Cross Rich Harden Off The Wish List
by James Kannengieser on Dec 9, 2009 8:03 PM EST
Email
PrintRich Harden apparently signed with the Rangers today for one year and $7.5 million, with a 2011 club option for $11.5 million. It's a good deal for the Rangers, as Fangraphs and Lookout Landing note. He was on many Met fans' wish lists, with good reason. Youth, filthy stuff and an astronomical strikeout rate (K/9 of 10.91 in 2009, 9.35 for his career) are some of Harden's positive attributes. The strikeouts would have been particularly welcome on a Mets team which played awful defense in 2009.
Any Harden discussion would be incomplete without mentioning his major negative qualities: susceptibility to injury and high pitch counts, which lead to short starts. While it's true that his injury history is extensive, he's pitched 140+ innings each of the last two seasons. Only two Met pitchers reached that mark in 2009 and none made it to 200 innings. The nature of Harden's deal minimizes risk of wasting money on an injured pitcher. If he tears up his elbow this season, you decline the option, say thank you for the effort and move on. If John Lackey needs to go under the knife in year two of a six year deal, a team is stuck with an aging, injured arm costing somewhere in the neighborhood of $15 million a year. High pitch counts are a legitimate concern and in turn will tax a bullpen, but five or six inning starts from Harden are more palatable considering the quality of those innings. 140 innings from Harden and 60 from a replacement level pitcher would potentially be more valuable and certainly cheaper than 200 innings from Jason Marquis or Joel Pineiro.
That the Mets likely weren't in on Harden is not surprising. It appears Omar Minaya is placing a premium on durability, even if it means sacrificing on-field value. The Jeff Francoeur acquisition and reported interest in Marquis are examples. It would be nice to see the Mets go after players who have the potential for big seasons. Harden is precisely that.
108 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well Sheets and Bedard are still out there
So we can wait and hope that one of them will get signed by Omar. Of course we all know that won’t happen. I see a Oliver Perez contract for Marquis in our future.
Why not Bedard?
Career 8.77 K/9 rate, 3.66 FIP. I’d love to have either one.
"I see the job in bigger terms. Paperwork, that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?"
I'd take either one
Of course, Omar will pass on both. And you know if any of them stay healthy and are available next offseason (and if Omar’s around), he’ll overpay in terms of both years and dollars to bring them aboard. Never ahead of the curve on these things
by Bieser's Balk on Dec 9, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions
uh
incredibly injury-prone, ridiculously low innings pitched… we don’t have a strong enough bullpen to sign 5 inning guys
A "Zeile" for avoiding outs
The same can be said of Sheets
"I see the job in bigger terms. Paperwork, that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?"
But Bedard is kindof like Sheets was last off-season
no one really has any idea whats going on with his latest injury, where as Sheets should be healthy now.
Bedard + Mets medical staff =
Erik Bedard will probably wind up DEAD before the 2010 season is over, knowing how injury prone he is, and how absolutely incompetent the Mets medical staff is.
Here’s another one – why not pursue Milton Bradley, for that matter!?
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
thats accurate
read it here. i’d personally only go as high as $10M on a 1 yr deal.
by Rob Castellano on Dec 9, 2009 8:50 PM EST up reply actions
If that's true, I wouldn't go after Sheets. Too much for an unknown quantity.
If that’s with incentives, though, I wouldn’t be as hesitant. A minimum of four or six million, with incentives working it up that high.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 9, 2009 11:53 PM EST up reply actions
NO!
$12 million!? I wouldn’t even settle for $10 million, flat! It would be $6.5 million, with about $7 million worth of goal-related incentives. (He might just bite, and the team would benefit if the right balance is struck here.) Ben Sheets would be hard pressed to even meet a quarter* of those incentives!
* Double meaning – obviously, I wasn’t talking about 25 cents.
INCENTIVES – that is an important word here!
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
An addendum, with details
Ben Sheets 1-year contract rider
$6.5 million - Base salary
$1.5 million - Pitch 150 or more innings
$1.5 million - Strike out 165 or more batters
$2.0 million - Win 10 or more games and pitch with an ERA of 3.65 or lower
$2.0 million - Does not finish the season on the DL AND maintains status on the active roster for at least 70% (126/180 service days) of the season.
This is one of those proverbial “spider-web” contracts, with strings attached everywhere. And, I would like to add that I hope the MLBPA doesn’t protest it, either – to do so would be nothing short of a “crock”.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
I had the impression
that you couldn’t write things like ERA into contracts as incentive triggers, just appearances and innings pitched, along with awards
You're right.
Only playing time can trigger incentives.
by BobbyV_Incognito on Dec 10, 2009 9:59 PM EST up reply actions
Oh
well, that kind of sucks, but then again, I can see the benefits of stringent moderation, in accordance with the MLBPA.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
I'm all for Bedard. He's rehabbing until June, though, so he won't be availible to pitch the beginning of the year (which is good in a way. If he's gonna throw 100 innings or so, might as well have them be in the second half)
Would it be wrong to hope Harden gets injured, now?
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 9, 2009 8:18 PM EST reply actions
I agree Bedard could be similar to Pedro Martinez last year
comes back strong and well rested for a half a season, takes some pressure off the rotation and bullpen. The price would have to be right but he’s not a bad addition after we’ve addressed other issues if he’s still floating around.
by KeithsMoustache on Dec 9, 2009 8:48 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 9, 2009 11:53 PM EST up reply actions
this is inexcusable
7M is a risk any big market team should be more than willing to take given that Harden wouldn’t even be asked to be the Mets Ace. The fact that the Mets showed no interest just shows that Omar has learned nothing and/or the Wilpons talk of spending money is just that, talk.
i think
this is all about omar’s tendency to be very reactive in the offseason. meaning, he’ll only really make moves that fixed last year’s holes instead of making the smart moves for next year. and for this offseason, that means he will not sign anyone with the slightest bit of injury concerns based on the widespread health issues of last year.
in other words, brace for the inevitable reliable innings eater-jason marquis/jon garland signing…
by Rob Castellano on Dec 9, 2009 8:44 PM EST up reply actions
About Omar Minaya
1. He is VERY impressionable. (just ask one chuckling Scott Boras, on Oliver Perez)
2. He shows an obvious bias toward Hispanic players.
3. He is fundamentally deficient on intuitive baseball knowledge, and is open to cynically-motivated criticism.
4. Very impulsive, and quick to act without thoughtful planning and foresight.
5. Admittedly, is lucky enough to have signed big players in blockbuster deals the last 4 years. And reflecting on point 2, the vast majority of them are of Hispanic descent.
That’s “”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Omar" >Don Omar", in a nutshell. Let me know if I left anything out, but I pretty much encapsulated just about everything with precision. To leave out any of these points is a travesty all its own.
And that’s basically what separates Omar Minaya from the Theo Epsteins, Brian Cashmans and Jon Daniels of the baseball world. And it’s quite a lot for 5 simple points!
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
fine
i would have liked harden but whatever.
now go sign ben sheets and kevin correia and i’ll be happy.
yes but
if he won’t sign Harden because of injury risk, I doubt he signs Sheets who wants more money and has to be considered even more of an injury risk(albeit with a higher upside as well perhaps). The truth is the Mets should have gone after both pitchers.
you're right
sadly, it’s unlikely that omar has considered any of the 3 high upside-injury risk pitchers (harden, sheets & bedard) as a serious option at any point this winter.
though on the bright side, last winter we were one of 2 teams seriously considering sheets, even w/ the injury concerns, though they’ve only gotten worse since…either way the other team was texas who you’d have to figure is out of the mix for sheets at this point. so at least theres that.
by Rob Castellano on Dec 9, 2009 9:50 PM EST up reply actions
5 Inning Pitcher
I think that the real knock on Harden is that he averages 5+ innings per start, when he’s healthy. That’s a great way to kill the pen. We already have Lollie and Maine for that.
Sheets and Bedard should give you good length in each start (when healthy), so they should still be in play.
"I think that the real knock on Harden is that he averages 5+ innings per start, when he’s healthy. That’s a great way to kill the pen. We already have Lollie and Maine for that."
For that matter, still, the Mets would’ve been MUCH better off, had they not traded Scott Kazmir. That is non-negotiable.
Now, as far as money is concerned, well, it might be fiscally deficient to sign Harden to a $10-12 million contract, though all things considered, $6.5-7 million with incentives is quite fitting. Check out my proposed “Ben Sheets 1-year contract rider” above, to get an idea of what I speak of here.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
Short Starts aren't being given their (negative) due
James assertion that 140 quality innings plus 60 replacement level innings isn’t really looking at Harden realistically. There is a real person that has to pitch those 60 innings…or more correctly, a bullpen that has to absorb the extra innings from Harden’s short starts. By the end of the year, the bullpen will be worn out….especially if Maine and Ollie are still around.
Haven’t we seen that happen before? Guys, it really wasn’t that long ago.
But then the answer should be
Sign Harden AND Marquis, so you don’t have to carry both Maine and Ollie, not sign Marquis and stick him with Maine and Ollie to soak up some innings.
Better, I suspect, to
sign Marquis and take the salary of a good, durable starter like Arroyo or Harang off the Reds hands for a couple of C prospects (which I strongly suspect would get it done).
Harden is like Moises Alou in 2008. If he can play he’s likely to be very good. If he can’t play, or can’t play much, then we wind up having no choice but giving innings to Ollie, or Maine, or Niese, all of whom come with real issues, and none of whom are likely to be worth half of what Arroyo and Harang are worth in 2010..
Think I should change my signature to
Sean Schirmer
The Mets need 2 durable starters for 2010
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 9, 2009 11:51 PM EST up reply actions
My greatest fear
The Mets sign an innings eater, and turns out to be another Carlos Silva. Carlos Silva was a great innings eater for the Twins about 5 years ago (2005), and then turned out to be a monumental fail afterwards.
Of course, what the 2005 Carlos Silva was then (7.0 INN/GS, 3.44 ERA, 3.4 K/9), might just be 2009’s Joel Pineiro (6.7 INN/GS, 3.49 ERA, 4.4 K/9) in terms of results. Fundamentally, I see a match – neither one is a strikeout pitcher, and has a lot of downside. A lot.
I could actually see the Mets trading for Joel Pineiro, only to have the deal blow up in their faces. And then, Omar Minaya will get fired just like Bill Bavasi. You follow me on this one?
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
“The nature of Harden’s deal minimizes risk of wasting money on an injured pitcher. If he tears up his elbow this season, you decline the option, say thank you for the effort and move on.”
Actually, the nature of Harden’s deal (versus going after two reasonably durable starters—which you figure any GM with sense is going to do with a rotation that barely averaged 100 innings among it’s 5 best starters last season) does indeed maximize the risk of wasting money on an injured pitcher.
At what cost though?
Do you go $10 mil over 3 years for both Marquis and Pineiro? Compare to Harden’s deal which is only 1 year guaranteed. Pairing a high upside Harden/Sheets type with one of the reliable free agents is more attractive to me than two reliables.
by James Kannengieser on Dec 9, 2009 10:13 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
If the worry is too many unreliable guys then kick out one of the crappy unreliable guys, we have a plethora of them, replace him with an above average unreliable guy, and get the inning eating.
Also wasn't Livan supposed to be the inning eater
answer to some of our injury risks? I don’t think that turned out particularly well. Like some have said if the inning eater isnt very good he’s not going to end up eating many innings anyway and will just end up be a really bad 5-6 inning starter.
Sure, that's why I'm not advocating just getting an innings eater.
There’s a big difference between Livan and Marquis or Garland, and a huge difference between Livan and Arroyo or Harang.
(Actually, Livan wasn’t all that bad last year. 20-25 teams could have used him as opposed to what they actually got from their last slot in the rotation.)
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 9, 2009 11:56 PM EST up reply actions
Yikes!
Then all you’ve done is add one reliable starter to a rotation that barely put up 500 innings last year without otherwise changing the overall risk.
Serious question: Do both of you think the Mets can’t legitimately win unless they really roll the dice in 2010, is it more that you don’t trust Omar to add the right pieces to a very good core, or is there some third opinion I haven’t mentioned?
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 9, 2009 11:54 PM EST up reply actions
Well the problem is
in this market there’s little chance you’re going to change the overall risk. So at least upgrade the risk. The problem with Maine and Ollie is even if you get 200 innings they’ll likely be mediocre innings, or you’ll get 110 mediocre innings. At least with a guy like Harden you can get 110 superb innings.
And yes I legitimately don’t think they can win in 2010 just by adding a guy like Marquis. I think there are too many holes and since I don’t think there’s any chance they add Holliday, and they’ve already made it pretty clear they don’t have any interest in the other “right pieces”, (plus I’m not sure what other right pieces are available, someone like Cameron?), I think at best with everyone healthy we’ll be an incredibly top heavy team that’s too susceptible to random bad breaks and could end up winning anywhere between 86-91 games. And in our division I think that could mean having just as good a chance of ending up in 3rd as in 1st.
I want no part of Pineiro
Despite the new pitch, I still think 09 was a career year and won’t be repeated under Warthen’s supervision. While he does provide innings, they could very well be bad ones. Prior to 09 the guy hadn’t posted a WAR more than 0.9 since he left Seattle. Marquis at least seems more consistent.
On another note and not even trying to be funny, is there any reason why the Mets shouldn’t pick up Church as at least a fourth outfielder? Somebody is going to grab him and get a steal.
Church will make a nice 4th OFer for someone.
Unless the Mets are punting the season, Pagan’s our 4th OFer (Our 3rd OFer, actually, as Gina pointed out, who just happens to be on the bench when Francouer’s in RF.), so we’ve already got one of the best in the majors.
But yeah, Church’d be a good pickup in that role for a lot of teams. Can’t imagine he’d want to come to the Mets anyway, after the way he was treated.
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 9, 2009 11:58 PM EST up reply actions
See my comment on Joel Pineiro above ("My greatest fear")
I have spoken for you on this one here. I think I pretty much nailed it.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
I understand your reasoning, so
I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree. If I thought one of Perez, Maine, or Niese was a strong bet to throw 200 innings with a FIP around 4.00 I’d be happy to pick up one more durable starter then take a flyer on Harden. It’s two things, really:
1) The starting rotation is in a shambles
2) If we fill in well around Beltran, Santana, Wright, Reyes and, ideally Holliday then this is a championship club. There’s no need to take flyers, or gamble on giving 30 starts to awful pitchers if Harden flops
Btw, the O’s picking up Millwood for nothing along with having the Rangers throw in $9 million demonstrates that there’s more out there than potentially overpaying for Marquis or Piniero (though the more I’ve read about it the more content I would have been if the Mets had added Wolf for what the Brewers paid.
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 10, 2009 5:08 AM EST up reply actions
$9 million would have been pretty sweet for the O's. It was $3 million.
A perfectly good alternative if you want to keep some cash for the stronger 2011 FA class.
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 10, 2009 5:09 AM EST up reply actions
Perhaps I'm not baseball savy, but why is there outrage over not targeting Bedard and Sheets?
I’m not a huge fan of Harden, but given that he does have potential and is healthy at the moment, I can understand why people would want him.
But I really don’t understand it for Sheets and Bedard.
I mean, first off, Bedard is out until at least June and given his injury history, is that even a reasonable estimate? Plus, you have no idea what his shoulder looks like at this point.
And as for Sheets…. the man hasn’t even thrown a pitch in well over a calendar year, and some here are willing to pay $10 million a year for him. That just screams “dumb”
to me at least.
Obviously you don’t want to overpay mediocrities like Marquis or Garland, but I don’t understand the obsession over these incredibly high risk. possible high reward pitchers.
Is there really outrage over those two?
Outside of this thread I haven’t seen many people mention them one way or another.
I am pissed about Harden, not the other two so much.
I am also with Sam. I think it was he who said that John Lackey, even at a overpriced deal is starting to look better and better considering the slim pickings out there otherwise. If you are going to overpay, might as well overpay for the best person out there.
Overpaying for a quality pitcher and overpaying for someone because he's the best left are two different things
We did the best left last year with Perez.
With Lackey, you know you’re going to get a solid #2/#3 at worst.
Lackey is not worth the money he is going to get
and if healthy, Sheets, Harden, and Bedard are better.
"I see the job in bigger terms. Paperwork, that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?"
If healthy
That’s an enormous if, and we already know Sheets and Bedard aren’t.
Oh, and looking at Fangraphs, there’s nothing to indicate that Harden is significantly better than Lackey, if at all.
Over their careers
Harden’s strikeout rate is 2 points higher, his FIP and xFIP are both a quarter of a point lower and he’s three years younger.
"I see the job in bigger terms. Paperwork, that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?"
Right but
Lackey’s walk rate is almost 1 and a half points lower, and Lackey has been worth more in WAR than Harden 4 of the last 6 years.
Not to mention, Lackey has pitched at least 163 innings every year since 2003, while Harden hasn’t even topped 148 since 2004.
A stupid simple formula (But it definitely works)
Efficiency (FIP or WAR) x % Time share (innings pitched and INN/GS) = VALUE
In this regard, John Lackey CLEARLY has the better value.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
Pretty sure most AAOPs wanted one or both of them,
though I don’t recall outrage attached, fwiw.
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 9, 2009 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
Sheets isn't getting $10 million
And yes I’m outraged over not getting one of these guys. Marquis, Garland, and Pineiro, they pretty much suck, so why not spend $5 or $6 million on a potential star? Low risk high reward is better than low risk no reward.
"I see the job in bigger terms. Paperwork, that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?"
Damn, rest of my comment got cut off
something along the lines of Garland, Marquis, and Pineiro sucking and it’s better to spend a few million on a potential star than inning eaters
"I see the job in bigger terms. Paperwork, that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?"
Risk Management
Hi risk + Hi reward = incentive-laden contract (“spider-web” contract)
Hi risk + Lo reward = Pffft! (Minor-League filler or DFA candidate)
Lo risk + Hi reward = $$$ (more of a sure thing than most)
Lo risk + Lo reward = Adequate bench-warmer (a la pinch hitter/runner or defensive upgrade) – a one-trick pony
If only Omar understood this basic fundamental concept…
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
the 12 mil
is probably a starting point in case the Red Sox or Yanks are serious. I could still see him getting around 10 or 12 when you include achievable incentives.
The reason for the "outrage", I think, is that we need someone who is going to make an impact in the rotation
For the most part, with the exception of Lackey, those injured, take-a-risk guys are the only ones in the current FA market who are going to be difference makers. Marquis, Garland, Piniero, Wolf, those guys might be solid, and below-average to average, but none of them really has the ability to turn a season around or whatever.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 9, 2009 11:56 PM EST up reply actions
All four of Marquis, Garland, Piniero, Wolf are above average starting pitchers.
How are you defining “below-average to average”?
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 10, 2009 1:34 AM EST up reply actions
I'm pretty sure Marquis and Piniero are average
Aren’t they like less than 1 WAR average per season for their careers? Last year was probably a career year for Marquis. Piniero might have come around to above average, but one year isn’t enough to determine that.
The last three years are what most projection systems count,
and Marquis has gone 1.7, 1.8, and 3.8, while Piniero’s gone 0.6, 0.8, 4.9.
I’ve never wanted to sign Pineiro. I would have been all right with a Marquis signing, with him as the lesser of the two SP signings the Mets need to make this offseason, as long as the $$$s were reasonable (as in not 3/30 or anything close to that).
by SeanSchirmer on Dec 10, 2009 5:14 AM EST up reply actions
In order (based on fiscal/productive efficiency)
1. Randy Wolf
2. Ben Sheets
3. Jason Marquis
4. Joel Pineiro (High risk, and is basically leeching off the proverbial “Dave Duncan Life-support System”)
Joel Pineiro – I commented on him above. He has the makings of another Carlos Silva.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
I'd say Wolf is a tad about average, Marquis and Piniero straddling the line, and Garland a tick below.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 10, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
At best, of course.
I’m conservative in my thinking.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 10, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
Really?
I’d say I think Garland has a better chance of being average to slightly above average than Marquis and Piniero. There’s much less variance in his numbers from year to year. I would be worried about the fact he was on a clear steady decline, until moving to the NL which could have just been a one year affect, though.
To me if we were going to do the one high reward player and one low risk I’d want Garland to be the low risk, just because I think there’s less chance of him falling off a cliff than Piniero and Marquis.
There's less variance in Garland's numbers, but he's been woefully average-not good (depending on how you want to define some of those numbers)
His ERA has consistently been in the 4.00s (which I define as bad, but that’s just me), his K/9 has consistently been in the 4.00s as well, his FIP has consistently been mid 4-5.
His WAR is surprisingly high through his entire career. That’s pretty interesting. I guess because of the relatively high amount of innings he pitches, day in and day out?
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 10, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions
Carlos Silva, 2005
Perfect example of that!
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
Your point is valid about Harden have huge upside vs risk
but as far as Omar is concerned you could be writing in Korean. He will never get it. ever.
Worst. GM. Ever.
Jerry and Omar assclowns for life
by Ghost of seven in a row on Dec 9, 2009 11:09 PM EST reply actions
It's still too early to tell!
Case in point – one Donald Zackary Greinke, from Apopka.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
Even still
the guys that he didn’t pick over Hochevar are pretty significant…Longoria, Kershaw, Lincecum, Scherzer, etc.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
But I mean you could say the same thing about us
And the guys we didn’t pick over Millledge/Humber/Pelfrey
Yuniesky Betancourt
According to Fangraphs, the ABSOLUTE WORST player last year, with a -2.1 WAR AND -21.3 RAR (both ranked last).
Of all qualified MLB starters last year,
- his 0.274 OBP was the lowest. (Bengie “Cinderblock” Molina came in second, with 0.285 – slowest player EVER, despite Tommy John having the lowest SPD rating.)
- his 0.625 OPS was the 2nd lowest (bested only by Emilio Bonifacio (Bonerfacio), at 0.611)
- his 36.7 weighted RA and -24.2 weighted RAA was the lowest (Emilio Bonerfacio came in 2nd)
If we use the WAR/dollar scale, Yuniesky would be indicted by some sports IRS, since he owes $9.6 million, plus any salary earned in 2009.
We should seriously start calling him Y.B. Good (so despite the paradoxical appearance, it sounds like an actual question)
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
he's not even the 2nd worst
and that’s just flat out scary
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
Yeah I think Wade might be the worse
cause that team doesnt even have a semblance of a farm system, to go along with their awful overpaid big league roster. And even when being told they have to cut the payroll by like 20 million he’s giving middle relievers 5 million per.
Korean - What's good hey Omar?
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
Maybe not Omar's fault
I read (I think on MLBTR) that Harden really wanted to pitch in Texas. Even turned down interest from the Red Sox. So maybe Omar inquired, Harden said no thanks, and that’s it.
That said, I didn’t read any rumors suggesting Harden was on Omar’s wish list, so maybe we shouldn’t give him the benefit of the doubt.
by englishgrey on Dec 9, 2009 11:39 PM EST via mobile reply actions 1 recs
Rich Harden is smart
He’s going to a team that is clearly preparing to be one of baseball’s best! I feel compelled to rank the Texas Rangers in the top 5! He (or his agent) did his homework, for sure.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
have they ever had a pitcher work out though?
That park is death to pitchers
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
Still...
Any pitcher of Rich Harden’s caliber will prove to be a great boon to the Rangers, assuming he can avoid injuries. They were a legitimate playoff contender last year, down to the final week I believe. Add in Rich Harden, and watch the magic transpire with the dearth of prospects that abound!
Besides, the pitchers’ park thing is a two-way street. It is equally death to opposing pitchers, as well. So, that argument cancels out.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
Don't limit yourselves to just the FA's available. The Reds are likely to unload
at least one of Harang or Arroyo. Between the two they take up one-third of the Reds anticipated $75 million payroll, which is making it impossible for the Reds to make other moves. Either is a better option than overpaying for the wrong starter.
Here’s the link: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/11/reds-expect-to-maintain-payroll.html
that sounds dirty
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
More dumb Mets mistakes
Like many stated above I think it would ave been a smart move for the Mets to sign Harden. It should have been one of the players they were targeting except they probably weren’t since management does not know how to run a team. He should have been signed along with other various moves for our rotation. Having Harden at $8m who performs better than Ollie at $12m would have been the better choice. I would have attempted to trade Perez and Pagan to the Marniers for Brandon Morrow. We could pay a little of Ollies salary to get rid of him and sign Harden instead. And we would get Morrow who could be a nasty bullpen guy or maybe a starter later on. We should definitely trade for Halladay, maybe he falls into our lap like Johan, but give them a package of Mejia, Holt, Pelf and one more. Then we can sign Garland and Sheets, who could be a Harden like guy. We would have a rotation of Santana, Halladay, Sheets, Garland, Maine. And if we could sign Bedard to a nice cheap deal he could be insurance if one of our guys, like Sheets went down. Or if possible we could swing a deal with the Reds for Harang and Arthur Rhodes, taking some salary off their hands. This would make our rotation look like Santana, Halladay, Harang, Garland, Maine.
No way would I trade all that for 1 year of Haladay.
I also don’t think that Seatle would take Ollie from us.
If only it were that easy.
Players simply don’t want to go to the Mets – the general consensus (not entirely correct, but understandable) is that the Mets are a team with ignorant management personnel and no real vision or plan for the future, that serves as a biased magnet favoring Hispanic players.
That’s about the last thing players like Rich Harden, Roy Halladay, and some others (non-Hispanic) would want, all financial promises and obligations aside. And based on my feelings on the whole matter, I could tell that Billy Wagner did not feel welcome within the organization, as a Met. The morale within the organization is pretty low right now.
And for all the above points, I honestly can’t blame them.
"The picture looked like I was in the dugout, but they got it all wrong. I absolutely was never in the dugout."
- Mr. B.V. Incognito
It's the meme that won't die lately.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Dec 10, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
to be fair
he’s not saying it’s true, he’s saying it’s the general consensus, which sadly, IS true.
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
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.
