Really, Todd Helton? Because while I understand you have to take the company line and act like you're still excited about the upcoming season in Colorado (and likely out of contention by mid-season), I bet a part of you, no matter how small, is really bummed that you're not headed to Beantown.
C'mon, would you rather have David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez protecting you or Matt Holiday and Garret Atkins? Would you rather have Curt Schilling and Josh Beckett pitching your first two games of the season, or Jeff Francis and Aaron Cook? Would you rather have to play a meaningful game in September against a division rival (either at home, or in a hostile environment) or just play to pad your stats the last 8 weeks of the season?
Helton appears to be a stand-up guy. You never hear a bad word about him. He doesn't get hurt, he's still a great hitter, and I admire the fact that he wants to play his whole career with one team. That's a true rarity these days. But playing on the same team and losing, year, after year, after year, after year, despite your best efforts (.333, 286 HR, 996 RBI career) has to be frustrating. I don't want to come across as constantly bashing the Rockies. I think they are headed in the right direction, and I'm not surprised they improved last year. It's just that their pitching isn't going to take them very far and for the first time in a while, the NL West may be one of the best divisions in baseball.
So in short, I know Helton has to say he's happy to be a Rockie, I'm just not sure if I believe him completely.
Major League Baseball did not approve Barry Bonds' new contract with the Giants. The sticking point may have to do with an unusual clause in his deal 1-year, $15.8 million deal (an absurd amount considering what Bonds is no longer capable of doing, like running). The clause states San Francisco can void the deal if Bonds is indicted as part of the federal steroids investigation.
Here's my question, and it's a lengthy one. If I am Barry Bonds, and I know am closing in on the most sought-after record in the sport, and if I know I have been under the proverbial "cloud of suspicion" for years, and if I know I am at the epicenter of the game's probe into illegal performance-enhancing drugs, and if I know my goon-childhood-friend-trainer Greg Anderson is still locked up because he's refusing to testify against me, and if I know there's already stuff out there about me that I failed an amphetamines test last year, and if I know I went from looking like a human being to a cartoon character a few years into my career in San Francisco, and if I know there's already a damning book out there about me written by some of the most respected investigative journalists around, BUT if I know I really didn't do anything wrong or illegal back when I went from a good player to one of the best who ever lived, WHY ON EARTH would I agree to this clause?
Barry, if you're innocent, this provision is completely unnecessary insurance for the Giants.
But if you're not, please come forward so when you hit #756 this year, nobody will care.
I'm looking at the pre-season depth charts and projected starters for all 30 teams, and I keep coming back to the same thought: the Washington Nationals are going to be God-awful.
This team finished 71-92 last season, dead last in the NL East, 7 games worse than the 4th place Marlins, 26 games back of the 1st place Mets. And that was with Alfonso Soriano. The Nats lost him along with Jose Vidro, Jose Guillen, Ramon Ortiz, and Marlon Byrd. And the man with four body-part names, Tony Armas, remains a free-agent.
In '07 the Mets are back and just as good as last year. The Phillies added pitching and didn't lose any offense. The Braves are about the same, and the Marlins are a year older and wiser. Then there's poor, poor Washington. At least when they were the Expos, they had marquee players. Nobody came to their games, but they had players other teams wanted.
If I had to set the Nats' opening day lineup (and I'm glad I don't), it would look something like this...
SS Felipe Lopez - 44 steals in '06, but 126 K's
3b Ryan Zimmerman - stud, but struck out 120 times last year
1b Nick Johnson - has never appeared in 150 games in a season
RF Austin Kearns - good numbers last year in first, full, healthy year
C Brian Schneider - average season: .255, 9 HR, 48 RBI
LF Ryan Church - never had 275 AB's in season, 28 years old
CF Alex Escobar - 0 AB's in '05, career high 152 in '04
2b Bernie Castro - 190 career AB's, turns 28 this season
And then there's their starting rotation...
John Patterson - bad forearm limited him to 40 IP last year, 185K in '05
Mike O'Connor - sent up and down in '06, finished with 1.3K:BB ratio
Billy Traber - 10-12 career record with 5.57 ERA in 48 games (26 starts)
Shawn Hill - 45 career IP, 1-3 w/4.66 ERA in '06
Jason Bergmann - 84 career IP, 37 relief appearances, 7 career starts
New skipper Manny Acta recently said they're going to take it slow with O'Connor, who's still recovering from elbow surgery, and likely won't be ready for the start of the season. He also said he's looking at about 10 different guys to fill out the 2 through 5 slots in the rotation, behind Patterson, who's said to be fully recovered. If there are 10 possible guys to fill out those 4 spots, it really means there are no sure fire guys after Patterson.
It would be one thing if this team was filled with youthful inexperience like the Marlins. But this team isn't particularly young. It's filled with a lot of mid-to-late-20-somethings who have yet to accomplish much of anything at the big league level.
That, combined with their tough division, is the recipe for a long, long season in our nation's capital. And that is something Democrats and Republicans can agree on.
Why?
Why is Sammy Sosa trying to make a comeback?
Why?
And why do the Texas Rangers think he can do it? Lest we forget, this team was wrong about his talent in 1989 when they traded him (along with Wilson Alvarez and Scott Fletcher) to the Chicago White Sox for Harold Baines and Fred Manrique. Now, 587 home runs and 18 years later, it's come full-circle and the Rangers are going to wrong about his talent again.
Did they not watch him limp to the finish line of a spectacular, if not controversial career, filled with steroid allegations, a corked bat gaffe, and plenty of miffed Cubs fans, coaches and teammates? Did they not watch his home run totals plummet and strikeout totals skyrocket in the orange and black of Baltimore? Is this organization that bereft of viable DH options that they think a guy who hasn't seen a big league pitch since 2005 can somehow turn back the clock and regain the strike-zone judgment that eluded him in his last few years?
They couldn't have.
The truth is, Sammy was always a big strikeout guy. Even in his MVP season of 1998 where he went yard 66 times, he still wiffed 171 times, and walked just 73 times. But in the years that followed, his walk totals went up (to 78, then 91, then 116, then down to 103), and his punch-out total went down, slowly (it actually stayed at 171, then dipped to 168, 153, and 144).
Then something happened in 2003. His production dropped off across the board. He had nagging injuries, and lost all plate discipline. That year he only drew 62 base on balls, his lowest total in 6 seasons. Yes, 2003 marked the beginning of the end of Sammy Sosa, Superstar. It was the last time he'd hit 40 home runs, the last time he'd hit above .260, the last time he'd come close to 100 runs scored, or driven in.
In the two years that followed, his decline turned exponential. His 35 bombs in 2004 came with a .253 average, just 80 RBI, 56 walks, and 133 strikeouts. Sammy Sosa had become Steve Balboni (who hit .243 with 36 homers, 88 RBI, 52 walks and 166 strikeouts for the 1985 Kansas City Royals). Unfortunately, nobody told the Baltimore Orioles, who sent him up to the plate 419 times in 2005. He reached base just 123 times, touched all four bases 39 times, and touched all four with one swing just 14 times...his lowest total since his days with the White Sox, a decade and a half before.
Even new Rangers skipper Ron Washington (the Oakland A's former third base and infield coach) sounds skeptical of Sammy Sosa, Texas Ranger. Personally, I think he'd rather have Walker, Texas Ranger.
"All he wants is an opportunity, and the Texas Rangers organization decided we want to give him that opportunity," Washington was quoted as saying.
That sounds like a guy who's ready to pencil in #21 for 500 at-bats this season.
My prediction? Sosa hits as many home runs for Texas this season as he did when they had him the first time...one.
That's what Colorado Rockies owner Charlie Monfort said recently about the Todd Helton/Red Sox trade, which now appears to be dead.
What I would like to ask Colorado Rockies owner Charlie Monfort is, "You do you realize you're talking about the Colorado Rockies, right?"
This is a team that is 155 games under .500 in its 14 years in the league. This is a team that has won more games than it's lost 4 times in 14 years. This is a team that has never won the division before. This is a team that, unlike in the mid-90's when they were good, no longer has the likes of Larry Walker (helmet on straight or backward), Ellis Burks, Dante Bichette, Vinny Castilla or Andres Gallaraga, each of whom were legitimate threats to hit .300+ with 40+ homeruns. This a team that just this off-season, traded one of the only guys who's actually pitched well for an extended period of time in the purple and black, Jason Jennings. So to quote Jim Mora in that Miller Lite commercial, "Playoffs!??! You want to talk about playoffs!??!"
I will concede the Rockies of '07 (with or without Helton) will be better than the Rockies of '05 and '04, (and possibly of '06, their best year since 2000). But to talk about winning the division on the heels of a largely snoozer of an off-season, and when every other team in your division made major moves especially to their starting rotations, is delusional.
Going from the top of the division last year to the bottom, Los Angeles upgraded an already-playoff-caliber pitching staff with Jason Schmidt and Randy Wolf. They added proven veterans Juan Pierre and Luis Gonzalez in the outfield. And while they did lose quite a bit, (Greg Maddux, JD Drew, Eric Gagne, Kenny Lofton, Julio Jugo) they are better off with their respective replacements (Wolf or Schmidt, Andre Ethier, Takashi Saito, Pierre, and Rafael Furcal).
San Diego won the Wild Card last year, and much like the Dodgers, they did lose a few big names (Mike Piazza, Woody Williams, Josh Barfield, Dave Roberts). But much like the Dodgers, I think the players who will fill their shoes are mostly upgrades (Josh Bard, Greg Maddux, Marcus Giles, Mike Cameron). The Padres may have taken a little bit of a hit offensively, but their pitching staff (Jake Peavy, Chris Young, Greg Maddux) is going to be awfully good.
Speaking of pitching, San Francisco lost a big arm (Schmidt) but gained a big arm (Barry Zito). Shea Hillenbrand is out, Rich Aurilia is in. They have a new backstop (Bengie Molina), and replaced Moises Alou with Dave Roberts. Offensively, this team is weak, but again, pitching (Zito, Matt Cain, Noah Lowry, Matt Morris) is going to help them win a lot of 4-2 games.
Arizona recognized a problem (starting pitchers, other then Cy Young Award winner Brandon Webb) and addressed it. The Big Unit is back in the desert. They'll have Livan Hernandez (who pitched a hell of a lot better with them than with the Nats in '06) for a full year. And they added Doug Davis. Offensively, they're like the Giants (weak) but also not like the Giants (very young, as opposed to very old).
Compared to the rest of the NL West, Colorado's projected starting rotation (Jeff Francis, Aaron Cook, Rodrigo Lopez, BH Kim, and Taylor Buchholz) looks like a Triple-A team. Francis is probably the only one with a bright future ahead of him, Cook and Kim have never won 10 games in a season, Lopez has had the most success of anyone in the past, but he was one of the worst starting pitchers in baseball last season, and Buchholz allowed 21 homeruns in 113 innings in '06. That should play well in Coors.
I don't blame Charlie Monfort for not wanting to trade Todd Helton for Mike Lowell, Julian Tavarez, and a mid-range prospect. But talking about the playoffs now is only going to be sports writer fodder in September when the Rocks are closing the book on another .500 season at best.
For the record, here's my 2007 NL West prediction:
Los Angeles Dodgers
San Diego Padres
Arizona Diamondbacks
San Francisco Giants
Colorado Rockies
I have to laugh because that's what Scott Hatteberg once called Roger Clemens when he (Clemens) was starting a game against Barry Zito, the year after Zito won the award.
Asked himself about the Clemens vs. Zito, "Cy Old vs. Cy Young" match-up, Zito said, "I wouldn't say Cy Old because I won't want to show any disrespect to Roger."
Nice.
Zito went on to pitch 8 shutout innings in Yankee Stadium, and Oakland won 2-0. Todd Zeile went 0-4 at third base for the Bronx Bombers, and who doesn't love a good Todd Zeile story?
That loss, May 4 of 2003 is one of 178 The Rocket has suffered in his 23-year-career. Oh by the way, he's been on the winning end 348 times, good for 8th all time. His 4,604 strikeouts are second-only to Nolan Ryan. And "Cy Old" has 7 "Cy Young" awards, easily the most ever.
It's a sad commentary on the state of big league pitching when a 44-year-old is the most coveted free agent arm on the off-season market (with all respect to Daisuke Matsuzaka, Zito, and Jason Schmidt). But he's definitely worthy of it because D-Mat has never recorded an out in a big league game, Zito has that "great but not stud" label, and Schmidt has a history of injuries. Plus there's the fact that Roger Clemens has been basically the same pitcher in the 80's, 90's, and 00's.
1980's.....95-45, 3.06 ERA, 1.14 WHIP, 8.51K/9
1990's...152-89, 3.02 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, 8.68K/9
2000's...101-44, 3.27 ERA, 1.06 WHIP, 8.55K/9
So should he return for 2007? Why not. His last three seasons have been some of the best of his career. As an Astro since 2004, he's been 38-18, with a 2.40 ERA, 1.07 WHIP, and 8.43K/9 in two-and-a-half seasons, so it's not like he's lost anything.
But if he comes back, where should he go? Well, he hasn't traded in his Houston duds just yet, and the Yankees and Rangers are also in the hunt. My guess is, if he comes back at all, it will be as an Astro (because of the familiarity factor, and because they'll be a contender in the NL Central), or as a Yankee (because of the Andy Pettitte factor, because they'll be a contender in the AL East, and maybe because of this).
I'm not sure if I would come back if I was in The Rocket's Reeboks, but then again, I never had his stuff.
For the last few years, the consensus #1 overall pick in almost every fantasy baseball draft was Alex Rodriguez. When he lost his shortstop eligibility, a few people lost faith, but for the most part, he was still one of the first, if not the first player off the board.
That's mainly because you knew what you were getting- an average slightly above .300, 40+ homers, 120+ RBI, 20 steals, and 120 runs. But he failed to deliver on 4 of those 5 "promises" last year. And that means this year, he's just slightly less valuable, almost in the "great-but-not-first-pick-overall-great" category. That also means, for better or worse, you'll probably be able to get him at #3, #4 or even as late as #5.
So just how "bad" was his 2006? Well, he hit .290 (15 points below his career average), he hit 35 homeruns (8 below his career seasonal average), drove in 121 (just 4 below his career average), scored 113 times (13 off his usual pace), and swiped 15 bags (7 fewer than we'd grown to expect). Those are great stats. Just not A-Rod great. He's still the best third baseman around, although David Wright and Miguel Cabrera aren't far behind. And their presence in most first-rounds explains why A-Rod isn't quite so special any more.
So if A-Rod isn't the no-brainer, top pick this season? Who is? In my opinion, it's Albert Pujols. And I say that, even though Alfonso Soriano was, hands-down the most valuable player in 5x5 leagues last year.
What separates Albert from Alfonso, in my mind, is the peace of mind you'll get when you draft him. What's the worst season he's had since he joined the league? It's probably his second season, 2002. During his "sophomore slump" Pujols only went .314, 34, 127, with 118 runs scored. And last season he missed the most amount of time he ever had in one season (19 games), but still set career highs in homeruns and RBI.
Now let's look at Soriano. Sure I'd love it if he repeats his 2006, goes 40-40 and drives in 95 (although I'm not too keen on the .277 average). But what if he has another 2004 (.280, 28, 91, 18 steals, 77 runs)? My point is, history says Soriano's bad year is going to be a whole lot worse than Pujols' bad year, and in the first round, it's more about not screwing up, because all the players are excellent with the potential to be God-like.
Possibly bumping A-Rod down the depth chart even more are guys like Ryan Howard, Jose Reyes, and even Johan Santana. Howard (who is actually older than Pujols, believe it or not) was the most prolific power hitter in the game last year. Nobody else even came close . He's averaging a dinger every 11.4 at-bats for his career. And it doesn't hurt that he'll play 81 games in Philly.
Reyes is interesting. If his ceiling is as high as most people think it is, hitting in the lineup he's hitting in, there's no reason to think he won't hit .300 again, come close to 25 homeruns, drive in another 85, steal another 60, and score 130 times. If he does that, he might be a better pick than Soriano.
Then there's Santana. The days of Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling, and Pedro Martinez all being safe fantasy pitching options are over. And because there's such a significant drop off from Santana to the 2nd best pitcher, Chris Carpenter, and an even bigger drop off to #3, 4 and 5 (Carlos Zambrano, Roy Halladay, and Jake Peavy, in some order), Santana has that special, scarce quality. Plus, there's the fact that, like Pujols, he's been so predictably superb.
Since becoming a full-time starter in 2004, Santana has won 20, 16 and 19 games. He's struck out 265, 238, and 245. His ERA has been 2.61, 2.88, 2.77. And his WHIP has been 0.92, 0.97, and 1.00. You know Santana is going to be the best pitcher in the game in at least 3 categories, and he'll be among the leaders in wins too.
Where A-Rod fits in with this bunch remains to be seen. And if he has another 2005 in 2007, he'll be right back where he was before the start of last season- among the top two picks, most likely. But he's not there this year, at least not for me. For the record, here's my mock first-round in a 12-team league.
1. Albert Pujols
2. Johan Santana
3. Alfonso Soriano
4. Alex Rodriguez
5. Jose Reyes
6. Ryan Howard
7. David Wright
8. David Ortiz
9. Vladimir Guerrero
10. Miguel Cabrera
11. Chase Utley
12. Carl Crawford
What does it take to be #1? Or, better put, what does it take to be a #1 starter in Major League Baseball?
I was having this discussion recently with a friend of mine who's a big Yankee fan. And the specific topic of the discussion was Chien-Ming Wang.
My position was that Wang is not a #1, despite his 2006 season. And, not surprisingly, the guy on the other end of the conversation thought I was nuts.
First, my logic. Wang was great in 2006. He won 19 games. He finished (a distant) second in Cy Young voting. And he finished tied for 7th in the league in ERA (3.63).
Now let's dig deeper. With his spectacular numbers, he carried a rather ordinary 1.31 WHIP, good for 18th in the league, and an even less impressive 76 strikeouts (tied for 37th best in the league). There are a handful of closers who had more K's last year, and they did it in about a third of the innings.
So Wang's a contact pitcher, so what? Does that mean he's not good? Well, consider this. This is a list, by season, of the pitcher who had the most wins that year without reaching 100 strikeouts.
2006 - Chien-Ming Wang (19W, 76K)
2005 - Kenny Rogers (14W, 87K)
2004 - Ismael Valdes (14W, 67K)
2003 - Ramon Ortiz (16W, 94K)
2002 - Kirk Reuter (14W, 76K)
2001 - Kirk Reuter (14W, 83K)
2000 - John Halama (14W, 87K)
1999 - Omar Olivares (15W, 85K)
1998 - Brian Anderson (12W, 95K)
1997 - Willie Blair (16W, 90K)
1996 - Jamie Moyer (13W, 79K)
1995 - Mark Gubicza (12W, 81K)
1994 - Jimmy Key (17W, 97K)*
1993 - Bob Tewksbury (17W, 97K)
1992 - Bob Tewksbury (16W, 91K)
1991 - Bill Gullickson (20W, 91K)
1990 - Tom Browning (15W, 99K)
*Key only made 25 starts because of the strike.
The names on this list don't exactly scream "aces" to me. And I was amazed to see Bill Gullickson won 20 without 100 punch-outs in 1991.
So if Wang is putting guys on base, and not striking many out, how was he so successful last year? The answer is double-play-balls. He got 33 of them in 2006, second only to Jake Westbrook's 36. It's hard to imagine someone who relies that much on his defense is going to be consistently good for a multi-year stretch (i.e., a #1 starter ).
Want more proof that Wang just had a good year, but isn't a #1? In 34 starts, only 18 of them were considered quality starts (at least 6 innings pitched, no more than 3 earned runs). Yet, he won 19 games. Only a few other pitchers (with at least 10 quality starts) pulled off that feat last year. John Garland did it (18W, 17QS), so did Jason Marquis (14W, 13 QS). And you know who else did it? Randy Johnson. The Big Unit had 17 wins, with only 14 quality starts. You know what Wang and Johnson have in common? The Yankee lineup. Johnson was #1 in baseball last year in run support. Mike Mussina was #5 and Wang was #12.
In short, is Wang a good picther? Yes. Is he a #1 starter? No way.
It appears the Red Sox and Rockies are in talks regarding Todd Helton. Hard to say when, or if the deal will happen, but for the sake of argument, let's assume it does. What should the Sox expect, and is it a good move for Colorado?
The biggest question is, how much concern should Helton's 2006 present for Beantown? TH turns 34 this August, and last year he posted career lows in average, homers, slugging, and OPS. Even worse, he hit a pedestrian .266 away from Coors Field. #17's set the bar pretty high during his career, but it's no sure thing he'll return to his typical .320+, 30+, 100+ that we saw like clockwork in the late 90's and early 00's
Now, the upside. Helton would easily be the best first baseman the Sox have had since Mo Vaughn (with apologies to J.T. Snow, Kevin Millar, Doug "That's My Ball" Mientkiewicz, Brian Daubach, Shea Hillenbrand, Rico Brogna, and others). He's a career .333 hitter, he struck out only 64 times last year (his lowest total since 2000), he's walked at least 90 times 7 years in a row, and he would bring three gold gloves to New England. He's never missed more than 20 games in a season, so his health isn't a concern, and unlike in Colorado, pitchers would have to throw to him (the Sox have a guy named Manny and a guy named Papi...ever heard of them?). And if Helton does have to leave the thin air of Colorado, Fenway isn't a bad place to go. Last year, the park was the 5th best in the bigs for hitters (Coors was #1).
Boston's potential line-up would be:
SS Julio Lugo
3B Kevin Youkilis
DH David Ortiz
LF Manny Ramirez
1B Todd Helton
C Jason Varitek
RF JD Drew
CF Coco Crisp
2b Dustin Pedroia
Not bad. In my estimation, that would be one of the most balanced and potent lineups in the league, if not the game (Yankees and Mets, and, to a lesser extent, White Sox and Cubs are also up there). So even though Helton is not without risks, I think the Sox would be happy.
Now, what about Colorado? The Rockies finished 12 games below .500 last year, 28 games under the year before, and 26 games under in 2004. In fact, they haven't had a winning season since 2000, so a big change might not be such a bad thing. But, in the off-season, they did trade their best pitcher (arguably), Jason Jennings. So trading a big bat just weeks after trading a big arm may not be the best way to go.
On a side note, this franchise is entering its 15th year in 2007, so I was wondering who's been their best pitcher in that time. And you know, it just may be Jennings. He's the franchise leader in wins (58), innings (941), starts (156) and he's 3rd in career ERA (4.74). In 2006, he also recorded the second-lowest single-season ERA in franchise history (3.78, Joe Kennedy's 3.66 in 2004 is best). As for the best single-season in Rockies history, Kevin Ritz's 17-11, 5.28 in '96 isn't bad, and neither is Jennings' 16-8, 4.52 Rookie of the Year season in 2002. But my money's on Pedro Astacio's 17-11, 5.04, 210 strikeout campaign in '99.
Anyway, Colorado seems to be a team building for the future, not trying to win now (Helton will help immensely with the later, not so much with the former). Their best players are relatively young (Matt Holiday, Brian Fuentes, Jeff Francis, Garrett Atkins, and ROY candidate Troy Tulowitzki). Plus, their bullpen could use the help. It blew 25 saves last year, more than all but 3 teams. More effective relief would also help their so-so staff get to Fuentes a lot easier (and Tavarez has pitched well in Colorado before in 2000). Add to that the fact that Mike Lowell's 2006 (.284-20-80) was pretty close to Helton's (.310-15-81) and he did it for about $7 million dollars less.
So if this deal does get done, it could be one of those "both teams benefit" trades, even though I think the Red Sox will benefit much more in the short-term.
We're in it.
And it's going to get worse before it gets better.
"It" is the worst time of the year to be a sports fan.
There's no football on TV this weekend.
There's only one more game left this season (and as a Baltimore Ravens fan, I can't root for the Indianapolis Colts, plus I refuse to root for the Chicago Bears because Rex Grossman has zero business playing in the biggest game of the year).
March Madness is still a month and a half away and pitchers and catchers don't report for at least 17 days.
The good news is, every team still has a shot at the World Series, even the bad ones (remember the Detroit Tigers last year, or better yet, the worst-to-first Series of 1991?).
The next few weeks are going to be slow, but they will also afford me the opportunity to make numerous predictions which will no-doubt prove to be way off by the All-Star Break.
So with that said, I hope you enjoy MLB Baseblogg, and please, feel free to post away too!
Really, Todd Helton? Because while I understand you have to take the company line and act like you're still excited about the upcoming season in Colorado (and likely out of contention by mid-season), I bet a part of you, no matter how small, is really bummed that you're not headed to Beantown.
