SB Nation User Blog: foos05

WS Rotation and Cole

foos05 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:49:59 -0000

So, with the probable impending date with the Evil Empire, what are you guys feeling for a rotation? It's obvious that right now Cliff is the man, but do we want to start him in Game 1? Let's look at this carefully... The Yankees are using a three man rotation, assuming we use the same rotation we used in the NLCS, the matchups would look like this:

Sabathia vs. Lee
AJ vs. Cole
Pettite vs. Pedro
CC vs. Cupcakes
AJ vs. Lee
Pettite vs. Cole
CC vs. Pedro

Let's be honest... Games 1 is a toss up and right now AJ looks sharper than Cole. Throw in that Pedro will be a bit of a wild card in Game 3, and then we get CC versus Cakes in Game 4. I'm not really feeling this. However, if we start Cole in Game 1, I think we have a better pitching matchup for the series as a whole:

Sabathia vs.Cole
AJ vs. Lee
Pettite vs. Pedro
CC vs. Cupcakes
AJ vs.Cole
Pettite vs. Lee
CC vs. Pedro

The goal for Games 1 and 2 should be a split. I'd rather take our chances, and perhaps put the chips on Game 2, where Lee should have an advantage over AJ. If we split and go to Philly 1-1, good. If Cole puts together a gem in Game 1 and we steal that too, even better. I'd look to exploit Game 2 and hope that Pedro shows up in Game 3. I think we have the advantage if we're 2-2 when we roll around to Games 5 and 6. Hopefully we get a good performance from Cole in Game 5 versus AJ and Lee should be able to outlast Andy in 6.

Thoughts?

Additionally, I've been thinking about the Cole Hamels situation. Now, I'm going to throw out an theory which I neither have the time, resources, or talent to test. But if you do, by all means please follow through. We've looked at metrics over and over to show that, besides a hugely inflated BABIP, Cole is the same pitcher. Well, I think that's exactly the problem; he's the same exact pitcher as last year and the opposition has adjusted.

We've been assuming that the inflated BABIP is due to a mixture of luck and some defensive lapses, but other than luck, what affects BABIP? I say the quality of swing and contact on the pitch that's put in play. So is it just luck that the little grounders to Jimmy and Chase from last year are now shots in the hole? Is it luck that the lazy outfield flies are now gap shots? Or is it that Cole has become so predictable that the opposition can sit on pitches in certain counts and put better quality swings on the pitch? I think this might be the case... which would explain why all of the other metrics are the same as well.

There's a way to test this, but it would take some work. I think this problem is most prevalent on the following counts: 2-0, 1-2, and 0-2. Practically everyone knows Cole loves the 2-0 change up. If I can sit at home and call it, do you think the hitter knows its coming? He's fallen in love with it. What about 1-2 and 0-2 you say? I've noticed that Cole is giving up lots of hits (especially HRs) in pitchers counts. Again he's predictable. He doesn't mix in the curve enough and his change is his bread and butter for his put away pitch and when down 2-0. I know it's coming, and so does everyone else. His fastball isn't overpowering, so I think they're sitting on the change in these three counts and just fouling off fastballs until they get it.

Anyone have the tools and the talent to take a look at Cole's pitch selection in those three counts this year versus last year and the BABIP as well? Something tells me that when hitters had more guessing to do last year, the BABIP was way down here. Also, I would bet his pitch selection in these counts is similar, but the BABIP is huge. And that's especially bad for 1-2 and 0-2 counts where he should have the advantage.

Thoughts?

Stark: Game 4 "LEGENDARY"

foos05 — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:42:23 -0000

Stark: Game 4 "LEGENDARY"

"There have been 1,251 postseason games in baseball history. Only two others -- two -- ever ended this way, with a walk-off extra-base hit by a team that was one out away from losing."

-Jason Stark

No argument here...

Well if Hallady and Lee fall through, there's always Zach Duke!! What?!?!

foos05 — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:39:57 -0000

Well if Hallady and Lee fall through, there's always Zach Duke!! What?!?!

Yeah... So... Hmmmm. Call me less than inspired with this proposition.

Jamie Moyer and Brian Dawkins

foos05 — Thu, 14 May 2009 18:57:02 -0000

Jamie Moyer and Brian Dawkins

BGN takes a look back at these two aging players that found themselves in similar contract situations in their respective offseasons.

Interesting Read...

foos05 — Wed, 06 May 2009 18:55:14 -0000

Interesting Read...

I'm not really an ESPN fan, but this article is kind of an interesting read, if you discount all of the Rick generated false quotes...

Let's Take A Little Look Around

foos05 — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:33:43 -0000

I know this was reported yesterday, but it's still worth mentioning. Jim Johnson seems to be doing well with his cancer treatment.

All of the NFL attendees at Playboy's golf outing got shiny new Tasers.

Hopefully for the Bills, Marshawn Lynch was in attendance so he can avoid any future three game suspensions.

It doesn't seem like Troy Aikman was every too thrilled about the T.O. experiment.

This is a few days old, but it's pretty funny. Plus, wide receivers and hot girls... sign me up.

Well geez, I guess these could double as a boat anchor in a quick pinch.

And, just for good measure, here's some Megan Fox from the new Transformers movie.

A Great Look at McNabb

foos05 — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:35:49 -0000

A Great Look at McNabb

Derek from IgglesBlog has stumbled upon a treasure trove of quarterback stats. It's an excellent read and I would suggest that everyone takes some time and checks it out. Some of the results will probably surprise you. They did me.

Bucs Extend Winslow 6 years/$36.1M

foos05 — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 13:56:17 -0000

Bucs Extend Winslow 6 years/$36.1M

Not long ago, we were entertaining the idea of trading for ex-Browns TE Kellen Winslow Jr. The Tampa Bay Bucs beat us to the punch and have since extended WInslow with a 6 year contract that contains $20M in guarantees. The deal is worth a little over $36M and can be maxed over $42M. Winslow is now the highest paid TE in NFL history. I only mention this because it'll set the bar for future TE contracts.

NFL Europe 2: Electric Boogaloo?

foos05 — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 13:42:46 -0000

One issue that is currently under discussion at the NFL Owners Meetings in California is the topic of regular season expansion. For the fans, this would be fantastic. Who wouldn’t want an additional game to watch? I’m sure the players have to qualms with this topic, but that’s to be expected. For the owners, again, this is a winning situation; another game to reign in the profits. If this were to move forward, the preseason would be reduced. This would result in some of the younger players not seeing as much action (as they normally find the bulk of their playing time during preseason games). So what’s the solution? Why the resurrection of NFL Europe (or some sort of developmental league), of course.

Don’t get me wrong, I think a developmental league is a great idea as long as it’s run correctly. Let’s talk about NFL Europe for a second though. Some version of American football was in existence in Europe from 1991 until 2007. It went through a few different name changes, but at this point, everyone knows it as NFL Europe. The premise was to have a league where NFL teams could send players during the offseason to get an increased number of snaps and work on specific shortcomings in their game. Unfortunately, the league became a way for the NFL to try to expand its football monopoly to a relatively untapped market that, arguably, didn’t want it on a regular basis. The goal of the league became profit, with development as a hopefully fulfilled byproduct. NFL Europe folded in 2007, with the owners citing yearly losses in excess of $30 million.

As I said, some incarnation of a developmental league is something the NFL should have, but it needs to be done the right way. Presently, the NFL is the only major American sporting league (MLB, NBA, NHL, NFL) without some kind of formal developmental league. Players that have enormous amounts of potential fall through the cracks because they are not polished enough. The only way for these individuals to develop is to find some playing time. Currently, the practice squad is the place where this occurs. While the practice squad is all well and good, it probably isn’t enough. Re-establishing a league that functions during the offseason would be vital to the development of players. The goal of this league needs to remain development and not profit. It should be established in the US and any profit that is actually made should be seen as a blessing. It seems as if Roger Goodell shares this perspective as well.

“If it was a developmental league, it should be done for that purpose, for the purpose of developing players,” Goodell said. “So the commercial aspects, the international aspects, I think those would become secondary. That was my issue primarily with NFL Europe was that, what objective was it trying to meet? Was it trying to develop players? Was it trying to grow our game internationally, trying to be a commercial success?

An environment like this would be perfect for players like King Dunlap, Bryan Smith, and probably even Winston Justice to work on their game in a situation where they would see constant playing time for a few months. I, for one, would welcome some type of development league. I’m not sure most fans would care very much or the league would be profitable, but that shouldn’t be the goal.

What Can I Buy With $35M?

foos05 — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:11:08 -0000

Right now, the Eagles sit and wait for the draft. Could there be a huge deal in the works for a receiver that the fans covet? Sure, but it seems far more likely that the receiving corps that you presently see will pick up a rookie in the draft at some point and move forward. In all honesty, barring a late veteran signing for depth, if you add some rookies to the current roster, that’s probably what the 2009 team will look like. After handing out a pair of one year contracts to two safeties and a one year deal to Leonard Weaver, we currently sit around $35M under the salary cap. We look at our veritable cornucopia of draft picks (far too many to utilize), put two and two together and come to the conclusion that we must be trading for a marquee player. Add the fact that we recently shipped Greg Lewis to the Patriots and the conclusion is that we must be targeting Anquan Boldin or Braylon Edwards, right? If not, the only other reason to hold onto all of this cap space is that it just provides more padding for Jeffrey Lurie’s money mattress, right?

To be honest, I’m not too surprised where we sit and that we’re not using all of this cap room that we have; some of my reasoning has to do with the future, but some deals with the present as well. If we take a quick look, our current numbers are as follows:

	2009
Salary	$ 113.8
Salary Cap	$ 127.0

Sub Total	$ 13.2
LTBE	$ 20.0
Deion Credit	$ 1.4
Dead Money	$ 2.4

Cap Room	$ 32.2

Now, in reality, our current team salary is somewhere around $109M, but I’m going on the premise that we will use both of our first round picks and I’m using a modest estimate that we sign $4.5M worth of rookies this year (and that’s a fairly low figure if we end up signing the 21st and 28th picks). That gets me to the roughly $114M figure for 2009. After we go through all of the steps and collecting our credits and adding in our dead money, we end up with a full roster ready for the season and $32.2M remaining under the cap. I’m fairly confident that we’ll be somewhere in that range when all is said and done (plus or minus $2M).

So why aren’t we spending? Well one of the answers is actually starring you in the face in the 2009 data. When the Eagles have seen a player they truly wanted, they had no problem spending to get him (Kearse, Runyan, Samuel, attempt at Moss, etc). What has always given us that flexibility? The fact that we have engineered a steady stream of "Likely To Be Earned" credit is the main reason. Each year we’ve had a fairly decent amount of cap money to spend; not too much, not too little, but it has always been vastly increased by LTBE credit that is passed forward from the previous year. Look at 2009; almost $20M that we are able to spend. Well that all goes away for 2010. Additionally, we need to worry about resigning some key players and will probably look to address some of the 2010 class as well. Let’s take a look and do some estimation.

No one can predict what the 2010 cap number will be; especially since it hinges on whatever new CBA is put into place. Initial estimates for the Eagles’ 2010 salary right now are in the area of $114M to the players that are currently on the roster that will be in 2010. We should also estimate the 2010 earnings of the 2009 rookies (the ones that should make around $4.5M in 2009), and I think a fair estimate of that would be around $7M. Just by contract progression, the 2010 salary is already $7M higher than the 2009 salary. This doesn’t take into account the 13 free agents that will need to be dealt with after the 2009 season. That’s right… 13 spots on the roster will need to be filled, and we’re probably going to want to keep some of these guys.

Out of these 13 RFAs/UFAs, the ones I’m worried about retaining are Avant, Giles, Gocong, and Weaver. I don’t think it would be unreasonable for this group, who is going to collectively make about $5.5M in 2009, to make at least $9M collectively in 2010. We’re now collectively +$10.5M above the 2009 salary. There are also 4 players that will be FAs after the 2010 season that will probably be approached about extensions after the 2009 season; namely Mikell, Bradley, Celek, and Abiarmiri. For the 2009 season, this group will collectively earn about $4M. These guys aren’t making much at all. If we were to extend these four players, would it be all that surprising for their collective salary to jump to $14M in 2010? I don’t think so. After another year of across the board salary increases and free agent signings increasing market value, I could very easily see Celek making $2M, Abiarmiri making $3M, Mikell making $3.5M and Bradley $5M. We’re now +$20.5M above our 2009 salary.

If our 2009 salary is roughly $114M and we add the estimated $20.5M, we end up at $134.5M. The 2009 salary cap increased from $116M to $127M, so let’s make a rough estimate and say the 2010 cap will be $142M. So everything looks good right? We resigned the players we wanted and we extended our talented youth for the foreseeable future right? With $7.5M to spare! So why didn’t we spend more this offseason? Well, in our scenario, we still have 9 spaces on the roster to fill with that $7.5M.