Wow... for some reason I thought he was younger, since his rookie year was in 2001. Can't believe he didn't come up with the yankees till he was 25... that's very Astros-like . Well, since he's 30, and about the same age as Lance Berkman... that changes things (contract-wise).
So, it looks like if we want a Soriano or Lee, we're going to have to spend a bit of cash. The question becomes is it worth "overpaying" for one of these guys if it means we add the power bat we need to protect Berkman? I vote yes depending on the length of the deal. Of course, I'd rather overpay for pitching, but it seems like Zito to a New York team is a foregone conclusion.
I wouldn't overpay for Zito anyways. Jason Schmidt would help any AL team more than Zito would. If the Astros are confident about re-signing Pettite, as well as adding another veteran starter or two... then by all means spend what it takes to get Lee or Soriano (as long as they're not both nuts, and only accepting the $18-20 million a year offers). But, if we're overpaying those guys, and we don't address the pitching because of it... that's a really bad decision.
I mentioned earlier in the thread that his strikeouts are meaningless because he sacrifices about as often as he GIDPs. (Somewhat crude analysis, I suppose.) Someone like Ausmus (9 sacs/year vs. 17 GIDPs/year) would actually be better if he struck out more, as long as it wasn't at the expense of his batting average.
Hmm, actually, looking at the definition of a sac fly, it states that the runner must score. What's it called when a runner on second advances on a fly ball out?
I agree, they need another major contributer whether it is a pitcher or a hitter, and it looks like the only way they can get this done is by overpaying. If they dont get one of these top free agents, are they just going to add a mediocre bat like last year? (Pwils). Obviosly that will not work. If they dont add one of these guys (zito, lee, soriano) they will not improve from last year.
Bah! At any rate, upon further reflection, it's been documented that the difference between a runner on second and a runner on third with one less out doesn't significantly change the likelihood of a score. So I'm right--STRIKEOUT MORE, AUSMUS.
If Zito comes to the NL, he'll be a one man wrecking crew. No one in the NL has seen that insane sweeping curve ball and his funky delivery. He'll have a year or two where he'll flat out dominate teams and then people will figure him out and he'll go back to being regular old Barry (which isn't bad by any means) But someone's going to massively overpay for him at some point. Hell teams are bidding for the rights to negotiate with that stud pitcher from Japan. The right to negotiate with Scott Boras is going for as much as 20 million bucks. 20 million just to effing negotiate with the guy.
He's had mixed success in interleague play the past 4 years: domintated some teams (the mediocre NL West particularly), got rocked by others (Cincy, Philly, Cubbies, Atl).
Typically, when a good AL pitcher comes to the NL, he is very good for a solid year or so (see Bronson Arroyo this year)...my guess is that Zito would fall into that category. I know Hudson has been solid...and Mulder was decent last yr iirc (obviously injured for the most part of this year)....but I dont see him coming here.
Mulder and Hudson certainly didn't dominate the NL once they came here (albeit Mulder was probably hurt).
Huddy had a 3 something era and won like 15 games last season....Mulder was hurt pretty much this entire season but last yr he had a 3 somethign era and won 16-17 games. granted, they both were on good teams but they still qualified, imo, as good pitchers
Yea... but both ended up being worse in the NL than they were when they were at their best in the AL. Zito will still be a good pitcher, no matter where he is. But, the theory that a guy with plus stuff in the AL will come over here and be LIGHTS OUT (as the previous poster was implying, with Zito's "unhittable" curveball that would cause NL batters to have jelly-legs every time they saw it) isn't completely true. Clemens did it, with help from ausmus and an arm that structurally, is probably the greatest right arm ever. Pettite, hurt in 2004, did it in 2005 with help from Ausmus... but predictably this year he was more inconsistent as the NL got used to him (still a "good" pitcher, however). Also, on the contrary, Oswalt would still own the AL.
true...maybe thats a credit to Billy Beane and his scouts for seeing their decline too no argument there....i think u can make an argument that he is the best pitcher in the major leagues right now
I think you could make the argument that he's one of the best, but Santana seems the clear-cut best. Best ERA in baseball in a tougher league, in a league with a DH with across the board ridiculous numbers (strikeouts, WHIP, etc).
To see how ridiculously good Santana is, here are Oswalt's BEST numbers for any of the last 3 years: ERA: 2.94 (2005) WHIP: 1.17 (2006) BAA: 0.260 (2004) Strikeouts: 206 (2004) Here are Santanas' WORST numbers over that time period: ERA: 2.87 (2005) WHIP: 1.00 (2006) BAA: 0.216 (2006) Strikeouts: 238 (2005)
