SB Nation - Rich Harden

Building A Cubs Champion: 2010 Edition

Al — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:15:22 -0000

by Charles Rex Arbogast - AP

Like it or not, one of the keys to the Cubs' success in 2010 is a resurgence by Alfonso Soriano. Here, he launches his game-winning grand slam vs. the Astros last July 27.

View full size photo »

Last year about this time, I made this post discussing what I thought should be the makeup of the 2009 Cubs.

Brave, isn't it, of me to post that link when I'd just as soon forget about it. I was shouted down and laughed at (people are still giving me grief for the Kevin Millar thing, and they were absolutely correct), and had the Cubs put that 25-man roster on the field last April, they'd undoubtedly have had a much worse season than they did in real life (case in point: Alex Hinshaw, who I thought was an up-and-coming LOOGY, threw only six major league innings in 2009, posting a 12.00 ERA).

So let me go about this project this year in a different sort of way. A year ago (actually, October 20, 2008 was the date I wrote the post about my proposed 2009 roster) we were all still stunned and angry that the 97-win team that had dominated the National League all season went three-and-out in the playoffs. This was before Lou's "we've gotta get more lefthanded" mantra led us to the Milton Bradley disaster, before popular favorites Kerry Wood and Mark DeRosa were let go, and a lot of us were wondering, "How can we make a team that good into one that will win 11 games in October?"

Jim Hendry and Co. were asking themselves the same question, obviously, but came up with the wrong answer. Without rehashing what we've rehashed all summer long, clearly, it didn't work -- and not just because of Hendry's moves, but because players like Alfonso Soriano, Geovany Soto and Mike Fontenot seriously underperformed their 2008 numbers by considerable margins and for various reasons, and because Aramis Ramirez, who is the Cubs' best hitter, missed 50 games with a dislocated shoulder and wasn't at full strength the rest of the season, eventually playing in only 82 games.

I believe in what new owner Tom Ricketts said at his introductory press conference: that the Cubs already have the talent that can win the World Series, and only need a few tweaks to bring the club back to pennant-contending level. I'm also going to assume that what we've heard about player payroll is correct: that it will be increased, if only "slightly", from 2009, and thus will wind up at (approximately) $145 million. That will rank third in baseball, behind the Yankees and Red Sox.

Thus, instead of trying to build a roster simply by picking pieces from here and there, let's use that $145 million to put together a winning team.

Let's begin with players we know will be with the team next year, and their payroll figures (all numbers from the excellent site Cot's Baseball Contracts). These players are under contract for 2010 and will definitely be on the team, followed by their contract amounts:

Alfonso Soriano, $19,000,000
Carlos Zambrano, $18,875,000
Aramis Ramirez, $16,500,000
Kosuke Fukudome, $14,000,000
Ryan Dempster, $13,500,000
Derrek Lee, $13,000,000
Ted Lilly, $13,000,000

That's $107,875,000 for seven players. The Cubs also owe Jeff Samardzija $1,000,000 on the major league portion of his deal (whether or not he throws a major league inning) and $500,000 to the long-ago-released Luis Vizcaino, who pitched 3.2 innings in a Cub uniform. We're now at $109,375,000, leaving "only" $35,625,000 for 18 more players to fill out the Opening Day 25-man roster. That means there are going to be a fair number of minimum-wage players in 2010, because among the players remaining, a number of them are arbitration-eligible, meaning they will be in line for raises.

The first order of business is to remove Milton Bradley from the premises. We have had many long debates about whether and for whom he should be traded, but I believe this is top priority for Jim Hendry and will happen sooner rather than later. Disagree if you wish, but I think the best of many not-so-great scenarios is to send him -- and Aaron Miles -- to the Giants for Aaron Rowand. Between Bradley and Miles, they are owed a total of $23.7 million; Rowand is owed $36 million. Since in doing a deal like this, you would be relieving the Giants, essentially, of $12 million (approximately) by taking the third year of Rowand's contract, Hendry should ask the Giants to split the difference and pay half of Rowand's 2012 contract, which would split the total dollars (approximately $60 million) between the two teams, about $30 million each.

This would also accomplish equalizing the 2010 payroll -- or come close -- to what Bradley and Miles would have been owed ($11.7 million) and what Rowand is owed ($12 million). I think the Giants would be willing to do this, because you are taking $6 million off their 2012 payroll, while leaving their 2010 and 2011 payrolls where they are now, since Bradley is owed $12 million in 2011.

I concede that Rowand has had two pretty poor offensive seasons in San Francisco (at least in part due to injuries). But in 2007, he had a fine hitting year in Philadelphia, and I believe that he has at least a chance to return to that level in Chicago. If you were looking at the possible acquisition of Rowand in a vacuum, you wouldn't do it -- but the necessity of removing Bradley from the team makes this probably about the best way to accomplish that. At best, this could turn into a Hundley-for-Grudzielanek-and-Karros sort of deal.

So, now the Cubs have a center fielder (with Fukudome moving back to his original position, right field, improving the outfield defense at two spots), but we are now at eight players and have only $23,625,000 left. They're fortunate that Geovany Soto is not yet arbitration-eligible, so let's say the Cubs bump him up to $825,000 from the $575,000 he made in 2009. That's a pretty good raise, given the bad year he had. Now we're at $22,800,000. Backup catcher Koyie Hill made $475,000 in 2009 and had a good year for a backup. Let's move him up to $600,000, leaving $22,200,000.

I'm going to leave the double-play combination alone for 2010. It's likely that by 2011, Starlin Castro will be the Cubs' starting shortstop -- but for now, because Lou and Jim like them, Jeff Baker and Ryan Theriot will return. Baker made $415,000 in 2009 and had a good run after he was acquired from Colorado -- one of Hendry's best moves last year. Let's pay him $500,000, and Theriot $700,000, both up from 2009. That's 12 players, and $21,000,000 remaining for the other 13 -- we're getting to the point where we can actually think about signing a free agent or two or making a deal.

Among our 12 signed players so far are nine hitters -- so, given the current fad of having 12 pitchers on your staff, we have room for four more offensive players. I like Andres Blanco and Sam Fuld -- both performed well in backup roles in 2009. Neither hits much, but both play outstanding defense and neither is going to be expected to start more than a handful of games. Fuld made $401,500 and Blanco $400,000 (the minimum) in 2009, and let's give them both raises to $425,000. We are at 14 players and have $20,050,000 left. We'll need one more outfielder and also a guy who could fill the role that was filled in 2007 and 2008 by Daryle Ward, and in 2009 by Micah Hoffpauir.

Sad to say, I'm non-tendering Micah. He's 30 in March and didn't really do well most of last year -- he's a one-dimensional player, since he's really not a very good outfielder, and didn't do well in the dimension (hitting) he was supposedly good at. Since we're no longer locked in to the "lefthanded" mantra of a year ago, the Cubs can put the minimum-wage Jake Fox -- bumped up to $500,000 for his good performance of a year ago -- in this slot, and re-sign Rowand's close friend Reed Johnson for $3 million to fill in when his buddy hits the brick wall at Wrigley too many times.

So, we now have $16,550,000 left for nine pitchers -- which means we're going to have to fill most of the bullpen with minimum-wage guys. That's actually fine with me -- look at the disaster that was Aaron Heilman last year (in my opinion, Heilman should be non-tendered) -- and the Cubs have a couple of real good prospects, in my opinion, to fill middle-relief roles in Justin Berg and Esmailin Caridad. They get the minimum $400,000 each, leaving $15,750,000 for seven more pitchers. It was reported earlier this week that the Cubs are negotiating a two-year deal with John Grabow; reported figures are "between $6.5 and $7.5 million" for the two years. Let's assume for this post that it's in between, and Grabow gets $3.5 million for 2010. We've got $12,250,000 left and six spots to fill on the pitching staff. Carlos Marmol is going to close; he made $575,000 in 2009, so let's bump him to $800,000. Angel Guzman will be his primary right-handed setup guy (Grabow's the lefty setup guy, or should be, if Lou would ever use him right). Guzman made $421,500 in 2009; he could be renewed at $500,000.

Our payroll drawer is nearly empty (you can almost count the remaining Benjamins, right?); we have $10,950,000 remaining and still need to fill three spots, one in the pen, and two in the starting rotation, and here's where it gets a bit dicey (and this is why I left this part for last). First, you can fill one of the starting spots with Randy Wells, who made the minimum last year and certainly deserves a raise; let's put him at $750,000 (or maybe even a bit less; he's renewable, meaning you don't have to give him that much of a raise until he's arb-eligible next year), leaving $10,200,000. The Cubs have five free agents: Rich Harden, John Grabow, Kevin Gregg, Chad Fox and Reed Johnson. I already re-signed Johnson and Grabow above; Gregg and Fox, thanks for your service, see you in another uniform next year (and please, Jim, not another minor-league invite for Chad Fox. He's done).

But what to do with Harden? If you offer him arbitration, he'll almost certainly accept. To paraphrase Longfellow's nursery rhyme, "When he's good, he's very, very good; when he's bad, he's horrid". If Harden accepts arbitration, he's likely to get pretty close to all the remaining dollars in the drawer -- so reluctantly, we say goodbye to Rich, without the arb offer, unless you can somehow agree ahead of time to get him to sign for $8 million or so. That's not unreasonable given his $7 million salary in 2009 and his mediocre performance.

For the sake of argument, then, let's say we have this $10,950,000 available for our two remaining spots. One of those spots is going to go to Sean Marshall, who, I believe, deserves another shot at the starting rotation after doing a good job as a swingman in 2009. Lou misused him as a LOOGY -- Marshall can clearly do better than getting one LH batter out -- and I'd like to see Sean, now 27 and with four major league seasons under his belt, get a shot at starting. Sean made $450,000 in 2009, and could be paid $600,000 in 2010. In this scenario Samardzija makes the team, likely because the Cubs are paying him the $1 million whether he makes it or not. Otherwise there are other possibilities, including Arizona Fall Leaguers John Gaub and Andrew Cashner, or maybe someone else who will have a good spring (and please, let's not have another David Patton scenario), for this final spot.

That leaves $10,350,000 (or just under $10 million if you use Gaub or Cashner, who would make the minimum). You could consider signing someone like Jon Garland, who just got his option declined by the Dodgers and is a free agent. Garland made $7.25 million in 2009 and had a "typical" Garland year, which is as an inning-eater; you could probably get him for about $8 million for 2010. Garland has made at least 32 starts for eight straight years, and has pitched no fewer than 191.2 innings in any of those eight. Doing that would take the pressure off the staff, especially if Ted Lilly isn't ready for Opening Day, and would let Marshall play the "swingman" role again. Or you could give that last rotation spot to Tom Gorzelanny, who made $433,000 in 2009, and save the money for a midseason acquisition.

Note that I haven't gone all DeRomantic here and proposed bringing back Mark DeRosa, although I think he'd still be a solid addition, even at age 35, for the right price, and a note in this St. Louis Post-Dispatch article indicates the Cubs may indeed make DeRo an offer. I also haven't retained Mike Fontenot, who could probably be traded -- I mentioned above non-tendering Heilman, but it may be possible that both Fontenot and Heilman could be dealt, even for low-level prospects. In fact, my 2010 team as proposed above has only two players (Rowand and Garland) who were not with the Cubs at some point in 2009 -- unless they decided not to go with Jake Fox in the bench role and instead signed a free agent (or one who soon will be) such as Ross Gload or Chad Tracy, whose option was declined by the Diamondbacks yesterday. Still, despite all the travails, injuries and bad performances in 2009, the Cubs won 83 games. With performances returning to career norms, better health and a little luck, just a few tweaks could have us returning to the postseason in 2010.

Cubs' Ted Lilly undergoes shoulder surgery

Eli Greenspan — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:19:46 -0000

More photos » by Nam Y Huh - AP

Browse more photos »

Bad News Cubs.

Bruce Miles of the Arlington Heights Daily Herald is reporting that Cubs pitcher Ted Lilly underwent arthroscopic shoulder surgery yesterday and could miss the start of the regular season. Lilly, who has been the Cubs' most reliable starter in recent years, says he hopes to start throwing in four months.

"The idea is maybe to start throwing in four months or so," he said. "A lot of that is going to be dictated on just how the rehab goes. That can change one way or another. My intention is to get back as soon as I can without setting myself back."

Since signing with the Cubs, Lilly has gone 44-26 with a 3.67 ERA. Entering a contract year in 2010, you can bet that Lilly wants to get back to the mound as soon as possible.

How will this impact the Cubs' moves this offseason?

The Cubs are not expected to bring back Rich Harden, meaning a spot will open up in the rotation. Currently, the rotation will look something like this: Carlos Zambrano, Ted Lilly, Ryan Dempster, Randy Wells, and either Tom Gorzelanny or Jeff Samardzija.

With Lilly out, it seems even more imperative that the Cubs bring in a veteran arm to give the Cubs some stability at the back-end of their rotation. Free agent pitcher Randy Wolf could be an option for that role.

Other options include Javier Vazquez of the Braves through a trade, or free agents Justin Duchscherer, Brett Myers, or Joel Piniero.

Sam's 2010 Offseason Plan

Sam Page — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:00:30 -0000

Take this post for what it is, subject to change and wishful thinking. I intended this plan to be realistic in the sense that all the trades and signings are possible, but not realistic in that I think it's what the Mets will actually do--that's another post for another time. So without further ado:

The Major Moves:

Sign Matt Holliday to a 6/$110 Million contract, starting salary $17MM--Maybe he will only sign for five years, but I think at age 36 he would still be at least an adequate outfielder given his skillset. I already made most of the case for Holliday here, but especially in a year where the Mets have a protected first round pick, he seems like a perfect fit. Jason Bay will be a DH in a few years, given how precipitously his fielding has declined. He's an acceptable backup plan, only if he'll take significantly fewer years, which he probably won't. The way Mets fans deified non-entities like Xavier Nady makes me think a they'll go crazy having a legitimately great corner-outfielder for the first time in a long time
Trade Bobby Parnell and Wilmer Flores to the Rays for Carlos Peña--I don't understand why Mets fans think it is smart or even efficient to resign firstbase to being played by someone like Daniel Murphy, if we sign Matt Holliday. It's not like the Mets were just middle-of-the-pack offensively last year, they were bottom of the barrel. With the largest payroll in the National League, why not try and fill all the team's holes with at least players who are average or better at their position? The Rays are motivated to sell Peña, being in his walk-year and making $10.5MM. They have a few a infielders on their bench, who could start on most teams (Aybar, Rodriguez), so they'll be most interested in a cheap set-up caliber reliever. Parnell fits that description easily--he's still making league minimum and posted a 3.80 tRA in the bullpen his rookie season. Wilmer Flores makes up the difference in value; he's the kind of super-athletic shortstop prospect the Rays love to hoard. For the Mets, Pena solves the "not enough homers" problem; he tied Mark Teixeira for the AL homerun crown, despite missing nearly all of September with a fractured hand. He has elite plate-discipline and the batting average will probably rebound a bit. If healthy, Peña is also an above-average defender and could easily be worth 4 WAR over a full season.
Sign Rich Harden to a 1-year/$10 million contract with incentives and a mutual option for a second season--See the above link on Matt Holliday for why I also don't want John Lackey. The best way to not get locked into bad contracts is to not give them. A one year deal to Rich Harden is the type of gamble a team with the Mets payroll should take. He's injury prone, having pitched just 140 innings the last two seasons, but in just 140 innings he can be worth 4+ WAR. He was just 1.8 WAR this season according to fangraphs, but that was due to bad luck with homers, which is reflected by his xFIPs being extremely consistent from year-to-year. Any argument to sign Lackey instead of Harden proves how overrated past durability is with pitchers. Coupling Harden with a good above-replacement contingency plan(s) likely costs less than Lackey, is incredibly more valuable than Lackey, will likely provide more innings than Lackey, and doesn't carry the huge risk of giving an injury prone pitcher in his 30s a multi-year contract.
Trade Jeff Francoeur to the Cubs for Mike Fontenot.--The Cubs will eventually dump Milton Bradley, and will look to replace him with an "RBI-guy" in rightfield. RBI's are Jeff Francoeur's specialty. Mike Fontenot magically amassed 3 WAR in under 250 plate appearances in 2007. In 2008, the Cubs gave him more responsibility then leaned toward trading him when his batting average sunk. As mentioned in that article, they still view him as trade bait. With such high BABIPs in past seasons, his batting average will likely rebound. I'd bet his true skill is somewhere in between .296 wOBA player of last year, or the .395 wOBA player of the year before, maybe the league average hitter of 2006. Even if he is only an average hitter, though, his fantastic defense (9.6 UZR/150) will make him more valuable than Castillo. Having a good defensive secondbaseman will be even more important with the young groundball pitchers Pelfrey and Niese in the rotation next year.

The Minor Moves:

Sign Carl Pavano 1 year/$6 million dollar contract--Pavano will likely half to accept another short-term commitment, because of his surface numbers and lingering injury concerns, but he actually pitched quite well last season. His 4.00 FIP reflects all-around good peripherals, consistent with his career numbers. Citi Field might help suppress his high HR/FB%, and a move to the National League can only help his strikeouts. At 3.7 WAR last season, he would have easily been the most valuable pitcher on the Mets. He'll likely be the best value on the market, and would solidify a rotation with a lot injury risk.
Sign Kiko Calero 2 years/$5 million dollar contract--Calero quietly posted a 2.38 tRA this season. Here's a pretty good summary on his attractiveness as a free agent, if 2.38 didn't convince you. He would be a definite upgrade over Parnell. I see him signing with the team that offers a multi-year deal.
Sign Adam Everett 1 year/$1 million--Here, I want a player that can step in and start, without dragging the whole team down with his poor play, if Jose's injuries become complicated. His defense isn't what it used to be but it's still great.
Sign Greg Zaun 1 year/$800,000--I waffled on this, but Omir Santos needs to go back to the minors. He's a minor league player who can't hit anything but fastballs, and pitchers will make the adjustment eventually. Zaun provides plate discipline and defense that is negligibly worse than Santos' and somewhat better than Bengie Molina's. Thole may be an adventure in the field, but if it gets too bad, Zaun has the bat to be a starter, without costing Molina-money.
Sign Endy Chavez 1 year/$1.5 million--Our hero. He's like Adam Everett for the outfield! He'll be coming off surgery, so it probably would not even cost this much to sign him. Even if he's lost a step, he's eons better than Francoeur in the field, so much better suited for a bench role.
Sign Shawn Hill 1 year/$400K--He was recently released by the Padres, but he's got a 4.11 career FIP. He's injury prone, but keeping both him and Maine around is a pretty good insurance plan for an already filled-out rotation.
Sign Mike Sweeney 1 year/$600K--Sweeney got his PhD in fixing fractured, mutli-cultural clubhouses from the 2009 Mariners (not that those things are necessarily related, or exactly describe the Mets). Anyone who liked Francoeur for his attitude will love Sweeney. His skills as a right-handed platoon bat are redundant with Nick Evans also around, but he'd be brought in just as much for his intangibles than abilities.
Sign Kelvim Escobar to a 1 year contract with incentives/max value $2.5 million--The former Angels ace is on the recovery path and would add dimension to the pitching staff as a cheap, worthwhile gamble in the bullpen.
Trade Luis Castillo to the Royals for virtually nothing--I'd bet they'd take him. Getting rid of Castillo is a priority, as I think he is a huge risk to totally bust in 2010. His continuing diminished range caps his value at ~1.5 WAR, and indicates his knees really aren't getting any better. He compensated for the lack of speed last year by taking an absurd amount of pitches and hitting a career-high percentage of line drives. There's no reason to expect him to repeat either of those feats in 2010. Sell high.

Overall thoughts:

On the hitting side, the lineup has patience, power, speed, and contact skills without any obvious holes. Never watching that squad would I think, "here's Santos-Cora-Valdez, 1-2-3." The bench re-emphasizes defense, something severely lacking from last year's backups, and features all players good enough to start on some team, but who aren't expecting starting jobs. Of the 26 players listed, 8 could be considered rotation candidates, which gives flexibility on who makes the opening-day roster and in case of an injury, no Pat Misches or Livan Hernadezes have to start. There's no obviously crappy reliever who fits in under the guise of "long man" but has no other usefulness or upside. Most importantly, this roster allows the AAA class of prospects (Davis, Martinez, Mejia, and Holt) to stay in AAA as depth options or emergency trade candidates, in case Harden, Pavano, Maine, and Hill all blow out their elbows. I could see 95 wins, and with good health, the upside for much more. Now go wild with your own proposals.

No Choice At All: Holliday>Lackey

Sam Page — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:00:26 -0000

Yesterday, Jon Heyman "tweeted" that the Mets wouldn't be pushing hard for John Lackey. I was happy to hear this news, but puzzled when I read on metsblog that 69% of their readers would prefer Lackey to Matt Holliday, assuming a choice between the two. For those of you wanting Lackey, hopefully I can try and account for this gap in fan perception and persuade you otherwise. Remember, Mets fans (who participate in those metsblog polls), you have been wrong before:

The case for John Lackey: In 2009, the Mets had one of the worst rotations in baseball. While injuries decimated the team, the rotation was clearly flawed by design, doomed from the start. John Maine was hardly a sure thing, having not thrown off a mound until the spring. And whether you realized it at the time or not, Oliver Perez, the reigning walk leader, was probably the most overrated starting pitcher in baseball and doomed to be average at best. Sure, he pitched well in 2007, but his ERA was just as much a product of the Mets great outfield defense as it was his comeback (FIP of 4.35). Next season, his walk rate regressed closer to his career mark, his strikeout rate dipped, and his fastball velocity lost a tick. In fact, his 2008 season more closely resembled his (3-13 6.55 ERA) 2006 season than his breakout 2007. Don't believe me?

via statcorner

In fact, the only thing Perez did better in 2008 compared to '06 was throw called strikes, the least important indicator. So what was the difference between 3-13 6.55 and 10-7 4.22? He gave up significantly fewer homeruns in 2008, despite an identical FB%, largely a product of luck. He also had a .288 BABIP, compared to .336 in 2008, which implicates (among other things) a better defense behind him. The better W/L record is entirely a product of playing on the Mets versus the Pirates.

Did I just spend all that time rehashing why people were wrong about Perez to rub it in? No, I understand why Perez was attractive at the time: relatively young, durable, and with good stuff. I bought an Oliver Perez jersey in 2007. The Perez situation, however, demonstrates some key lessons applicable to why I don't want the Mets to spend on Lackey, instead of Holliday. That is NOT to say John Lackey, a very good pitcher, is comparable to Oliver Perez, a very poor pitcher.

Instead, Oliver Perez neatly illustrates why nearly all free agent pitchers get overrated. Most fans have a hard time differentiating a pitcher's performance from his team's fielding. The Earned Run Average statistic has much to do with this; ERA measures how a team's defense performs when a given pitcher is on the mound. Defense includes fielding and pitching. Statistics like tRA and FIP that try and differentiate between these two performances aren't perfect, but are empirically pretty accurate. The conclusion here is not that John Lackey is overrated by his defense, but that he would have posted a worse ERA for the horrible-fielding 2009 Mets than he did on the above-average 2009 Angels.

As an illustration, take the most common argument for John Lackey: "The Mets need a good #2 starting pitcher to complement Johan Santana." Totally reasonable, but has no one asked why this sentiment didn't exist last year, when the Mets had the exact same personnel? Could it be because most fans hoped that Mike Pelfrey with his 3.72 ERA, lower than John Lackey's 2008 and 2007 ERAs, could that solid #2?

In 2009, Pelfrey pitched almost exactly the same as he did in 2008. He even flashed a better slider. His strikeout rate improved. His walk rate went up a little, but he threw a fewer percentage of balls. The main difference? He allowed more homeruns and more hits, basically the anti-2008 Oliver Perez. The Mets infield defense was horrible, and I've beat this dead horse thoroughly by now. Without Reyes, and with an under-performing David Wright and increasingly bad Luis Castillo, Pelfrey's ERA went up because the defense on days he pitched was worse, not him. If Pelfrey had a 3.72 ERA this season, would you vote differently on Holliday/Lackey?

Secondly, Oliver Perez demonstrates that pitchers too often get paid for what they did, not what they're likely to do. Many people, including myself and Matt Cerrone believe Omar Minaya only thinks about what was wrong with last year's team, not what could go wrong next year, when constructing a roster. It's a valid criticism, but is little good, unless we identify high-risk players and situations. Pitchers, in general, are less likely to repeat feats of durability or performances from years before, both because of the injury-risks associated with pitching and the aforementioned factors outside of their control. John Lackey, who gets described with terms like "bulldog" and "workhorse," has come off two straight seasons where he has missed time with conditions such as "elbow strain" and "arm strain." He'll be 32 next year, and while he still pitches very well, he has experienced a yearly drop in swinging strikes since 2005, a potential sign of declining stuff.

Instead of potentially risking another franchise crippling contract, why not pursue Erik Bedard, Rich Harden, and Ben Sheets on a year-to-year basis? All three of those pitchers have poor track records of health, but undeniable stuff. Harden-Bedard combined could reasonably be estimated to provide the same results as Lackey. More importantly, however, with a better fielding, the Mets have some pitchers in-house who might also provide similar results to Lackey.

The case for Matt Holliday: Matt Holliday would go a long way towards helping the Mets defense. He gets a bad rap because of his below-average hands and poor arm, the most notable traits to the average onlooker. These traits are also the least important, however, as a fielder's range most greatly influences the number of hits, and in turn runs, his pitcher allows. According to Ultimate Zone Rating, throughout his career, Holliday's arm has been 15.8 runs below average, his errors have cost virtually no runs compared to the average leftfielder, but his range has been 48 runs above average. The Mets already have Jeff Francoeur's cannon manning rightfield. They could most use a rangy leftfielder to complement Beltran in Citi Field's huge outfield. For another source, check out John Dewan's +/- rank of the best left fielders in 2009:

Offensively, Holliday is elite. Much ado was made about Holliday's home/road splits and how the related to Coors before this season, but Holliday still hit very well, albeit with expectedly fewer homeruns. If anyone still cites his home/road splits, read this:

Players perform better at home than on the road, all else being equal. That's what causes a home-field advantage! Across MLB in 2008, the average home OPS was .770 while the average road OPS was .730.

Holliday's away parks don't include Coors field, while all other National Leaguer players' away parks do. In other words, his away parks lean towards pitching parks, pulling down his numbers.

Using only road numbers ignores more than half of the data we have on Holliday. How is that a good thing? It's a much better idea to use ALL the data available and do a proper park adjustment.

There very well might be a "Coors Hangover Effect". Since breaking balls don't break as much and flyballs are rewarded big time in Coors, Rockies hitters might be hurt on the road because they can no longer count on those advantages. I haven't seen any conclusive studies for or against this theory, but the Rockies do tend to have more extreme home/road winning percentage splits than other teams.

Why are we using career numbers? Why not the most recent seasons? Holliday's road OPS numbers from 2006 through 2008 are .819, .860, and .892. That's an average of .857 and a 5/4/3 weighted average of .863. (Thanks to reader dougdirt who provided #5 in the comments.)

He hit fewer homeruns and linedrives, but still walked a ton and hit for high-average. He's a great hitter, even if he is not the insane hitter he was before. Another argument I've heard against Holliday is that he only started hitting when he got to St. Louis, and that his numbers are the product of one hot streak. This point makes little sense to me, because:

All hitters numbers are reflections of hot and cold streaks throughout the season
St. Louis is a pitcher's park that deflates homers significantly
He had started to hit in Oakland before the trade
Splitting the numbers up like that only makes the sample size smaller and lessens the potential of making a meaningful conclusion

That leaves "AL is harder than NL" which is both overblown and irrelevant if he'll be signing with the Mets.

Conclusion: John Lackey is a very good pitcher and may very well be worth whatever contract he receives. Matt Holliday, however, is younger, carries significantly less injury risk, and helps the entire pitching staff with his fielding. Pitching performances like John Lackey's last year are replicated by plenty of surprising and unexpected players every season (think Joel Piniero). A long-term investment in Matt Holliday solves a gaping hole the Mets have endured in their lineup and fielding alignment for years now.

10/23 - Mole Day; Wake and Papi Prepare to Come Back With A Vengeance

bs.uf15bosox9bears23 — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 09:00:25 -0000

It's Mole Day!!! /chemistry nerd who wishes he could have set this to publish at 6:02

Wakefield upbeat after good news - Clubhouse Insider

Wakefield looking for 200 wins - Extra Bases

Hope he can get a lot closer after next season - would be nice if he's healthy for the entire year and gets within single digits. As stupid a stat as WINZ is, it still carries a lot value among the media, meaning most fans as well.

Theo: Big Papi Will be Ready for 2010 - Fenway West

Full Count " How a Hitting Coach and Little League Saved Ortiz’ Season

"I said, ‘[Expletive] it – I’m going to play like it’s Little League." I’m serious about this. One day, I woke up and I went, ‘Okay, I guess I’ve got nothing to lose anymore. I’m way behind what I’m normally used to. I’ll go to the field today, and not do [expletive]. I’m just going to act like I’m in Little League,’" Ortiz said late in the regular season.

This explains so much - it probably came naturally to him, being the big kid that he is.

Pros & Cons: Rich Harden - The Bottom Line

He's got pretty good mechanics, so he shouldn't be having any more issues. If he's not getting much interest, he'd be a great option to look into - 28 years old (NG-approved age), good pitches, wouldn't be asked to be a front-line starter.

After the jump, it's one of our fellow SB Nation bloggers vs. a famous former Sox employee (hint: stats), and we continue the theme of the offseason, looking back and forward at the same time.

Jason Bay vs. Matt Holliday, Bill James vs. devil_fingers: Free Agent Projection Showdown - Driveline Mechanics

Who is the better free agent in the hot stove season, Matt Holliday or Jason Bay? And what do the Bill James projecions have to say about it?

Double connection to the Sox here: the decision between Bay and Holliday, and a look at how well one of the biggest names in sabermetrics is keeping up with the rest of his field.

The 2009 Red Sox Minor League System - Sox Tea Party

Boston is fed through their farm system and the 2009 season proved to be successful for the organization, but how does the system look going forward?

Hope the minor league coverage that USG and others have provided will help y'all recognize at least a few names.

Theo speaks on offseason, Drew, and philosophies - Full Count

Full transcript, for your critical analyzing pleasure. Any hidden messages?

Padres general manager decision may impact Red Sox trade options - Red Sox Monster

In baseball's personnel market, relationships are also important. Be it because of personal comfort, previous success or shared values, certain teams seem to make trades with the Red Sox more frequently, while others are more likely to leave a flaming bag of poo on Theo Epstein's door step (I'm looking at you, Colorado).

Pretty funny look at Hoyer's departure to San Diego and its impacts.

An MLB Infield's Greatest Offensive Season - Bleacher Report

Cool little history lesson - it'd be interesting to see if anyone can disprove the claim that this is the best though.

Odds & Ends: Parker, Okajima, Kikuchi, La Russa - MLBTradeRumors.com

Red Sox reliever Hideki Okajima has dismissed agent Peter Greenberg in favor of Boston-based Joe Rosen, according to a Japanese report passed along by NPB Tracker's Ryo Shinkawa. Shinkawa takes this as a sign Okajima wants to stay with the Red Sox. He is already under team control through 2012 as an arbitration-eligible player.

Yusei Kikuchi's NPB-vs.-MLB decision seems to be coming within a few days, says Patrick Newman of NPB Tracker.

So my interpretation of the translation wasn't horribly wrong. Anxious about Kikuchi's decision, too - could be a good indicator of how the Dice-K effect has trickled down.

Zach Daeges looks to resume promising career following ankle surgery - projo.com

BOSTON –– Red Sox outfield prospect Zach Daeges is recovering well following ankle surgery to remove an extra bone in his foot last month, and expects that the problem that caused him to miss the entire season is behind him.

"It’s going good. I just got out of the boot the other day, so it’s going good," Daeges said from his Iowa home.

Based on Jed's situation, this means that Daeges will never amount to anything right? We should be surprised that he was even able to remove the boot without snapping his ankle?

Boston Red Sox Fans Fear a New York Yankees World Series - The Faster Times

I asked some Red Sox bloggers about how they were holding up over the possibility of the Yankees winning a World Championhip. Guess what? They're not happy.

Again, Go Phils!

I want to see Avogadro's number of comments on this post - links, comments, homework problems will all be addressed if left here.

Wakefield To Undergo Surgery, Likely to Return for 2010

USG — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:56:52 -0000

More photos » by Eric Shelton - ASSOCIATED PRESS

3 months ago: Boston Red Sox starter Tim Wakefield delivers to the Oakland Athletics during the first inning of their baseball game at Fenway Park in Boston, Wednesday, July 8, 2009. (AP Photo/Eric Shelton)

Browse more photos »

Tim Wakefield is set to undergo surgery Wednesday to fix the herniated disk in his back, a procedure which shouldn't stop him from coming back next season. Assuming all goes well, Theo seems happy to have him back.

"Wake is someone that is in our plans and we hope makes starts for us next year and is a member of the rotation," said Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein during his Monday press conference. "We haven’t sat down and finalized anything. Obviously we want to see how the surgery goes and then both sides will sit down and talk."

Wake was, as usual, worth more than his $4 million option last year. So long as the Sox can keep getting the same level of production out of him, it makes sense to have him back. Given his age and fragility, though, expect the Sox to either have a backup for Wakefield, or to use the Knuckleballer in a back-up role himself.

The Sox will likely fill the 5th/6th starter position with another low risk, high reward candidate. While the strategy proved unsuccessful last year, with both Brad Penny and John Smoltz proving to be of little help, Theo Epstein recently stood by his decision, and suggested the team would try it again. Certainly, though, this year's crop of names is rather more impressive, with Erik Bedard, Justin Duchsherer, Rich Harden, and Ben Sheets highliting the list.

Poll

What should Tim Wakefield's role be with the 2010 Red Sox?

5th starter.

147 votes

6th starter/long relief. Sign a low-risk, high-reward free agent.

69 votes

6th starter/long relief. John Lackey is worth top dollar!

31 votes

None. Decline his option.

25 votes

Other (Comment away!)

2 votes

274 votes | Poll has closed

Thursday Evening Quick Hits

Eli Greenspan — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:11:15 -0000

More photos » by Pat Sullivan - AP

Browse more photos »

Here are some links compiled from this Thursday's headlines:

The Boston Herald suggests that the Red Sox may target another oft-injured pitcher this offseason. The Cubs reportedly have no plans to offer Rich Harden a new deal, meaning he will be a free agent without restrictions. Recently, the Red Sox have gone after veteran arms to help stock their rotation, and Harden could be on their list for 2010. In the past, they have signed Brad Penny, John Smoltz, and Bartolo Colon, among others.
Rangers hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo declined a one year offer from the Rangers to test the market. He may not be around long, though. The Cubs are in need of a hitting coach and a veteran like Jaramillo certainly fits the bill. Jaramillo is credited with developing several of the games top hitters, including Jeff Bagwell, Mark Teixeira, and Michael Young, among others.
The Tigers have committed a lot of money to players for the 2010 season, which may impact their spending this offseason. Free agents Fernando Rodney, Brandon Lyon, and Placido Polanco are all due for new contracts, and could very well be playing for new teams in 2010. Polanco could be an option for the Cubs at the top of their order.
Formers Brewers manager Ned Yost interviewed for the Astros managerial position today. Yost played a role in the t u rnaround of the Brewers, who reached the playoffs for the first time in over a decade last season. They still have seven candidates to interview, including Manny Acta who is set to go tomorrow.

2009-10 Do-It-Yourself Offseason Trade/Free Agent Post

Al — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:01:23 -0000

More photos » by Mark Avery - AP

Some guy named Brian Roberts. Ever heard of him? Me, either.

Browse more photos »

This morning, wrote that the Cubs are interested in acquiring . Cubs GM Jim Hendry . Meanwhile, Hendry said that Milton Bradley would be traded to the . Hendry also said that Rich Harden , and that Carlos Zambrano . Former Cub Mark DeRosa while Bradley was offered to the . The Cubs tried to get the to take Aaron Miles' contract, but they refused because . In the upcoming Rule 5 draft, the Cubs are going to select . The Cubs' plans for Sam Fuld in 2010 include Brian Roberts was located and had this comment on his possible trade to the Cubs: Finally, manager Lou Piniella's comments about the rumors included:

Tell Your Statistics To Speak Up

Al — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:28:36 -0000

View full size photo »

Over the four and a half years that BCB has been in existence, many discussions and debates have taken place here over the value of statistical analysis in baseball.

Despite what you may think, I am not anti-statistics, nor anti-intellectual. I am fully aware of the value of modern advanced metrics, what they are, and how they can be used. However, I believe they are not an end in and of themselves; they need to be used in conjunction with scouting techniques and other forms of analysis of people.

With that said, I realize that many people here do enjoy discussion of advanced metrics and how they apply to baseball situations and in particular, the Cubs. Since I admit that statistical analysis is neither something I am that comfortable in doing myself, nor do I have the time to do detailed studies, I am pleased to announce that as of today, I am adding BCB reader shawndgoldman (whose name, as you likely could guess from his user name, is Shawn Goldman) to the staff to do stat-oriented pieces.

I've given Shawn free rein to write about any topic he chooses. He'll post on an occasional basis during the offseason and likely more often as the 2010 season comes closer and begins next April. Shawn does excellent analysis and, as you saw in his post comparing Milton Bradley to a salesman from a month or so ago, he also writes and explains his methodology well.

Please join me in welcoming Shawn to the BCB front-page staff and I know we'll all learn much from his posts.

Here's something we can also chew on while the long off-season begins. This isn't statistical analysis per se, but I wanted to post some of the Cubs' W-L splits from 2009, because they seem odd to me in several ways, and wondered if any of you have any ideas as to why certain things happened the way they did -- not just for the team, but for some individual players in particular.

The Cubs were 47-32 against the NL Central in 2009. That's the best record for any team in the National League within its own division, slightly better than the Reds and Cardinals, who were 46-34. Why, then, could the Cubs post only a 30-37 mark outside the division? Of the other ten teams, three of them were 90+ loss clubs (Mets, Nationals, Diamondbacks). But the Cubs were only 9-10 against those bad teams, while going 10-4 against the 99-loss Pirates.

The Cubs were also 44-33 in day games, but 39-45 in night games. The 84 night games played (would have been 85 if not for Thursday's rainout) is about 20 fewer than most teams; I assume that sometime soon, new ownership will petition the city to amend the current night game ordinance to allow perhaps 10 more home night games, with permission to schedule maybe 3 or 4 a year on Friday nights after road trips. The Cubs were the only team in baseball with a winning record in 2009 to have a losing record in night games. Why is this? Is it simply a one-year anomaly? (The 2007 Cubs, whose 85-77 record was similar to this year's, were 42-39 in night games and last year's team was 49-35.)

We are all aware of the bizarre day/night splits of Rich Harden (6-4, 2.81 in 14 daylight starts, 3-5, 5.93 in 12 night game outings), as well as his home/road troubles (3-7, 5.99 in 15 home starts, 6-2, 2.00 in 11 road starts). Why did this happen? Ted Lilly had just the reverse problem: 8-2, 1.87 in 13 starts at Wrigley, 4-7, 4.41 in 14 starts on the road. Are these one-year freaks? Or something to look out for next season?

Anyway, those seemed interesting to me; pick 'em apart, and soon Shawn will make his first front-page BCB post. Again, welcome, Shawn!

Sam Fuld's First Two Career RBI Lead Cubs To 5-2 Loss To Diamondbacks

Al — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:37:42 -0000

More photos » by Paul Beaty - AP

Sam Fuld was everywhere today. Here, he gets tagged out in a rundown.

Browse more photos »

It figures, doesn't it? In this season that has made very little sense since Opening Day?

Sam Fuld, who has actually had a fairly productive rookie season, finishing just short of .300 (29-for-97, .299) and with an OPS of .821, came within two at-bats of becoming only the fifth player in major league history with as many plate appearances as he had this year (112 coming into today) with zero RBI -- and three of those were pitchers. Here is the complete list, not including today's game.

Instead, "Little Sam Fuld", as Vin Scully called him when he made that diving catch in Dodger Stadium in August, took advantage of a west wind howling out to right field and launched a fly ball that made it into the first row of the right-field bleachers for his first major league home run and RBI. Later, Sam drove in the Cubs' second run of the day with a groundout. (The wind also blew over my Super Big Gulp, nearly full, only five minutes after the gates opened. In past years spilling this drink has been considered by us as "good luck" for a Cubs win. Silly superstition, yes -- but it didn't portend the right thing today.)

That would have made for a great story if those had been the only two runs of the game; unfortunately, Fuld wasn't the only player taking advantage of the wind. The Diamondbacks' Chris Young, who has made a career of hitting homers at Wrigley Field, hit his fifth lifetime home run at Wrigley off Ryan Dempster with two men on base in the fourth inning, and that was the difference in the Cubs' season-ending 5-2 loss to Arizona, leaving the season record at 83-78, seven and a half games behind the Cardinals, who also lost today (and who enter the postseason, ominously, on a losing note -- they lost eight of their last ten regular season games).

Curiosities abounded today -- in addition to Fuld's feats, Dempster struck out ten, tying his season high and giving him the club leadership for the 2009 season at 172, one more than Rich Harden. One of the K's allowed Gerardo Parra to reach base on a wild pitch. That allowed Dempster to register four strikeouts in the fifth inning. That's the 52nd time in baseball history that a pitcher has done that; Dempster becomes the fifth Cub to do it. Here is the complete list of those who have accomplished this feat; the last Cub to do it was Kerry Wood in the second game of a doubleheader on September 2, 2002. That one was notable because in the fourth inning of that game, when Wood registered four K's, there was an out recorded other than a strikeout; Wood wild-pitched two runners on base.

Also, apart from the delayed 2001 regular season, which ended on October 7 due to the one-week suspension after the 9/11 attacks, this is the latest regular season date ever at Wrigley Field.

Dempster finishes the year with a 3.65 ERA, higher than he would have liked, I'm sure, but still within range of the 2.96 he recorded a year ago. He did manage to post a 200-inning season, something he'd been shooting for, and overall I think he had a very good year given the problems his daughter had after she was born on April 1. Dempster might have had an easier time today and maybe gotten a win, had So Taguchi not dropped Chad Tracy's popup in short left field. While it was not an easy play with the wind, Taguchi had it in his glove and then dropped it -- 3B umpire Ed Rapuano had even signaled "out" before the other umpires realized Taguchi had dropped it. That helped lead to the first two Arizona runs and after Young's homer, Lou played spring training rules with the bullpen, using four relievers to mop up for an inning each. They did all right, giving up only two hits and striking out six.

The Cubs went down meekly in the lat two innings and that, as they say, was that. Leaving the ballpark for the final time of a season that goes no further than the regular schedule is always sad, even on a day like today when the weather was sunny and decent for most of the afternoon. Jim Hendry has much work to do and as I noted this morning, he may have already begun. As noted in eths' FanShot, Von Joshua has already been dismissed as hitting coach, no real surprise, as his work didn't seem to produce any real results, and hitting coaches are often the designated management scapegoat.

We await changes and positive developments for 2010, and we go into this offseason with hope, as ever, that "next year is THE year". BCB isn't going anywhere, of course; we'll be here all offseason with updates, fun stuff and new things, so stick around. In the meantime, I leave this season as I do every season, with this quote from the late A. Bartlett Giamatti's The Green Fields of the Mind:

It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone. You count on it, rely on it to buffer the passage of time, to keep the memory of sunshine and high skies alive, and then just when the days are all twilight, when you need it most, it stops.