case of Peterson getting the cause/effect backwards.

It's not completely that getting to the 39th batter brings up the 3-hole hitter again that swings the game so much as it is having a WHIP of 1.3333 or worse tends to equate with losing, and that just happens to correlate with the 3-hole hitter getting that extra PA.

Very interesting.

No one seems to be factoring in the difference between Worley and Lannan in evaluating how the team this season will be be better or worse than the team last season.

All I've heard is that if Halladay, Utley, and Howard are healthy, that's all that matters. But those aren't the only players on the team. Doc only pitches every 5th day (hopefully).

I just bought tickets behind home plate for the Mets game on April 8th. It will be my first game at Citizen's Bank Park!

And now I find out it may feature Kyle Kendrick on the mound??!?!? Serendipity.

"No one seems to be factoring in the difference between Worley and Lannan in evaluating how the team this season will be be better or worse than the team last season."

Last season, Worley gave the Phils a 95 ERA+ and 133 innings. The team was 9-14 in his starts.

From 2008-2011 as a full-time starter, Lannan averaged ~179 IP with a 103 ERA+.

I don't think there's all that much reason for concern that Lannan will be worse than 2012 Worley. There's every reason to believe that he'll be a bit better, actually.

Is there anyone on earth that thinks how Lannan performs is even in the same realm of concern as how Halladay pitches? Is it that much of a mystery why people might think Halladay is monumentally more important?

I personally think Kyle Kendrick may be the tipping point for the staff this year.

His two seasons as a full-time starter were actually his two worst of his career (2008 and 2010).

Of course, most people believe he's a better pitcher today than he was then, but he will have a lot to say about the success of this team in 2013.

I mean, Halladay went from 8.3 & 8.5 WAR his first two years here to 0.7 last year. His ERA+ went from 165 in 2010 & 2011 to 89 last year. 77 fewer innings. Zero complete games after 17 in his first two seasons. You could go on and on.

I don't think you could even combine two players on the roster (outside of Lee and Hamels) that have that much of a difference in their potential impact on the team this season. The concern is not being overblown. The Phils' season more or less hinges on Halladay. The difference between Lannan and Worley (if there is one) is negligible by comparison.

Anyone going to be down here in Tampa/Clearwater for spring training know when the Phillies will hold an open practice for the public? And if anyone watches the march 24th Red Sox game i'll be behind home plate. Man I missed baseball.

And when I say behind home plate I mean sitting in a seat not catching. Just thought I should clear that up...

Iceman: I think most people who think the Phils can contend assume Halladay will be "back to normal." If he's not, this season is lost.

But it's those other key players who might be the difference between squeaking in or not.

Widely wasn't very good last year. Sorely moyer or may not be better than lannan in 2013, but as.far as.replacing worelys 2012 production, lannan should be capable.

Count me in the group that isn't too keen on splitting up the pitchers due to what hand they throw with. I want the best pitchers pitching as much as possible as soon as possible.

Iceman: It's a good point on the fact that Worley wasn't all that productive last season.

But, as to the WAR and Halladay being so important, you have to view the team as a whole. There's something like 30-50 "wins" up for grabs (a replacement-level team wins about 45-50 games). If Halladay bounces back fairly well and provides, say, 6 WAR (5.3 better than his 0.7 last season), that seems like a huge difference.

But 6 WAR spread out across 24 other players is not very much at all. Rollins might drop a couple from his very good season last year, Ruiz almost surely will, etc. You could find a loss of 5-6 WAR really easily, and all of a sudden Halladay's resurgence is washed out.

I guess what I'm saying is that, while I agree Halladay, Howard and Utley all being at least somewhat healthy and productive is probably necessary for this team's success, it seems to me to be far from sufficient.

But hey, I'm just a Braves fan, right, so what do I know?

Now, obviously, improvement could come from any number of guys as well. But that's part of what I'm saying. It's just crazy to say the entire season "hinges" on one guy, or even three guys.

Like I said, I think you're right that a minimum level of production above what they got last year is necessary out of Halladay and Howard, at the least (Utley at least still gave them some production last season). But I don't think it is sufficient. I can see plenty of scenarios in which Halladay and/or Howard have good seasons and the Phils still don't make the playoffs.

If Doc, Howard, and Utley all have *great* seasons (say, 8 WAR, 5 WAR, and 7 WAR), then yeah, of course they're likely to make the playoffs. But that's an incredibly unlikely projection given their recent histories.

"Kyle Kendrick is going to pitch the second game of the season?"

Just curious - does this qualify as the first Kendrick-bashing comment of the preseason?

Phlipper: Sure, why not.

Although I will say Kendrick impressed me with the improvement he showed last season. Of course, most of it was due to upping his K rate (12.0% career, 17.2% last season), but don't let Clout hear that. I'm moderately optimistic about his chances this season (moderately).

Hmmm. It seems that my posts are disappearing into the ethernet.

I'll try one more time - in a shortened version.

Jack and Fata - related to the previous thread.

Using roughly descriptive terms: To be better defensively than the average shortstop, you have to have exceptional defensive skills because the average shortstop is a good defensive player. To be better defensively than the average 2nd baseman, you only need to have good defensive skills, as the average 2nd basemen isn't as good defensively as the average shortstop (is, basically, has average defensive skills).

Comparing the value of a player's defense to the team is a different discussion - it does not necessarily follow from how they compare relative to the average player at their position.

Because they have an off day on the 11th, they'll be able to skip Kendrick's turn the third time through the rotation and give the opening day starter an extra day of rest.

Wouldn't they be skipping Lannan if they skip anyone in the rotation?

Right, NEPP - my bad. I posted about it before but forgot what I posted. :)

Iceman, don't misconstrue.

I like having Revere, his energy and his defense.

But, once again, I hated giving up Worley to get him.

If Hamels starts opening day, it should be Hamels, Kendrick, Lee in the opening series against the Braves. Doc, Lannan, and Hamels pitch the home opening series against KC. Kendrick, Lee, and Doc face the Mets. Then we get the off day and they skip Lannan.

Jack- I agree with a lot of what you say in your 7:02 post, though not all of it. I was responding to your comment that we should be talking about whether or not Lannan will be a downgrade from 2012 Worley. I don't think it's a concern at all. Worley was a below average starter last year.

Jack: Where are they gonna lose 6 WAR?

"No one seems to be factoring in the difference between Worley and Lannan in evaluating how the team this season will be be better or worse than the team last season."


Jack, I factor it in all the time.

Now, of which Worley are you speaking, th e pre-injury/DL or post-injury/DL?

That is, the pitcher who had a 3.07 ERA and 1.340 WHIP through May 11th, or the pitcher who had the 4.75 ERA and 1.595 WHIP from June 4th through August 28th when he got shut down?

Now, mind you, the "all of 2012 Worley" had a 4.20 ERA and a 1.511 WHIP.

So to answer your question, if I'm forced to take the "Over/Under", I'll take the "Under" if I'm asked whether Lannan's ERA, etc. will be better (that is 'lower') than the post-DL and "full-season" Worley. Lannan's track record is better than that and I'll lay odds he continues to be so.


However, Lannan doesn't have a prayer of being as good as the pre-DL and 2011 Worley.

And, if Worley comes back from the elbow surgery and is as good as he was in 2011 and pre-DL 2012, he will demonstrate why I (and others) thought he was a steep price to pay for Ben Revere.

Jack: Where are they gonna lose 6 WAR?

I agree. Chooch (5.5 in 2012 per FanGraphs) and J-Roll (4.9) will probably lose about 3 WAR off last year between the two of them - both had outlier seasons last year, and neither is getting any younger. That said, Utley can get that back by himself if he plays every day, and Howard can't possibly be as bad as last year (can he?). Revere will get back most, if not all, of the 4 wins we got from Vic and his replacements, mostly with his glove and baserunning. Our corner outfielders were weak last year (about 2 WAR on each corner), and even our ragtag collection of replacements should be able to cover most of that production. Michael Young may be awful in the field, but he only has to give us about 2 WAR to match what we got last year at 3B.

Remember, this team went 44-31 after the All-Star break despite a fire sale and missing Doc and one of Ryan Howard's legs. We may harp on our weaknesses - and there are weaknesses - buf we still have a good squad here.

TTI: yeah, I was kind of wondering that myself.

I mean, I guess we can't completely rule out Halladay righting himself, but every single other 'tipping point' thing going wrong, thus rendering his bounce-back meaningless. But to believe that the worst case scenario will occur with most of our position players is as unrealistic as believing that all of them will work out.

But when you spend all of your time here arguing the 'con' side of every player/acquisition/etc, I guess it's understandable to believe it's all going to go wrong.

Also- I would venture a guess that almost any loss from Ruiz and Rollins WAR wise probably gets covered by Utley should he stay healthy all season long.....


which of course gets us back to the fact that the key is HHU being healthy and productive all season.

I can't wait until there's actual baseball so we can argue about what actually happened, as opposed to arguing over hypotheticals.

"I mean, Halladay went from 8.3 & 8.5 WAR his first two years here to 0.7 last year."


Iceman, I'll provide some context for that:

As mediocre as were the 2012 Phillies, if Roy Halladay had had a 2012 season as good as 2010 and 2011 - and let's split the difference and say he had a WAR of 8.4 - ass-u-ming the validity of WAR, that means if 2012 Halladay had been as good as the prior two season, the Phillies would have won 8 more games, giving them 89 wins and a WC spot.

That is, with half a season of Utley, half a season of a severely, severely diminished Howard, Worley injured, Chooch injured, Lee on the DL early in the season, Blanton pitching like Blanton, Polly being a china doll, Wiggy playing defense like the and Vic and Pence being traded away...

the 2012 Phillies might have made the postseason if Halladay had been in 2010-2011 form.

Even if Halladay is healthy, I'm reticent to believe that he's still an 8 fWAR pitcher. It's hard to expect that from ANY pitcher, but especially hard for a guy coming off a shoulder injury, a really bad season, and one who is turning 36 with his workload.

If he's healthy, I'd pencil him in around 4-5 fWAR, which is still a damn fine season, and would basically equate him to what Cole Hamels was last year. I'll take that.

Fata: You think real baseball is gonna stop the hypothetical arguments?

Also, the Phillies 1B last year (the likes of which included Pigginton and Hector Luna) hit .234/.308/.418 with a -0.8 WAR last year- 28th out of 30 teams at that position.

Not even the most ardent Howard-hater could possibly argue that they aren't going to make gains at that position if Howard is on the field the entire year. A realistic expectation of a healthy Howard starts at around 1.5 WAR. That's another two wins right there.

At 2B, the Phils went from 0.9 WAR in the first half of the season to 2.8 WAR in the second half. Utley for a full season is at least one win, and probably closer to two. So you're looking at ten wins between the three of them combined, if healthy and effective.

Combine that with a setup guy worth a damn (one of the best in the league for the past five years) and a little better luck for Lee (who got royally screwed last year the entire year), and you've got a sure playoff team. It's not that hard to imagine.

You could take any one of those factors, or maybe even two, out of the equation and still see them sneak into the playoffs. If you take Halladay out of it, though, and the whole thing becomes incredibly tenuous.

rolo- very good post. I would add that Lee might as well have been on the DL the entire season with the luck he had in terms of run support and HR/FB rate skyrocketing. He might as well have been John Lannan with the way the team crapped all over him, whether it be the bullpen or the poor run support. He pitched seven quality starts before scoring his first win, going 7+ innings in four of them and giving up 2 ER or less in five of them. I'm counting 14 QS in which he didn't get a win, 10 of them where the team ended up losing.

Criticism of the offense is certainly justified, but I find it hard to believe that Lee will go two seasons in a row getting the shaft consistently with the team losing 60% of his starts.

None of Lee's wins were cheap, either. He gave up 4 ER total in his six wins, not giving up more than 2 ER in any win. He averaged over 7 innings per win with a 0.82 ERA.

The chances that Lee pitches as well as he did last year again, while getting such pitiful results, are as close to nothing as you can get.

"His two seasons as a full-time starter were actually his two worst of his career (2008 and 2010)."

KAS, Kendrick was a full-time starter in 2007.

He actually logged 202 innings between Reading and Philly that year.

KK's innings jumped in 2006 and 2007. I wonder if he had some sort of delayed Vercucci Effect in 2008?

About that last point:

Boy have the Phillies avoided a bullet with Madson. I know a lot of people hate Papelbon's contract, but Madson would have been the alternative there, for 4 years too.

Can you imagine how much worse the team would have been in 2012 if our closer was Mad-dog instead of Pap?

Fata: You think real baseball is gonna stop the hypothetical arguments?

Posted by: norbertods | Tuesday, February 12, 2013 at 09:20 PM

At least mitigate them.

A real concern I have going into the season is pitching depth in the rotation. If any of starters go down for an extended period of time, relying on Rodrigo Lopez and Tyler Cloyd could prove fatal.

Will Pettibone or Martin be called up if those two don't get the job done? They both seem to be on the 40-man.

Fatti, I'm not counting on Halladay to return to 2010 - 2011 form, but that's just me.

He's Roy Halladay, and he probably expects to do so.

Jack, you are correct in this context: It's going to take more than a return of HHU to make the playoffs - others will ahve to contribute. I think, however, what people are stating is if they DON'T return to form (or some semblance thereof), it's not going to matter what the others do.

Fat - it's a huge issue. The next guy on the depth chart is Cook. Basically no depth and if one of the big 3 goes down for an extended stretch they won't make the playoffs.

Roy Halladay is to the 2010-2013 Phillies what Catfish Hunter was to the A's in the early 70's.

After Hunter signed with the Yankees after the a's third WFC in 1974, Reggie Jackson famously said (and I paraphrase):

"With Catfish Hunter we're World Series Champions. Without him we won't make the playoffs."

Damn MG, I forgot about Cook. That makes me more worrisome, not less.

Thanks.

Rolo: Yes. That's basically what I'm saying. Their productivity is necessary, but not necessarily sufficient.

Like I said before, if you tell me that Utley, Howard, and Halladay all have *great* seasons, then yes, we have a very good shot at being in the playoffs. But how can you honestly, objectively predict that? Halladay is 36. Utley hasn't played a full season since 2009. Howard... well, I won't get into detail, but suffice to say he has been neither healthy nor great for a while.

It is basic probability. If the odds are 75% for each of them individually to be healthy and very productive, the odds of all three of them doing so aren't 75%. Those odds are 42%. So it's just hard for me to count on that, you know? I'm not being a Debbie downer, honestly. I'm trying to be objective.

Pettibone is my #6

I wonder if our #6 starter isn't on some other MLB roster. He will then be cut in Spring Training and picked up off the scrap heap ?

Shouldn't the header be updated to Phillies 2013?

Bubba, good point.

Either that, or they'll call somone up who isn't on the 40-man.

Was KK on the 40-man when he got called up in 2007? How would one look that up?

Sucks about Madson. For him and for the Angels. I hope he gets better sooner rather than later.

Yeah, GBrett, i feel bad for madson. Always liked him when he was here.

Padrino is right, though. They dodged a bullet when they signed Pap instead of him.

GBrettFan-
Agree on Madson. Hated to see him leave the Phils , and he sure hasn't had anything go well for him since he left.
I thought he would have a good run of years as a closer , and he still may.
But his big payday is still on a medical deferment.

I feel bad for Madson. I always liked him as well.

I mean, he's not dead, though, right? Just having some arm trouble. Hope it turns out fine for him.

BTW, if that's Darin Ruf in the picture up top, he sure doesn't look like a butterball.

Looks like he's got some serious leg muscles, and is in the best shape of his life.

@ Rolo

Given it's his elbow again, he may be done in baseball. It's his age 33 season, he's been pitching for over 10 years now. Sometimes the body just breaks down after 30. It's an old story with pitchers.

Padrino, I hope that's not true. I love watching Madson look make batters look silly with his changeup.

Wally j and Steve hend gave great interviews on hitting and this team. Forgot Steve had Deleon when he was in Tampa. Still hope Dom and ruf get bulk of playing time.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/32544/ranking-the-best-starting-rotations

Fun read, but I don't agree with ranking the Rays ahead of the Phillies. Alex Cobb and Matt Moore are too young to project as being good enough to make that rotation better than ours.

And the write-up on the Nationals just further instills my fears about that rotation. They have the propensity to be very special, especially if Strasburg turns into who everyone thinks he will, and Haren is healthy.

Fata- he didn't. He ranked the Phillies third and the Rays fifth.

TTI, the way I see the article, the Phillies are the first entry, followed by the Rays right below them, then Tigers, Nationals and Giants at the bottom.

I don't see any numbers, so I'm concluding that the entry at the top if #5, with #1 being at the bottom.

Am I missing something?

Nevermind, I didn't read all the way to the bottom. I see it now.

What an odd way to create a top-ten list.

Thanks for pointing that out. Criticism retracted.

*top-five list*

I should go to work.

***Given it's his elbow again, he may be done in baseball. It's his age 33 season, he's been pitching for over 10 years now. Sometimes the body just breaks down after 30. It's an old story with pitchers.***

Maybe all the PEDs he did back in 2008 to jump his fastball 3 mph had something to do with it.

I mean, the great stretching and workout program he discovered during that season that suddenly had him throwing 97 mph in the post-season.

From MLBTradeRumors: The Royals announced that they acquired utility player Elliot Johnson from the Rays as the player to be named later in the December trade involving James Shields and Wil Myers. The Rays had designated Johnson for assignment last week.

I figured I'd post the update as Johnson was commented on last week as possible guy to go after for our bench.

I've always liked Madson. He was my fireman on my all-birthday team. Hey, it's my birthday team and my best reliever is going to be an old-fashioned fireman rather than a closer.

At his peak, Madson was great-to-elite at not issuing walks, putting the ball on the ground and striking guys out.

He was nearly the perfect relief pitcher.

His changeup was one of the very best in baseball. It was a joy to watch.


From 2007-2011:

310 G, 329.2 IP, 2.89 ERA, 146 ERA+, 8.6 K/9, 2.6 BB/9, 1.192 WHIP, 48.7 GB%

When we parse down to 2010-2011:

117 G, 113.2 IP, 2.45 ERA, 161 ERA+, 10 K/9, 2.3 BB/9, 1.1 WHIP, 49.5 GB%

Damn impressive.

It's amazing to me that Juan Cruz (not that he's that critical) didn't know when to report, miscommunication or not. Every Phillies fan has known for months that 2/12 is the day pitchers and catchers report. You could find this out anywhere; the MLB network, the internet, etc. This isn't 1912, information is a little easier to come by.

NEPP, absolutely agree. When he had a guy in a 0-2 or 1-2 count, I used to get giddy waiting for him to throw that changeup, and watch it completely fall off the table, as the batters hopelessly swung about a foot over it.

The best part was that everyone on earth knew the changeup was coming including the hitter but it didnt matter. That's the definition of a great pitch. Chooch could have told the hitter beforehand and they'd still swing early.

NEPP, when you say everybody on earth, I don't think that's hyperbole. There were monks living in caves who hadn't spoken in decades who still knew that changeup was coming.

Didn't matter.

Between Madson's changeup and Lidge's slider, our 2008 bullpen was just filthy. I honestly dont know which pitch was filthier.

Lidge's slider is on a level by itself. But in late 2008 when Madson all of a sudden found a flaw in his delivery and began dialing it up to 97-98 MPH, his change-up reached that level for a while. He was as dominating, maybe even more so, than Lidge down the stretch.

Fatti, I remember one time Madson was facing Richie Sexson, who was a pretty good hitter in his day. IIRC it was in Seattle.

He faced him in a high-leverage situation late in a game (I don't remember the exact circumstances but I believe there was a RISC).

He threw him three straight changeups. It was a three pitch AB with three swings and misses. Inning over. Phils won the game.

flaw in his delivery, yeah, we'll go with that.

BTW, the "official" story is that Jamie Moyer taught him some new stretching and arm strengthening techniques early in the 2008 season and those efforts led to his fastball jumping from 94 to 97 mph through the course of the season...along with him going from a multi-inning guy to strictly 1 inning per outing.

JC's OX-treme slider was filthy as well.

NEPP, I though the official story was that Tom Gordon "kidnapped" him one morning, and took him to a workout facility, where he showed him some new stuff in his delivery.

NEPP, I thought it was Tom Gordon who introduced him to his trainer who gave him the shoulder stretching and strengthening execizes.

I remember an article where he credited Moyer....to the Googles!!!

Damn, Fatti, you type faster than I.

Wait, you guys seriously think Madson took JC's special vitamins for a few months in 2008? That's really what everyone thinks, with absolutely no evidence supporting it?

Ok then.

Iceman, I don't think that. Where are you getting this from?

Okay, I found a link to a Philly.com article where Madson says Gordon and another Hardball Times article where the author says Moyer. The first article is not longer on the webs...just the entry blurb mentioning Gordon...the 2nd is still available.

So...maybe both of them? Both mentioned a new series of arm strenghening exercises FWIW.

And then there's this: http://www.redreporter.com/2012/2/13/2793827/the-red-report-ryan-madson

Which unfortunately is circular reporting as it references that same Hardball Times article.

So maybe both?

***Wait, you guys seriously think Madson took JC's special vitamins for a few months in 2008? That's really what everyone thinks, with absolutely no evidence supporting it?

***

He's getting it from me...and I'm getting it from just being suspicious of any jump in performance in that last 20 years. Given that a fellow reliever was also popped in that same season for PEDs, it doesnt help when you look back and think that Madson was throwing 91-92 in April, 93-94 in Jun, 95-96 in Sep and 97-98 in Oct. That's a hell of a leap.

So, zero evidence at all and its probably wrong to besmirth the guy but the overall "pattern" is supicious...especially now that he's dealing with repeated arm issues a few years down the line.

It's ok to smear Madson because his wife hated Philadelphia.

I'm not smearing him at all...just pointing out a somewhat odd set of coincidences.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

SHOP CSN


Advertisements


Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG