[ESPN] Rangers grab Millwood, Purpura/McLane sit on sidelines

I agree...They can have him for that much money...

 

1. Scott Borass is his agent
2. Insane Contract $$$

I'm more than happy that Purp didn't win this battle for Millwood.

 

His career postseason ERA is 4.08.
Millwood's is 3.92.

 

9 < 34.

 

Edit - So Pettitte has been mediocre more frequently than Millwood.

 

So, were you against the Pettitte signing or against us not signing Millwood?

 

you guys need to go look up Pettitte's run support. He does have a good post season record but he has had run support. and I don't know why you would count his appearances as a plus, that's more on the team.

the guy was playing with arguably the greatest team of our generation. He held his own, and I think Pettitte's biggest strength is his consistency, but he does not put up ace numbers.

 

Neither, just disagreeing with the myth than Andy is some great postseason pitcher.

Millwood would have been an interesting signing, but he's only likely to give you 2 good years out of the 4 years.

 

So far I don't think the Astros have missed out on much. Even if Roger doesn't come back, I wouldn't be afraid of going with Rodriguez and Astacio as the 4 and 5. They did pretty good for rookies last year. They could use a bat, but if Purpura thinks that there is still more room for improvement from Lane, Taveras, Ensberg and Burke; then I would't rush to buy high on a free agent. Just because you sign high priced free agents doesn't make your team good; see Dodgers, Orioles and Mets.

The one I'd love to see is Everett and Lidge for Tejada. I'll keep dreaming.

 

One crucial difference in Millwood's numbers the last 5 or 6 years and Pettitte's. One pitched in the AL every year except 04 and 05, the other was a national league pitcher from up until last year.

98 33 216 4.24
99 31 192 4.70
00 32 205 4.35
01 31 201 3.99
02 22 135 3.28
03 33 208 4.02

1998 Atl 31 29 3 1 174.1 175 86 79 18 56 163 17 8 0 1 -- 4.08
1999 Atl 33 33 2 0 228.0 168 80 68 24 59 205 18 7 0 0 -- 2.68
2000 Atl 36 35 0 0 213.2 213 115 110 26 62 168 10 13 0 0 -- 4.66
2001 Atl 21 21 0 0 121.0 121 66 58 20 40 84 7 7 0 0 -- 4.31
2002 Atl 35 34 1 1 217.0 186 83 78 16 65 178 18 8 0 0 -- 3.24
2003 Phi 35 35 5 3 222.0 210 103 99 19 68 169 14 12 0 0 -- 4.01

Let's see here: 1998, Pettitte threw more innings, and only trailed a Leo Mazzone taught Millwood(in the pitcher's league) by .16 in ERA. 99, Millwood no contest. 2000, Andy had the better year in the hitter's league. 2001, Andy no contest: more innings, lower ERA. 2002, edge millwood because of innings pitched. 2003, edge Andy, barely. Similar innings and era but Andy did his work in the AL, while Millwood did his in the NL.

The reason the league difference is important is usually a pitcher moving from the AL to the NL takes about a run off his past era and a pitcher going from the NL to the AL sees an era increase of one run per game or so.

 

I liked Millwood when he was with the Braves, but he seems to have gone downhill and his contract is to much. Like a few others, I would love to Tejada come to the Astros.

 

Except for last year.

 

I'm not sure how the team can get Tejada. The Orioles don't want Lidge. They want frontline starting pitching. Only thing I could see is a three way with us, oakland and baltimore. Where oakland gets either prospects or Qualls, Burke and a couple of prospects for Zito, Baltimore gets Zito, Everett and perhaps an Oakland hitting prospect, and the Astros get Tejada.

I thought about a deal with Boston in a 3 way, but they would want Tejada in said 3 way.

 

That's great, hindsight's 20x20. What I'm talking about is the argument people made for him vs. Millwood.

I think Millwood's an alright signing for the rangers, because they don't have an ace. we had Roy Oswalt. I thought the Astros could have spent that money elsewhere. Pettitte also didn't even pitch in 04.

 

I think the difference is we have Pettitte now. Had we not had a solid #2, I'm guessing more people, including myself, would be more upset about us not signing him. But, we have Pettitte and a fairly solid #3 in Backe. We need a bat much more than we need a 3rd starter making $12 million a year.

I think Millwood's a great signing for the Rangers. Having Roy Oswalt alone doesn't make a good staff. Pettitte was a good signing for us at the time and even though he didn't work out in '04 (he did pitch part of the season), he more than made up for it last season. Not to mention, we didn't give Pettitte a 4 year/$48 million deal.

 

The difference is not as big as you think - usually about .25 to .50 R/G.

There is an easy fix to this analysis - OPS+. This adjusts for league average and for ballpark with a higher number being better than a lower one and an "average" pitcher being 100. So, here's how they stack up:

<pre> Pettitte Millwood<br>1999 95 162<br>2000 116 100<br>2001 112 102<br>2002 134 127<br>2003 109 103<br>2004 111 90 <br>2005 174 143<br>Career 120 114 </pre>

The Career numbers are pretty close.

 

The only reason the career numbers are close is Millwood's 1999 season. Andy by your numbers has been the better pitcher the other 6 years. That tells me that one year is masking the fact that Andy is a superior pitcher.

 

You guys that are saying that 2 of Millwood's last 3 years are forgetting that he was pitching injured for a good part of 2003....then was one year recovered in 2004. Leading the AL in ERA is a heckuva lot tougher than doing it in the NL ....not to take anything from what Roger did....I'm just pointing out that what Millwood did last year was pretty remarkable.

 

The unfortunate thing about the inflated contracts issue is that even if the contracts do start to come down, there will still be teams like the Yankees and Red Sox that will be willing to overpay because they know they can. So while some teams like Texas and the Blue Jays would drop out of more negotiations because of contracts they hamstrung themselves with a season or two ago, we could still be easily outbid for free agents by the big markets. It's a crappy situation and it sucks my beanbag, but as it is I have no problem with Purpura not sticking the team's collective neck out there and signing borderline stars to star contracts. Stick with what you got, and when the perfect opportunities present themselves (be via trade or FA), then you jump on it.

Even if Purpura doesn't make any significant signings this season, and you have Bagwell at first, Lane at RF, Taveras at CF and Berkman at LF...that's not bad. If Bags can't cut it and we are stuck with Burke/Scott in left...oh well. It won't be the end of the world, offensively.

I don't know why I'm typing this...it has been hashed and rehashed ad nauseum on this board and others to the point of exhaustion. I think I just don't feel like working is all.

 

Isn't that why we are all on this board, avoiding work?