http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/wiggity01.shtml

Considering Ty Wigginton's stats recently, I was floored by how well he's produced since leaving Pittsburgh. I stacked him up against other hall of fame third basemen, and I was really surprised by what I found:

- He's almost 1/3 of the way to 3,000 hits, a plateau that surely would surely guarantee him enshrinement

- His .183 ISO is other-worldly, and for those who keep up with sabermatric statistics like isolated power (like me), we are both impressed and awed by Ty's proficiency here.

-Of his 137 HRs hit over just the last 8 years, 30 of them have come while playing 2B, a position not typically thought of as a power position. This places him in rarified company with players like Ryne Sandberg, Ernie Banks and other Cubs greats.

- Perhaps most convincingly, for his career, he has a .952 OPS while hitting at home or Comerica Park with runners on 2nd and 3rd, hitting a HR 10% of the time in that situation.

These are just a few of the many statistics that back up these assertions, and I implore you to consider these words carefully...

We just bought Sean Gallagher from the Padres.

http://twitter.com/RobBiertempfel/status/17974085939

From a few days ago:

A team source tells Dan Hayes of the North County Times that a "handful" of teams have called the Padres to discuss trading for right-hander Sean Gallagher.

Gallagher was designated for assignment by the Padres last week, but he's bound to attract some interest due to the considerable "buzz from his prospect days," says one baseball source. The 24-year-old right-hander was once a highly-regarded prospect in the Cubs system, but has only a 5.57 ERA over 60 major league appearances (23 starts). He posted a 5.40 ERA in 15 relief appearances with the Padres this season.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/38100573/ns/sports-player_news/

The Iwamura trade remains a head scratcher for me. To trade for him, when as John Perotto describes he was guaranteed to be non-tendered, means one of two things to me:

1. Neal Huntington felt that another team would either sign him for more short-term dollars or else provide him a longer-term contract, or both.

2. NH felt compelled to spend more than it would really take to acquire Akinori Iwamura should the Rays non-tender him.

Let's take the first option first, because it is the one that is most likely. What does this move say about NH? Besides the fact that he was not given a physical, which in and of itself seems a dubious decision, did NH really think there would be a bidding war on a second baseman coming back from injury, who had never been any better than league average? And if so, what did he think the offers for him might be? Can anyone see another team signing him after the 2009 season for more than $5 million? I don't. If we are to believe that NH really negotiated this deal based solely on wanting to acquire Iwamura to play for just one year for the Pirates, then I think we have to question not only his player assessment skills, but also his understanding of the broader MLB landscape.

But let's consider the 2nd option above. Am I really suggesting that NH felt somehow compelled to spend MORE than it would take to acquire Iwamura on the open market? Perhaps I am. But why? What would possess the general manager of a losing franchise to go out and spend money on "veterans," other team's castoffs, when there could be absolutely zero hope for their presence actually improving the W-L percentage? And if that was his prerogative, why in God's name would he want to actually spend MORE than the situation actually called for?

Ahhhh... welcome to Sloshy's world, where things aren't always what they seem.

Let's go back to the year 1997; some would say the last year of truly exciting baseball in Pittsburgh. The Pirates' bizarre, 2nd-place finish (79-83) came during a season when the team's payroll was an astounding $9 million. Total. All-in. Virtually every player was being paid within one standard deviation of league minimum.

This had to make people a little nervous, and by people I mean the MLBPA. If the Pirates' could somehow remain competitive with a payroll just over league minimum, what would stop other teams from driving down salaries? MLB was just 2 years removed from a player's strike and work stoppage that served as a tremendous black eye to the league. The MLBPA took notice.

When the 1995-2002 collective bargaining agreement ended, negotiations began toward the 2003-2006 agreement, and now the notion of revenue sharing is placed on the table to provide for equity amongst teams. MLB had seen revenues climb astronomically during this time, and teams in larger markets saw dramatically larger revenue streams than small market franchises.

Imagine, though, how the MLBPA might have seen the situation. Here, dollars are being taken away from the large market teams - a "luxury tax" was even being employed to "punish" free-spending teams - and it was being handed over to small market teams, which had demonstrated a far more thrifty approach to spending. What if those owners took the earnings from revenue sharing an pocketed it, or gave it to untested draftees while MLBPA's members sit at home un-signed?

I can't imagine the MLBPA not having something to say about how revenue-sharing dollars would be spent, and though the policy itself only states that the dollars must be used for baseball operations, could you not see an unwritten rule regarding some percentage being spent on veterans? Unwritten because the MLBPA's couldn't possibly mandate such a thing. But the implication could be that MLBPA concessions given during negotiations are never so permanent, as the CBA only lasts 4-5 years...

I could see the signings of Iwamura or Vazquez, or Burnitz and Hinske before them, being nothing more than "paying it forward" to keep the MLBPA happy. Though NH does seem to be smarter than Dave Littlefield, they are similar in this way, and it makes me wonder. Was, in fact, the frugality of some franchises like the Pirates a major sticking point to past CBAs? Was Frank Coonelly, one of Bud Selig's right hand men, hired to keep this system intact?

Far fetched? Sure... but not impossible.

I'm floating this idea from a philosophical stand point - essentially, if an alien from another planet looked at the Pirates' predicament, how would he (it?) recommend we move forward independent of any human emotions or hang-ups familiar to sports fans. Here's what I see him (it?) saying:

"Any expenditure by a basement dwelling team without talent in its system, intended to serve near term goals and not designed to serve the team's long term goals, are actually antithetical to improvement due to the MLB draft system rewarding the worst W-L teams the best pick.

"I would rather the owner pocket that money than negatively impact the team's chances at future (immediate) high draft picks. That goes for just about every free agent veteran on the team currently: Bobby Crosby, Iwamura, Dotel and Donnelly.  It goes doubly true for free agents like Adam Dunn circa 2008, who could have cost the Pirates the 2nd pick in the 2010 draft in exchange for 2 years of above average production.

"Exceptions in my mind can and should be made for bounce-back players acquired cheaply, especially when they may be retained for a longer period of time, and of course the advancement of prospects, as they can not be counted on to succeed, and if they do, are certainly worth the trade off in drafting status.

"That this goes against competitiveness in baseball is besides the point. That the Pirates are probably forced by MLB to spend money on veterans is besides the point. Acquisition of high end prospect talent should be the team's primary goal. Given the circumstances, and with a goal of systemic change, it is exceedingly the best way to go.

"While I am not calling for intentionally losing, any effort to stem the losing in the short term with external assets should be considered anti-future.

"Once prospects are acquired and the team is poised to be successful, the inclusion of high-paid free agents and trades for established players to augment prospects is advisable - needed even - and the trade off of losing high draft picks is sustained winning. When winning ceases, revert to efforts to attain high draft picks.

Any thoughts on this?

Projected 2010 Pirates Salaries

Position Players
C: Ryan Doumit - $3.65MM
1B: Unknown 1B
2B: Shelby Ford ~ $400K
3B: Andy LaRoche ~ $425K
SS: Brian Bixler ~ $400k
LF: Nate McLouth - $5.0MM
CF: Andrew McCutchen ~ $400k
RF: Brandon Moss ~ $415k
Total Position Players = $10.69MM + 1B salary

Bench
C: Jason Jaramillo ~ $415k
IF: Ramon Vazquez - $2.125
OF: Nyjer Morgan ~ $450k
IF: Unknown Bench Guy
OF: Unknown Bench Guy
Total Bench = $2.99MM + 2 Bench Salaries

Starting Rotation
Paul Maholm - $5MM
Unknown Pitcher
Ian Snell - $4.45MM
Zach Duke ~ $3MM
Russ Ohlendorf ~ $425K
Total Rotation = $12.875MM + SP Salary

Bullpen
Matt Capps ~ $3.5MM
Evan Meek ~ $400k
Sean Burnett ~ $425
Craig Hansen ~ $850K
Donald Veal ~ $425K
2 Unknown RP
Total Bullpen=$5.6MM + 2 Unknown RP

Additional Player Salaries
Pedro Alvarez = $2MM

Confirmed 2010 Contracts = $23.475MM
Total Estimated 2010 Contracts = $34.155MM
+ Starting 1B, 2 Bench, 1 SP, 2 RP

2009 Payroll = $52.268MM

Difference = $18.133MM
__________________________________________________

The above list assumes many things, primarily that the players on the 25 now pretty much remain as is going into next season with the exception of the rent-a-vets. I also took Jeff Karstens out of the running for a SP position, and deleted Tyler Yates altogether as a project even Kerrigan won't want to undertake again. Karstens could be one of the missing RPs, but then again, with the exception of Matt Capps, that entire bullpen could look different next year.

For the sake of a projection, I used the players on the current 25-man thinking that salaries on the 1st/2nd year guys are pretty fungible. If we get some young talent for any of Sanchez/AdLaroche/Flash, I'm assuming they won't be making much more than $500k each.

I think we all agree Alvarez won't start the year on the 25-man, but he's a sure bet to be called up sometime in May. Given that we'll be adding his bat, and perhaps moving Andy LaRoche to 1B, we are likely best served NOT adding a 1B to start the season. I don't know that ownership will be able to stomach that in the year they bring up their golden boy, but if we didn't pay much for a 1B, we'd have considerable funds to sign a starting pitcher and round-out the bullpen. There are significant unknowns, including the potential of having Lincoln in the mix for the rotation, whether or not we move Capps or Duke (or for that matter, Snell).

This exercise was meant to show that, even all things remaining the same, there is going to be extra $$$ around in 2010 even given an equal payroll to 2009. If the payroll goes up, say, another $2-3 million, there's $20 million+ to play with.

Key questions:

1. Can NH stomach parting ways with Adam LaRoche and Freddy Sanchez? Their career-years-in-the-making could be a windfall for us... or result in a couple dumb contracts at the wrong time.

2. Will the payroll go up?

3. Will we try to sign a legitimate FA pitcher during what may be one of the most bountiful offseasons for SP in some time?