SB Nation User Blog: bobr

Ripple effect?

bobr — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:38:31 -0000

I have a question about the possible ripple effect of the signing of Soriano based on a number of assumptions I am making.

1. My recollection is that Sternberg and the Rays do not intentionally lie or mislead the press or public about their intentions. They may be mute, or circumstances may force them to alter their initial policy, but I cannot recall an instance when they said one thing and did exactly the opposite. Yet Sternberg said the Rays were not adding any $7 million closer, and apparently they have done exactly that. Is that simply that the opportunity was too good to pass up (but they had to know that a talent such as Soriano was always available when he made the statement), or does it mean there will be some other moves that make the cost of Soriano much less in context?

2. I don't think the Rays have changed their fundamental view that it is foolish to pay big bucks to relievers no matter how good they are. Obviously paying Soriano, albeit for just one year, flies in the face of that view, and even if the difference is made up elsewhere he will receive, by Rays' standards, a disproportionate amount of the total payroll. Still, in a year when they are going all out, it might not be entirely a change of mind if they can save elsewhere and not hurt their chances.

3. Since trading for Soriano means the Rays are after the prize in 2010, it makes no sense to speculate that they are going to save money by trading any core members of the team before the season starts. So the two most expensive players, Crawford and Pena, are staying unless the return is an upgrade for 2010, most unlikely to be that and also less expensive.

4. If the trade of Burrell for Bradley happens, it has no effect on the payroll of 2010 as both are getting the same money this year. I doubt the Cubs will pay all of Bradley's 2011 salary, although perhaps they might split the payment so that some came this year and some next. I do not know if that is possible or if it is the sort of thing the Rays would consider beneficial.

5. So who does that leave, and how much can the Rays expect to save? Aybar is due $1.35 million, so the most to be saved there is under $1 million. Balfour got $1.4 million in 2009 and probably gets a raise, but is he likely to be dealt? Bartlett made almost $2 million in 2009 and is due for more. So I suppose by using Brignac the Rays could save near $2 million there. Navarro made $2.1 million so if he goes, the saving is something over $1.5 million if the replacement is minimum salary. But the big number among the small numbers is Wheeler's $3.5 million due in 2010. Wouldn't he be the most easily replaced with a cheap alternative and the biggest saving?

6. So here is the question. Does the Soriano contract mean that some combination of the above players are replaced by minimum salaried ones to total at least $4 million of Soriano's contract in savings, or do we think the Rays, when you add guaranteed increases to other players we know will be on the roster, will enter the 2010 season with a payroll approaching or even exceeding $70 million?

Anybody have any more information? ___________________________________ "Fernando Perez is running...

bobr — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:04:20 -0000

Anybody have any more information?

___________________________________
"Fernando Perez is running behind on rehab after October surgery on his left shoulder.
Perez should be ready for Opening Day, but any delay hurts his chances of sticking with the big league club as a backup outfielder. The speedster figures to open the season at Triple-A Durham.
Source: St. Petersburg Times
____________________________________

Cited at rotoworld.

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone on my favorite website on my favorite holiday.

bobr — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:51:02 -0000

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone

on my favorite website on my favorite holiday.

Did you see this Upton blog?

bobr — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 18:47:12 -0000

It is linked at Dock of the Rays:

_________________________________________________

After making it to the World Series last year it has been hard for me to watch the playoffs this year. There's nothing like playing in October. Playing on baseball's biggest stage was the most amazing experience I've ever had on the field and I was very disappointed we didn't make it there this season. Not making the playoffs has motivated me that much more to re-dedicate myself and help the Rays make it back to the playoffs in 2010.
One thing I'm doing with my free time is helping give back to the communities that gave me so much. Over the weekend, I went to the Trop and spent time with kids from the St. Pete area. Next week I'm holding a golf tournament with my brother Justin in Virginia that benefits Friends of the Portsmouth Juvenile Court. I'm also hosting my second annual BJ Upton Golf Classic in Tampa that will help the homeless in the Tampa/St Pete area.
I can't wait to get back on the field and get 2010 underway, hope to see you at the ballpark!
- BJ Upton

Did anyone go to the instructional league game at Tropicana Field yesterday? Except for Beckham...

bobr — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 12:51:27 -0000

Did anyone go to the instructional league game at Tropicana Field yesterday?

Except for Beckham and Sheridan (who I saw play in Bowling Green), it was the first time I had seen any of the players. I would love to know what someone else thought of those s/he saw.

It was nice to see Beckham get a solid line drive hit to RF, although I think he swung at a high pitch out of the zone (which he did in his previous AB as well). And exactly as happened in Bowling Green, he threw wildly to 1B while moving after the catch. I am not making anything of this, just observing.

It seemed to me that Moore does indeed have an impressive curve that young hitters simply cannot figure out. He threw a lot of balls, but not really wildly, just a bit off the plate. The stadium gun was clocking his fastball in the 87-89 range.

And it was nice to see Luke Bailey take a couple of ABs and to watch Lobstein pitch as well.

This is from Perotta at BP, On the Beat column. It is near the bottom under the heading what scouts...

bobr — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:44:14 -0000

This is from Perotta at BP, On the Beat column. It is near the bottom under the heading what scouts are saying about players:

"Rays left-hander Scott Kazmir: "He’s just not right physically. He’s become a soft-tosser, and his pitches lack bite. If Tampa Bay does get to the postseason, I don’t think [they] can afford to pitch him."

I did not think this was true. Seems to me his fastball has returned somewhat if not all the way. I don't know if his slider is as sharp as it was, but my impression is that it is also improving.

I don't know when the scout said this.

From Project Prospect, a review of Tim Beckham based on watching him play. Not particularly...

bobr — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 12:20:16 -0000

From Project Prospect, a review of Tim Beckham based on watching him play. Not particularly encouraging.

http://www.projectprospect.com/article/2009/08/21/tim-beckham-scouting-report

Right vs. Smart: More of an old story From The Hardball...

bobr — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:11:45 -0000

Right vs. Smart: More of an old story

From The Hardball Times:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/rubbernecking-part-1/

A totally frivolous post I have no problem if you want to erase this post. It's just something...

bobr — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:03:31 -0000

A totally frivolous post

I have no problem if you want to erase this post. It's just something that occurred to me and I wanted to express it somewhere.

I recently read that Crawford decided, after viewing tapes the past off-season, that he needed to be more selective at the plate.

When Crawford was promoted at age 20 in 2002 he was totally raw and inexperienced. Football was actually his game. Suppose the exact same Crawford were 20 years old in 2006 in the Rays organization.

A hypothetical question:

When would he have been promoted, and what would his career have looked like? That is, would the Rays have worked on his plate discipline in the minors so that when he arrived he was already more aware of that skill?

Leaving aside imponderables (a different situation, different players et al), is it possible he would have become a far better player even than he is?

John Smoltz

bobr — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:16:44 -0000

Let's suppose that

1. Boston releases him rather than trades him.

2. Smoltz is willing to go into the bullpen.

Would it be reasonable for the Rays to sign him?

We know how terrible many of his numbers are. He has been brutal against lefties although pretty effective vs. righties. He has given up a ton of home runs.

On the other hand, he still strikes out a fair number of batters and walks relatively few. From what I have read, he apparently still has good stuff. His command may be off, which may be a sign that he is done at his age, but is it also possible that it is a function of being a starter and needing to pace himself?

As a matter of fact, the first time through the lineup his stats look pretty good. Each subsequent time they get worse and worse. I suppose I am grasping at straws, but he has actually been pretty good in his first two innings. (Well, not exactly. He has allowed 5 runs in the first inning over his 8 starts, but 4 were in his first start of the year. His second innings have been brilliant. It goes downhill after that.)

Would he be an improvement over Bennett? And might his signing please those who think the Rays could use a veteran with a winning tradition on the team-and perhaps really have some effect, however small, in that regard?

There are a lot of "ifs" involved. It may be pie in the sky anyway (or arsenic in the sky perhaps), but I wonder if it is worth consideration. I don't think the bullpen is the primary concern, but anything that upgrades anywhere and costs nothing seems worthwhile.