Of course I, you, and Tim wanted Pettite back... but when the guy is talking retirement, and then goes out and signs a 2 year guaranteed deal that he's clearly not worth (even with inflation), what do you do? What do you do? The trade wasn't good enough to get Jon Garland... who himself isn't a top of the rotation starter on a lot of teams (especially playoff ones)... btw, remind me to thank de Jesus (again) for leaking that. Thus, they traded for a guy who was also highly sought after (especially by their perceived main rivals at the time in St. Louis). No, they're not one pitcher away with the way the team has played this year... but if Berkman, Qualls, Wheeler all don't have career low years... AND Jennings and Lidge also don't have their first injury problems EVER while they're in the big leauges, this team is likely in contention for the division (with said pitcher). If you had told me before the season that all those players would grossly underacheive, then I definitely wouldn't have given up young guys... but those players were expected to do their jobs at the level we're accustomed to them doing. The hypothetical second-guessing/hindsight arguments here are pretty much out of control... but it is a fun "every 3-week" argument that will be revisted till the season is over. Here's a new wrinkle... if Willy starts out the season has horribly as he did for Colorado... does he get sent down, like Burke did, for Pence (who was going to play CF for Round Rock regardless this year)?
And two of those three pieces don't get you much right now (with Hirsh significantly depreciating in value)... while Pence's assurgence while playing a competent CF is a big reason why the offense is the best it has been since 2004 (and not missing Taveras). Yes, they need pitching... they need Jennings to perform like he did last year AND more pitching. They need Qualls/Wheeler to be good...AND Lidge to be healthy.
take a deep breath, head to florida; have the patience to let some things play out.... my one and only priority would have been pettitte. he was the best pitcher available, free agent or otherwise, and potentially brought roger clemens along with him. this WE HAD TO HAVE A #2 PITCHER desperation you and others keep spouting is how you end up giving up way too much for a marginal #2 pitcher like jason jennings - what was the harm in waiting to see your team in spring training? jeff suppan and ted lily were highly sought after, too, based on the deals they got, and both signed with division rivals - why no urgency to sign either of them? didn't they HAVE TO HAVE A #3 PITCHER!!!!!! too? remember in an earlier post when i listed the # of starts pettitte's made the last two years and then contrasted them with jennings' # of GSs? there was a 17-game difference and it didn't favor the guy who's NEVER had an injury while in the big leagues... but therein lies the problem: for every underachiever, there's been an overachiever - lamb has picked up ensberg's slack; lee was picked up berkman's slack; pence has picked up scott's slack; loretta has picked up burke's slack; wandy and sampson have both overachieved, etc. so you can't cling to this notion of "yeah, but if only..." it cuts both ways. i don't think there's a tremendous amount of second-guessing at play here; most of us were on record as being worried about ensberg, scott, lane and burke before the season started (stretching back to last year, in fact) and we all recognized that biggio, everett and ausmus weren't going anywhere despite being three of the worst offensive everyday players in baseball. so deeming pence not ready; desperately trading for a #2 starter like it was the final piece of the puzzle and trading taveras *in december* was dumb then; remains dumb today. but even if this was ALL second-guessing hindsight - does that invalidate our opinion? besides, it requires not an ounce more of skill to proclaim purpura a moron 1.4 seconds after making a move, just so you can get it on record and shout "i told you so" down the road, never mind whether you even know who jason jennings is. what's wrong with steping back, taking your time and trying to objectively evaluate things, giving the (hopefully) qualified individual a chance to let his plan unfold?
Like what? It wasn't "desperation"... it was having Wandy Rodriguez as your #2 going into the season (okay... so maybe that is desparation). But once Pettite has gone, and he's not coming back (and probably would have retired had the Yankees not still wanted him), what does the club do? Regardless of what Taveras would or would not have done for this lineup that Pence has done... you still need to address the pitching... even if you take a gamble on a guy like Jennings. Nobody has picked up the bullpens' slack. Nobody has picked up Jenning's slack from being injured. Nobody has picked up Lidge's slack from being injured. The lineup, right now is fine (even though Berkman hasn't replicated his career numbers yet)... consistent pitching (top to bottom) is not. And, btw, I'm not that upset that they never signed Jennings to a long term deal (boy, I must really bug you now)... they likely need to get somebody better than him, Hirsh, AND Buchholz (of course, his injury is clouding my perception of him). Maybe its Patton.
Looks like a fluke sliding accident. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/gameday_rec...tent_id=1139148&vkey=recap&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb
fractured finger on his pitching hand... not pitching related. I'll rephrase it... Jennings has never had arm/elbow/shoulder trouble, or anything related with pitching, in the big leagues. Neither had Lidge (while in the majors).
I would have suggested they look at their team. For "impact" moves, they took a 0.500 team the previous year, added Carlos Lee, and removed Pettitte and Clemens. They still have a huge questionmark at 3B and closer. This all should tell you they were not a "one piece away" team. Perhaps its an opportunity to bring up some more of your young guys and find out what you've got. See if Hirsh develops into the #2 type guy you and Buck described he would be 9 starts ago. Regardless of whether Wandy was your #2 or #3, your team is going to have to win with offense. Then, in May or June or at the deadline, if your team seems pretty good but short a pitcher, you see who's out there and see if it's worth making a trade. That's basically the formula they've used for the past 10 years. Why is it so bad now? They've gone into seasons with huge holes before as to avoid overpaying for a player in money or prospects - why not this year? In 2005, they went in without a LF or CF - they relied on a no-name Luke Scott and a 22yr old Willy Taveras. One worked out, the other got replaced. And that was a team that was there to win it all in the now while Bagwell, Biggio, Clemens and Pettitte were all there. There's nothing wrong with having some holes on the team and hoping someone steps up and fills up.
Weird. Is it just me, or do pitchers seem to get into an inordinate amount of freak injuries in the field compared to other players?
Win with offense? C'mon. If 2005 taught us anything its that plenty of teams can suck with above average offense... but its very rare to see a team struggle with above average pitching. Hell... if you want to talk about "looking at the team" they have... why did they spend 100 million on Lee? Don't get me wrong, I like the guy (and he's been great)... but if Pence is brought up on opening day, they could have used that 100 million and signed two pitchers. I also was on record as early as last June... if they didn't find suitable replacements for Pettite/Clemens... nothing else really would matter (including more offense). Of course, that was said at a time before I realized how mediocre the league would turn out to be... and still is. Once again, I don't excuse them for trying to make an average team just slightly better to contend for this division. Some years you have to load up.... this year, you didn't.
Not really... Its because they're not out there sliding/fiedling/or even running as much as guys who are paid to do that... they're paid to throw (just like how NFL kickers get hurt every year attempting to make a tackle).
I'm not the only one who thought he'd be better than he has been... I guess I was wrong. Hard to believe that HE was the center-piece of that deal (and the one that had people questioning the Astros more than Taveras). Its a shame because he's likely not going to develop into much in Colorado, even if he learns how to keep the ball in the ballpark on just his road starts alone (which he hasn't). On a similiar, but unrelated note, I wonder what Cardinals fans feel right now with Dan Haren starting the all star game (and Daric Barton about to break into the big leagues)... while Mark Mulder recovers from shoulder surgery (I guess they still have their ring... looks like their "lopsided" trade which completely backfired didn't cripple them).
You're seriously suggesting the team should have gone into Spring Training without a number 2 pitcher?...and if Pettite decides to go to the Yankees, guess what, the team has to rely on unproven commodites as the number 2 guy because no one else would have been available in free agency by that point. The team recognized that Pettite wanted to take his sweet ass time (and probably saw the writing on the wall that he was going to NY regardless) and wisely didn't let him dictate their offseason. Pettite, Clemens, Taveras, Hirsch, Buccholz...these guys wouldn't have changed the win-loss total of this team much...so let's move on already.
i know - the horror, right? they went into spring training with big question marks at 3B, CF and RF, three of the most offensively-challenged players in all of baseball in their everyday lineup, and a closer with more baggage than an airport's lost and found department. but god forbid they go into spring training WITHOUT A #2 STARTER! heading to florida with oswalt, wandy, sampson, williams, hirsh, buchholz and maybe an open mind regarding patton is no more ridiculous than investing in guys like ensberg, burke and scott when you already have biggio, everett and ausmus in your starting line-up. and yes, nick - they panicked. and overpaid for, let's be honest here, plan C (after pettitte and garland). i'm at a loss how any executive could look at THAT line-up and determine it was a jason jennings away from contending. in that light, i fail to see how going to spring training and letting things play out FIRST, before making any rash decisions (including having an open mind about pence, too), would have been such a terrible thing. the astros' brass have fallen in love with the generic baseball player. they have chris burke's tucked into every nook and cranny of the franchise - loretta, bruntlett, guys on the farm like conrad - not to mention the ultimate: craig biggio. the actual burke is redundant. meanwhile, luke scott is cut from the same cloth as jason lane, preston wilson, aubrey huff... a generic corner OF'er who does nothing exceptionally well. again, at a loss how they talked themselves into those two guys being answers ahead of guys like pence and taveras. and in december, no less. mind boggling, really.
sorry, dude – but there’s nothing even remotely similar about the two circumstances. the cardinals were coming off a 105-win season in which they went to the world series and were averaging 95 wins/year since 2000. given an opportunity to add a 27-year old pitcher who, in 4 full seasons in the AL, posted a 3.65 ERA and 1.21 WHIP while logging, on average, 212 IP/year, to that mix is pretty much the quintessential no-brainer and an apple to the astros… well, rock in terms of similarities. trades are always inherently risky, but so, too, are prospects. i’m sure we’d all love to have freddy garcia firing fastballs to john buck while carlos guillen mans a position on the left side of the infield NOW. but i wouldn’t deal any of them for the dare-to-be-great risks we took with unit and beltran; i imagine cardinal fans would feel the same way about mulder.
Oh - I don't disagree with that at all. But once we lost Pettitte and Clemens, and had a shaky Lidge as an integral component of your bullpen, the team was no longer going to win with dominant pitching. Even with Jennings, you were going into the season with Williams, Wandy, and an unknown #5 starter. If the team expected to be good, it was assuming the offense was going to be the strength. The differential between Oswalt/Jennings/Williams/Wandy/? and Oswalt/Hirsh/Williams/Wandy/? was not a huge difference worth giving up those assets for unless you believe you were on the cusp and need just that little extra edge. I totally agree. I think we way overpaid for Carlos Lee. Now, two things here. One, I thought we should have resigned Huff for much cheaper - that would have been a disaster. I have no idea what has happened to Huff. And two, watching Lee has been nice - he's a much needed "smart" hitter on this team, something that had been lacking in the past. So I've come to appreciate him more, but I definitely think he's overpaid and I'm worried there's an impending disaster in a few years if his weight becomes a problem.
I don't follow the minors much at all, so I just rely on you guys for info on the minor leaguers. My question is what happened in the course of his 9 starts for people to rewrite their expectations for him between July 2006 and December 2006? For example, you've referred to him a few times here as a 87mph control pitcher. The scouting report mentioned that he was consistently in the low 90's and occasionally got to 95. Was that wrong? Did he lose velocity? An injury of some sort? The reason I ask is that the Oswalts are rare - those guys that dominate right from the start. Most players take a year or two or three to get their footing. Both of this year's all-star starters took about 3 years before they became anything better than average. Hirsh's starts in the first year weren't bad - he had some real stinkers, but he had about half his starts as quality starts, which is not bad for a rookie. But somehow he got thrown into the "he's a #3 or #4 at best" pile after just 2 months in the majors - what caused that?
I would have rather taken my chances that Ensberg could bounce back after his "injury" year, that Burke would fill in nicely in CF and if not him then Pence and that Scott would continue to play well than to go into camp with the bigger of the question marks in who's gonna be the number 2. They had an opportunity to get Jennings and didn't really give up much...2 pitchers who haven't done much at all and a CF who would have been nice to keep but was expendable with a Hunter Pence waiting in the wings. Plus why shouldn't they be more focused on building the rotation since it's that formula that has proved successful in recent years. Now as for the marginal players approach...couldn't agree more there...they do need better talent and gave guys like Lane and Ensberg way too many opportunities...so I'd like to see that change.
First of all, even when he was dominating the Texas league (as well as last year), scouts were weary of his "stuff"... probably because he was essentially a 6'9 pitcher who didn't throw in the high 90's. I never saw him projected to be an ace... but a solid #2 was a possibility (and further strengthened by his dominating stats) Yes, his velocity had improved... according to the scouting reports... but last year he'd have a tendency to elevate balls that were thrown with max velocity (typically 91-92 for him), and they'd take him deep. Thus, he's had to sacrafice speed for location (much like Jennings apparently has)... and its translating to an 87-89mph fastball with downward movement. Another aspect that apparently didn't translate is his ability to keep the ball in the park (which he was very good at in the minors). Yes, he was a little shell-shocked when he first came up here last year (giving up 16 HR's), and that may have soured some of the higher-ups in the organization on whether or not he could pitch at MMP regularly. Surely, you expect some improvement... but he has still been touched up a bit by the HR this year. Currently, he's 5th in the NL among pitchers in HR's allowed... and its not just a Coors Field effect. Can he continue to develop/improve? Sure... I'm not thinking anybody has written him off for his career yet, and everybody understands the process that young pitchers must go through (see Wandy). But, will he ever put up the type of numbers that he did in the minors, and thus have his perceived "prospect" value be as high as it was when we called him up? That is looking less likely... and as long as the Astros didn't give up the next 6'9 Greg Maddux, they won't be regretting the deal as much as everybody here has talked about it. BTW... I was clamoring for two-pitch Buchholz to be a bullpen guy last year. Watching Wainwright freeze hitters with a similiar curveball out of the bullpen in the world series only re-inforced that. If he can stay healthy, he may have a chance to have a long MLB career... he certainly has the age/stuff for a quality bullpen career.
Don't know where else to post this but in a phone interview Purpura said that, if trades are made, they will be geared towards the future, not for short term gain. Interesting...
