|
| |
July 2008 - Posts
-
I hate losing to the Cubs. It's really the only series that I let myself become completely irrational when watching a game. The umps are against us. The national media doesn't respect us. I am part of the team when the Brewers play the Cubs. Now it's time to step back and take a deep breath.
It doesn't make sense, but when the Cubs are in town, perspective flies out the window. The Brewers stole games from the Cardinals on the last road trip. How does a team come back in four straight games against a team they're chasing in the standings? Maybe they win two...or three if it's a really good series, but four games? Against the Cardinals? Tony LaRussa has Milwaukee's number, so how does he let his team, which is in contention, drop four games to the Brewers in St. Louis? Crazy stuff happens over the course of 162 games. Regress to the mean? That isn't really a great excuse for sweeping the Cards on the road and then struggling with the Astros and Cubs at home. If the Brewers are able to sweep a seven game road trip that swings through St. Louis, we can probably expect a let down at some point. The Cubs are a better team and the Brewers can't afford to play anything less than their best and expect to win. Sabathia pitched well, but the defense let him down. Sheets lost it in the 6th and didn't any help from his outfield defense. The bats are still struggling.
Things need to turn around for the Crew not just because we'd like to see them catch the Cubs and take over the lead in the NL Central, but because they're still playing every other teams in the NL. The Brewers lead the Cardinals in the Wild Card by one game. They have a two game lead over the Mets and and two and a half over the Phillies. They're playing offense and defense at the same time. This series is big for the Brewers and the Cubs. The Brewers at this point want to stay right on the tail of the Cubs, and the Cubs would like to extend their lead in the NL Central. Just because the Brewers lost when both CC Sabathia and Ben Sheets took the mound doesn't mean they can't win the last two. It will be tough, but stranger things have happened.
-
If you haven't seen our series looking at the farm system roughly halfway through the season, you can check out part one here and part two here. It was brought to my attention that there were a few oversights in Wednesday's article on the infielders in the system, so here are the overlooked:
Second basemen Eric Farris of West Virginia was the Brewers 4th round pick in 2007 and was off to a slow start to the season before getting going recently. His season line is up to (.263/.302/.323/.625), which isn't all that good but is an improvement from where he was a few weeks ago. As a 22 year old playing in low A, he'll need to continue to improve quickly to put himself on the prospect map. In retrospect, we should have mentioned AA keystoner Mike Bell if for no other reason than we mentioned the 7 other regular starters on that team. Bell is clearly not on the level of those around him, but he has solid pop (19 2B, 3 3B, 8 HR) for a middle infielder even if his OBP (.306) is way too low. Moving on up to AAA, there are several other players worthy of at least a mention. Second Basemen Callix Crabbe was selected by the Padres in last winter's rule 5 draft, but had to be returned to the Brewers when the Padres decided to no longer carry him on their 25 man roster. The fact that he is 25 years old and posting a .658 OPS in AAA doesn't bode well for him getting another shot as good as the one he got with the Padres this year again. Though he hasn't played much in the infield this year, Hernan Iribarren still has value as an infielder. Sand-witched around a couple of brief callups to the majors this year, The Hurricane has managed to post a (.279/.338/.328/.666) line. The fact that he has speed, good contact skills and the ability to play in the infield and outfield gives him a solid shot to stick around for a while as a utility guy. Look for part three featuring starting pitchers on Thursday and part four on relievers Friday. Thanks to Mr. Breen for pointing out a few oversights over on the message board.
-
Apparently, Ned Yost is thinking outside the box again. Not that it's a bad thing. I was in favor of batting Jason Kendall 9th, after all. I'm still not quite sure why that was abandoned, exactly. The basic idea to this latest brain storm is this: Dave Bush has been so good at home and lousy on the road and Seth McClung has been better on the road than at home, so the team is considering platooning them so that Bush would start at home and McClung on the road. On the very surface, that sounds somewhat logical and appealing. The acquisition of CC Sabathia means that when Jeff Suppan returns from the disabled list someone will have to be moved out of the rotation. Ben Sheets, Manny Parra and Sabathia all have earned spots in the rotation. Jeff Suppan has a large contract and his track record of summer slumps suggests that if the Brewers stick with him, they will be rewarded later in the year. That leaves Bush and McClung, and both have largely pitched well of late, especially Bush. Still, someone has to go and it's going to be one of them.
Of course, once you go beyond the surface notion of creating this "super starter" out of two different guys, it gets a bit trickier:
- Is it really reasonable to expect that in both cases that there are real reasons that McClung pitches better on the road and Bush is better at home? Because if it's not, then there is little reason to think that these trends can be counted on to continue. Bush has a long track record of being better at home than on the road, but not nearly at this large a differential. McClung has an ERA almost two full points higher on the road versus at home in his career. So isn't it likely he would revert back on the road anyway?
- These are real human beings and they have routines they are used to. Teams do have starters make appearances out of the pen or have relievers make spot starts from time to time, of course. What they do not do all that often anymore is ask players to consistently shuffle between the two roles. It is an open question how a player being asked to shuffle between these roles would do.
- It takes up two roster spots and leaves the manager short a reliever out of necessity for long stretches when you figure that a player who is being asked to potentially make a "full start" is going to need at least three days rest before and after each start if you want them to be effective and not worry about over use. That 4th day they are only going to be available for limited duty if they are coming off of a full start or are being expected to make one in 4 days. Lets take a look at how this might work over a period where they alternate starts:
Day 1: Bush starts at home / McClung fully available
Day 2: Bush unavailable / McClung marginally available
Day 3: Bush unavailable / McClung unavailable
Day 4: Bush unavailable / McClung unavailable
Day 5: Bush marginally available / McClung unavailable
Day 6: Bush fully available / McClung starts on the road
Day 7: Bush marginally available / McClung unavailable
Day 8: Bush unavailable / McClung unavailable
Day 9: Bush unavailable / McClung unavailable
Day 10: Bush unavailable / McClung marginally available
Day 11: Bush starts at home / McClung fully available So, the only day that the one not starting would be fully available would be the day that the other is starting. Other than that, they wouldn't be available for more than some limited duty. You also end up with 4 days in 11 where neither one would be available at all, meaning any short start on one of those days would have to be covered by the other relievers on the staff. All in all, I just don't see there being a likely enough upside to justify the definite cost.
-
I've been kicking this blog post around for a while now, and I just never got around to writing and posting it. My immediate inspiration was this post in Rob Neyer's ESPN.com blog on the Red Sox overtaking the Rays, of all things. For those who aren't "Insiders" he starts by quoting a news story that talks about how Clay Buchholtz, who pitched a no-hitter last September, is being recalled to the majors while Justin Masterson, who's been more than adequate is probably going down. Then he says this:
You ever get the feeling the Red Sox mapped all this out from day one?
They didn't want Buchholz to pitch more than 180 innings this year, because he pitched only 148 innings last year. So when he got away from his fastball this spring, they gave him some time off before sending him to Pawtucket to re-establish his fastball command. Now he's on pace to finish the regular season with fewer than 180 innings. Right on target.
Same thing with Masterson. Last year he pitched 153 innings, and I'm sure the Red Sox don't want him topping 180 this season. Just wait; at some point Masterson is going to get a nice rest.
Of course, Masterson was sent down and is going to pitch out of the pen when he comes back up. That will put him in position to stay at or below the inning target. Buchholtz is right on target for his innings too. I agree with Rob, I think they had all this in mind and weren't going to let what was going on in the pennant race dictate changes to the plan to protect their young pitchers long term.
Back in spring training, I broached the subject of how to handle Manny Parra's inning workload. It was a hot topic then, because the Brewers were trying to figure out what to do with him and the other starting pitching candidates. In the end, Chris Capuano got hurt, they released Claudio Vargas and Manny opened the season in the rotation. He pitched well enough that when Yovanni Gallardo came back from his injury, Dave Bush was sent down. Carlos Villanueva's ineffectiveness as a starter caused him to be bumped in favor of Seth McClung. Until the Brewers acquired CC Sabathia this week, they really only had 5 legitimate options to start games, so the Parra issue was on the back burner. Sabathia's acquisition briefly brought the issue back up, until Jeff Suppan landed on the disabled list and left the team with 5 starters once again. Looking back at some gamelogs from early in the season, it is apparent that the team had some plan going. They pulled Parra after 4 innings a few times despite pitch counts under 85. Of course, if they don't do those sorts of things in the second half, his innings per start is going to go up and he'll go upwards of his current 166 IP pace. The improvement he has shown leads me to believe that will probably be the case. From here on out, if he averages 6 innings per start and makes a start every 5th day in the second half, he'll end up with about 177 innings. That would be 44 more than last season, when he threw 133 total innings, not including any potential playoff innings. That would put the Brewers in the position of violating their own general "30 inning increase" guideline, potentially by quite a bit if they make a run in the playoffs. Now, these things should not be set in stone. It's not like Parra is guaranteed health at 163 innings and injury at 175 innings. But the team has guidelines for a reason and Parra has shown that he is a valuable asset worthy of protection with how he pitched in the first half. What I would like to see is the Brewers take some steps to protect Parra's workload in the second half so that he ends up with about 155 or so innings in the regular season. If they do that, then any extra risk wouldn't be intolerable because the extra innings would come in a potential League Championship or World Series, and the risk would then clearly be worth the reward. The question is, will the Brewers be proactive enough to make these sorts of moves? This brings us back to the Red Sox handling of their young pitchers. They are in a high pressure pennant race again, as they are virtually every year. Yet, they are finding ways to limit their pitchers and keep them on track for inning goals despite what must be considerable fan pressure to ride their best pitchers. Of course, they've won 2 World Series in the last four years and have earned some credibility and leeway to make tough decisions. Selling the idea that Manny Parra needs to come out of the rotation in favor of some lesser loved starters like Seth McClung or Dave Bush to the fans at this point is going to be tough. Given the fact that the team went out and acquired CC Sabathia, it would seem to be unlikely that they would start making moves that run counter to "win now" in any major way. The larger point here is that good franchises control their circumstances. They do not allow themselves to be pressured or pushed off their long term plans by the crisis of the moment. For the Brewers to truly take the next step in their evolution from cellar-dweller to powerhouse they are going to need to get out in front of some of these situations and control events instead of allowing themselves to be controlled by them. I'm not saying that if they allow Parra to go over X amount of innings that they have necessarily failed in some way, but it wouldn't be a positive sign.
-
So, it looks like CC Sabathia is finally going to be a Brewer. Seemed to take an awfully long time, didn't it? Lets just get the whining out of the way early here so we can get on to more enjoyable subjects: I have serious reservations about the wisdom of giving up a prospect of Matt LaPorta's ability for 3 or so months of anyone, even an ace caliber starter. There is a very good chance that LaPorta will be a major impact bat at the big league level within a few years. The Brewers would have had him under team control and at a fairly reasonable price for six years, maybe parts of a seventh depending on when he is called up. There is always the chance of a washout, but LaPorta's bat has never been questioned by scouts since turning pro and there is a very small probability of that happening. The Brewers also have apparently given up a possible closer in Rob Bryson who was at West Virginia and a disappointing Zach Jackson, a washed out starter at Nashville. Bryson is obviously the one you would rather hold on to, but neither is a "top flight" guy. There is also a "player to be named later" rumored to be Taylor Green who is currently at Brevard, and would be a major loss in his own right. He is a potential future starter at third, is rapidly developing and could be in line for a breakout once out of the Florida State League. Alright, so the cost is high. So is the potential reward. By nabbing the reigning AL Cy Young winner in Sabathia, the Brewers have put themselves not just in a good position to make the playoffs, but a good position to make a run in the playoffs if they make it to them. Giving up LaPorta has raised the stakes on making it to the playoffs, because his loss will hurt the team's ability to contend in the future, at least to some degree. Franchises stand to make tens of millions of dollars for making it to the postseason tourney, money that could potentially be used to cover for the likely loss of both Sabathia and Ben Sheets. That cash could also possibly be used to keep one of those players long term, if the right deal presented itself. So there is plenty to gain by making the playoffs and a lot has been given up to take that chance. Is it worth it? I honestly have no idea. What I do know is that even though I have serious reservations about giving up a Matt LaPorta-type prospect (and potentially more) for a few months of Sabathia, I've waited a long time for the Milwaukee Brewers to make a serious run at a championship. A person can question if this was the right move at the right time and if the cost was justified. I certainly have and will again. For the time being, however, I am going to enjoy the hell out of having CC Sabathia in a Brewers uniform, because chances like this don't come around every season. The time for worrying about what was given up lies both in the past and the future. The present is all about CC, at least for me.
More Posts Next page »
|
|
|