Pitching is the Currency of Baseball
by djk royal on Aug 14, 2008 4:43 PM EDT
Email
PrintGeneral Manager Dayton Moore has made it no secret that the key to winning in his eyes is pitching. He has focused heavily on pitching in the draft in order to re-stock a depleted farm system. This philosophy has substantially increased the minor league pitching depth but predictably has left a dearth of positional prospects (roughly one). Moore has indicated from the onset of his tenure as General Manager that pitching is the currency of baseball so it stands to reason that once enough pitching depth is accumulated he will spend some of that currency to balance out the organization.
The question becomes how successfully Moore will spend that currency. While it is still too early to know the answer to that question we have been provided with some data to evaluate. Below is a list of trades in which Moore has cashed in pitching and the results of those trades using admittedly simple statistics (mainly OPS+ and ERA+). I have added a verdict below each trade which states my opinion on whether the trade has been a win or loss. In many instances it is too early too call it one way or another but I gave it a shot.
1. Jeremy Affeldt and Denny Bautista for Ryan Shealy: Affeldt ERA+ 71, 137, 123; 2006-2008. Bautista ERA+ 91, 38, 124; 2006-2008. Ryan Shealy OPS+ 102, 55; 2006-2007 and 2008 OPS of 861 at Omaha.
Verdict: Loss. One solid set-up man and one with potential for a guy who couldn't crack a big league roster if it had a Gload of Crap playing first there (wait...). Apologies to any South Floridians with man crushes on Gload that may be reading this blog.
2. Elmer Dessens for Odalis Perez, Blake Johnson & Julio Pimentel: Dessens ERA+ 96, 65; 2006-2007. Perez ERA+ 83, 84; 2006-2007. Blake Johnson 2008 ERA of 4.66 for Arkansas. Julio Pimentel 2008 ERA of 5.58 for Arkansas.
Verdict: Win. Although no prize, Odie was less awful than Dessens after the trade. Plus there are two prospects who have a chance to make this a very one-sided trade for Moore.
3. Mike MacDougal for Tyler Lumsden and Daniel Cortes: MaDougal ERA+ 264, 70, 215; 2006-2008. Lumsden has a 7.14 ERA for Omaha and Cortes has a 4.18 ERA for Arkansas this year.
Verdict: Loss. Mac the 9th was lights out for the Sox the year of the trade and had the vaunted "closer" label. Cortes is a legit prospect but is still a ways from the majors. As Lumsden is almost certainly a bust Cortes must produce to redeem this trade.
4. J.P. Howell for Joey Gathright: Howell ERA+ 90, 60, 177; 2006-2008. Gathright OPS+ 72, 88, 52; 2006-2008.
Verdict: Loss: Howell has been lights out this year for the AL's best team. Gathright is on the DL for sucking.
5. Andrew Sisco for Ross Gload: Sisco ERA+ 57 2007 (Hurt? 2008). Gload OPS+ 95, 73 2007-2008.
Verdict: Slight win. Only Gload could barely edge out a guy who was released from his team in the Mexican League mid-game for going to the concession stand to eat tacos. Mmmm.... tacos.
6. Ambriox Burgos for Brian Bannister: Bugros ERA+ 124; 2007 Injured; 2008. Bannister ERA+ 121, 83; 2007-2008.
Verdict: Win. Despite the growing Banny backlash this is still a clear win for the Royals. Burgos could still rebound from Tommy John surgery and pitch well but Banny should eventually become a solid #4 starter for years to come. Plus we get treated with a weekly Banny Log from his "BFF" JoePo.
7. Erik Cordier for Tony Pena Jr: Cordier was hurt in 2007 but has ERA of 1.54 in A ball for 2008. TPJ OPS+ 66, 1; 2007-2008.
Verdict: Loss. The odds are against Cordier ever pitching in the majors but TPJ has an OPS+ of 1. That's right 1. Plus we wasted all that money on bobble-heads.
8. Octavio Dotel for Kyle Davies: Dotel ERA+ 91, 138; 2007-2008. Davies ERA+ 71, 95; 2007-2008.
Verdict: Draw. Dotel was a rental but it's hard to believe a below average fringe starter is the best we could do. Without knowing the other offers Moore had to choose from I will call this one a draw.
9. Billy Buckner for Alberto Callaspo: Buckner ERA+ 114; 2008. Callaspo OPS+ 81 DUI +1; 2008.
Verdict: Slight Loss. Too soon to tell but Callaspo's off the field issues scare me.
10. Jorge DeLarosa (The Mexican Rose) for Ramon Ramirez (RAM RAM) (we'll ignore pending PTBNL's): DeLarosa ERA+ 74; 2008. RamRam ERA+ 156; 2008.
Verdict: Big Win. The nickname upgrade alone makes this a clear winner. Ramirez could step in and close if it is determined that Soria switch to the rotation.
Final Tally 4 wins, 5 losses and 1 draw. A pretty mixed bag but I come away with two observations one being good and one being bad. The good news is Moore can trade away a lot of bullpen arms and still have a good bullpen from year to year. The bad would be that most of the wins involve flipping pitching for pitching which doesn't help answer the question of whether he can build an offense. The trades where we have acquired offense have netted us Gload, Pena, Shealy, Gathright and Callaspo. Maybe we should ask for our money back on those.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
tough to call
- or # 7 losses without knowing what Tyler Lumsden, Daniel Cortes, and Erik Cordier end up doing.
but good observation that wins have been pitching for pitching mainly
Calling #3 a loss is laugable
And #7? It is WAY WAY to early to know anything. Neither have done much so far.
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
Disagree with many of your verdicts
MacDougal sucked ass last year with an ERA around 7, and has pitched only 8 innings this year. It’s odd why you would only focus on the 25 IP in 2006 for the Sox as an indicator for why we supposedly lost. Cortes is arguably our top pitching prospect and Lumsden could grow into a solid reliever, as the stuff is there.
We traded 2 months of Octavio Dotel for a young starter in Davies that we will control for 5 more years. He’s only 24, he’s hardly a total zero. And again, it was 2 months of an oft injured Octavio Dotel – certainly a win for us, IMO.
Most of the others seem like you gave them absolutely no thought and just wanted to vent about the team and DM.
Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club
Disagree with the verdicts as well
Can’t see how anyone can say MacDougal for Cortes is a loss. Mac hasn’t done much and Cortes is one of our best prospects.
And Dotel for Davies was a loss? Really? We’ve gotten some useful innings out of Davies, while Dotel was an impending FA. How is that a loss?
Buckner for Callaspo a loss? When neither has done anything at the big league level yet???
I’m not even convinced Shealy for Affeldt is a loss.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 14, 2008 5:14 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
+1
The “verdicts” on #’s 1, 3, 8, and 9 are wrong, #3 and 8 especially so.
Djk, you are completely ignoring how MacDougal has performed post-2006. Yeah, he was good for the White Sox for the rest of the year after we traded him, but he was beyond awful for the Sox in 2007 and has pitched a whopping 9 innings in 2008. Even though Lumsden is by all accounts a bust, Cortes should end up making this trade a complete steal for the Royals.
Retro is mostly right on Dotel-for-Davies. I wasn’t thrilled when I heard about the trade, but getting a #5 starter in exchange for ten weeks of Octavio Dotel seems like an alright deal for us.
As for Buckner-for-Callaspo, Buckner has been, at best, mediocre at AAA Tuscon, while Callaspo may yet develop into a serviceable everyday second baseman.
- is the closest of these four verdicts to being correct, but do we really miss Jeremy Affeldt that much?
I think the big problem is that your cursory explanations of each trade only explore one or two possible dimensions of the trade. There is no mention, for instance, of how awful Buckner has been in the minors this year, or of how Mac the Ninth completely imploded after 2006. Without such holistic analysis, your post is painfully inaccurate in many of its assessments.
by DarthYoshi on Aug 14, 2008 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+2, the verdicts on many of those trades are off
The explanations of where and how many of those verdicts are wrong were well described by Retro and Darth Yoshi, so I won’t repeat them, but I definitely agree.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 14, 2008 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Here's a fun game...rate the trades from -5 to +5 and add up
the scores, 0 = neutral.
1. -1
2. 2
3. 3
4. -3
5. 1
6. 2
7. -1
8. 2
9. 0
10. 2
+7 I think he’s done pretty well.
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
That's actually a much better analysis I think
If a GM makes two trades – say he trades David Cone for Ed Hearn, but also acquires Luis Aquino for Juan Beniquez, you could say “well he one won trade and lost one trade, guess that evens out!” But losing David Cone greatly outweighs picking up Luis Aquino.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 15, 2008 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions
+1
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 15, 2008 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions
These results are too simplistic
If you are counting only ML success currently I guess I would have to agree on a couple of them but luckily for us KC gets a few years before you can decide. Plus in some of these who is to know what KC would’ve gotten elsewhere.
Try to be more possitive KC hasn’t gained a whole lot but at least DM is good enough at evaluating who he should trade. All the players he has traded with the exception of Affeldt and Howell have turned out to be bums. Ask yourself would I trade all of those guys except Affeldt and Howell for Bannister. I would say yes. Then if Cortes works out I would think a logical person would say I would trade all the players traded for Cortes, Callaspo and Banni Definitely.
GMDM didn’t have much to work with.
Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin
And as far as generally spending pitching currency...
Moore hasn’t spent much yet. He’s been working on increasing the pitching quality in the majors and building pitching in the system. He’s been stockpiling, not spending. Over the next year (and certainly the next two offseasons) he should work on spending the currency he’s been saving.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
Position player prospects
This philosophy has substantially increased the minor league pitching depth but predictably has left a dearth of positional prospects (roughly one).
Kila Kaaihue
Mike Moustakas
Joe Dickerson
Giovatella
(Hosmer)
At least 4 legit position player prospects. I agree that the minors are very, very short on good position player prospects. But we don’t need to exaggerate to oversell the case. Reality sells the case well enough.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
in all fairness
kila kaaihue kinda came out of nowhere this year (he has always been intriguing, but not like this)
dickerson still has lots of detractors
giovatella is a month of gritty pro ball into his career.
obviously Moose is the only top prospect, but when the next three are those above, i feel you can say "dearth of positional prospects " legitly
Yes, I think "dearth of positional prospects" is fair, but "(roughly one)" is not fair or accurate
Not counting Hosmer, we have “roughly four”. I think after his play in AAA, Kila is a legitimate prospect. The fact that he “came out of nowhere” doesn’t mean he’s not a legit prospect. Yes, Dickerson has detractors. Every prospect outside of the top 20 MLB prospects has detractors. That doesn’t mean he’s not a legit prospect. Yes, Giovatella is a month into his pro career. Every draftee is about a month into their pro career (those who have signed), and yet many of them are legit prospects, including Gio.
So, as I said, it is certainly true that the Royals system is very, very short on good position player prospects. But saying there is “roughly one” is exaggerating the case when the case can easily be made without exaggeration.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 15, 2008 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Just want to add one thing.
Most of the trades listed above are somewhat minor and my opinion of whether the trade is a win or a loss is largely irrelevant. We are all able to draw our own conclusions. The point I was hoping we could address with this post was to show all the major trades involving pitching and whether any conclusions could be drawn on Moore’s ability to succesfully build an offense.
He has shown he can build and re-build a bullpen successfully. He has not shown evidence (IMO) so far that he can build an offense. Is that a product of having limited resources to sell or a blind spot for offense? That is what I wanted to focus on, not whether I’m an idiot for happening to think that MacDougal has been a pretty good reliever overall or that it’s concerning that Callaspo had to hit the DL for alcohol issues.
Then why
Did you list “wins” and “losses”??? You should have just listed all the offensive players he has acquired and analyzed them in context of the way in which they were acquired.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 15, 2008 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, when you provide analysis like that, you have to expect that people are going to pay attention to it
DJK, wasn’t your analysis of how good or bad those trades were integral to your analysis of the issue of Moore, trades and how he deals with the “currency of baseball”?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 15, 2008 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Moore's ability to build an offense
1. As he hasn’t done much work on that so far, there isn’t a lot of evidence from which to draw a conclusion.
2. The available evidence, on balance, isn’t very positive.
So I don’t have a lot of faith in Moore’s ability to evaluate and acquire offensive talent and build an offense. But there isn’t a lot to go on. I think this offseason will tell us a lot more.
And I have to take the bait on MacDougal. With the Royals, Mac was all over the place. Sometimes dominant, sometimes horrible, and often injured. With the White Sox, MacDougal had a good half season after the trade. After that he’s been awful, often injured, often in the minors and pitching badly in the minors as well. There’s not much to like there.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 15, 2008 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
I've always liked MacDougal for some reason.
Maybe it’s just 2003 nostalgia but when he’s on he’s got some nasty stuff.
True, I love his stuff
He’s just got major control problems which haven’t gotten better, as well as injury problems which just keep coming up every year. And now he’s 31.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 15, 2008 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Still remember that montage in 2003
Of him getting Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols to buckle on his breaking ball.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 15, 2008 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, he was on fire for awhile that year.
He did the same thing to Frank Thomas that was a thing of beauty.
You can't evaluate like this
without accounting for impending free agency.
I don’t think you accounted for this enough when evaluating the pitchers he traded.
I think one thing we have all forgotten about was the mentalities that he traded. He had a team that was a loser team with loser players. We’ve gotten rid of the majority of players that GMDM didn’t think would ever develop a winning mentality on this team. I don’t know if that is for sure, but I think that has something to do with some of those trades. Either way, we’ll never know until our drafted players turn into our starting players.
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
I guess every trade you have mentioned is minor in my book.
Cortez has looked unstoppable at times this year and with some maturity in Omaha in 2009 he could be doing what Hochy is doing this year in 2010. I call a number 3 starter a big upside on that trade. All the other moves won’t matter by September.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
