His frustration has finally become visible.
The Rockies closed July with a 7-17 record for the month and on pace for 102 losses. The end of July saw the Rockies make several changes, both personnel-wise and in the front office. Jeremy Guthrie and Marco Scutaro were traded away, but that was the extent of Dealin’ Dan’s efforts. The front office changes involved restructuring responsibilities without actually adding or removing any of the current staff: Bill Geivett is taking over the personnel decisions for the major league club and O’Dowd is focusing on minor leagues and player development. This week, we discuss if the front office changes will result in any real change and evaluate the results of the trade deadline.
Will the front office changes help Jim Tracy?
Brendan: Apparently Tracy being involved in deciding who gets called up is a major distraction and is taking away from his joy for the game. This move is supposed to “help Tracy focus on lineups and game strategy.” Instead of discussing what type of player needs to be brought up when someone goes on the DL, Tracy will now stare at his lineup card and come up with strategies for double switching in the 5th inning. At this point, the only thing that would help the Rockies’ manager make better game-related decisions would be to have someone other than Tracy making them.
Kevin: It looks like it will give Tracy more information, but whether that helps Jim Tracy remains to be seen. This team is terrible, and it needs all the help it can get. Having more information about players and matchups will certainly give an opportunity to help, but it is far from certain that such information will be put to good use. Tracy makes some questionable moves, and I am not convinced that those moves are a result of information deficiencies.
Ned: This will sound cynical, but anyone other than DOD should be better for the ML team, and consequently better for Jim Tracy. Bill Geivett is virtually unknown to fans, including yours truly. We can only hope that Geivett has not gone to the same school of New Age spirituality that DOD went through. It is very concerning that DOD is to be focused on player development and the minor leagues given the team’s dreadful drafting record over the past twelve years.
True or False? The restructuring threatens O’Dowd’s job security.
Brendan: False. I want to believe that this is the first step to removing him completely, but I think it is O’Dowd positioning himself to side-step the blame. He is now focused on the minor leagues, so if there is a problem with the big league roster it is Geivett’s fault – not O’Dowd’s. His absence from the press conference is a good sign that he may be losing favor within the organization, but I won’t believe it until I see it. Until the Rockies begin to institute REAL change (actually bringing in someone from outside the organization), it is just more of the same old trash for trash exchanges that usually litter the Rockies’ transaction page. Check out this article from 2007. There are a lot of similarities in what the Monforts were saying then compared to now: “we’re doing things differently than other teams”. The miracle that was 2007 was a once in a lifetime experience, but its true cost may be ownership deluding themselves into believing that they know what they are doing.
Kevin: True. Although on the surface it looks like O’Dowd is insulating himself, this restructuring shows weakness. It shows that he is responsible for this embarrassment of a team, and now he is linked to this failure. It obviously shouldn’t require this restructuring to link O’Dowd to this debacle, but the biggest issue with this franchise is that ownership can’t tell their elbows from their rears. Ownership appears to be totally insulated from the world, with little understanding of Big-Four sports franchise ownership. The Monforts have no understanding of what is unacceptable failure, and they have no idea of what ought to be reasonable expectations. Just the other day, Dick Monfort said “I don’t know how 29 other clubs are doing it and really don’t care.” Some people might see this as a rogue trailblazer. I see this as a head-in-the-sand fool who is unwilling to learn from the successes of other franchises. It’s no small wonder how such stubborn and clueless people ever came to operate a multi-million dollar business.
Ned: True. The Monforts’ management style has, to date, been characterized by soft terminations. Moving Bob Apodaca “upstairs” in June to be a special assistant is a recent good example. With a little luck, the restructuring announced last Wednesday represents at least the beginning of the soft termination of DOD. Hopefully soon DOD will become “tired” like Bob Apodaca, and “ask” to be reassigned to a less stressful position—like special assistant to Shirley MacLaine.
Were the trade deadline moves (or lack thereof) a failure?
Brendan: Yes, but not because of July. Failing to acquire any players of substantive value during the offseason directly contributed to the inactivity. Cuddyer’s contract is untradeable (without taking back a large part of the money) and there just isn’t a market for injury prone catchers hitting .200. Parting ways with both Scutaro and Guthrie were good moves, but other trades did not occur mainly due to a lack of real assets. I still cannot believe that neither Betancourt nor Reynolds were shipped out of town, but it is not like they would yield anything of real value in return. It is nice to sit here as a fan and say all these different players should be traded, but reality is that you cannot force another team to take your trash. Teams looking to buy at the deadline are interested in proven commodities, not broken down vets and unproven young players – which, minus a few exceptions, is exactly what the Rockies are. The failure to make more of a splash at the trade deadline is attributable to years of chronic ineptitude in player acquisitions and serves as a good example of why the Rockies are on pace for over 100 losses.
Kevin: No, not a failure. This team clearly was in a position to be a seller, yet they didn’t move many pieces, probably because they aren’t set to lose any valuable pieces at the end of this year. Trading Guthrie was good: the Rockies saved some money and received a decent, but troubled, arm in return. The Scutaro trade was basically a wash. Betancourt and Belisle were probably the only pieces that could have gathered a decent return, and the Rockies do have them under contract for next year, so the Rockies still can trade them in the future. If this team experiences similar struggles next year, it must fire-sale. This team has two superstars in Tulo and CarGo, but the team has massive holes throughout the roster. Tulo and CarGo are so valuable that they could bring in the type of prospect haul that is needed to turn this franchise around.
Ned: The only benefit the Rockies received from the two trades was some small salary relief which helps ownership, but does nothing directly for the team. The team is fortunate, however, to have received anything at all for Guthrie. But having now seen Sanchez several times on the mound for the Rockies, it really does appear that the team got fair consideration since Sanchez is every bit as bad as Guthrie. Although it would have been an unpopular move, moving Rosario and keeping Nieves would have been a very smart move. But, it is likely that every other GM can also see that Rosario is a terrible receiver who is the ruination of any pitching staff.
Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.
Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion? Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com
Loading ...
Loading tweets...
18 comments
Marcus Farrell
August 8, 2012 at 2:18 PM (UTC -6)
I can’t believe how much everyone is blaming Rosario for the pitching woes. Does he have a hand in the extreme failures in the pitching staff? Of course he does but he’s not the main reason this pitching staff is garbage. The “young talent” we supposedly have came from trading guys like Ianetta and Smith who were not that great and thats why the “young talent” we got back is not that good. Why would expectations for them be so high when we got them in return for mediocre players? I think everyone would agree that for the most part the bullpen has been much better than the starters and Rosario is catching them too. If we’re going to blame him for the poor starters then we need to praise him for the bullpen. I’m so sick of hearing about how the pitching issues can be attributed to our young catcher when the staff is awful.
Dan
August 8, 2012 at 3:00 PM (UTC -6)
Someone needs to organize a parade downtown if/when O’Dowd is finally fired or dies.
Kurt H.
August 9, 2012 at 7:11 AM (UTC -6)
Has everyone read Troy Renck’s column in today’s ((Aug 9, 2012) Denver Post? He sounds just like Ned, blaming Rosario for the pitching problem of the Rockies. Don’t these guys realize that it doesn’t matter how bad your catcher is defensively, poor pitching gets hit out of the park. Passed balls and wild pitches don’t get squared-up and blasted by the batter. The Rockies problem is not Rosario’s catching, it is the pitching!
Kevin
August 9, 2012 at 8:42 AM (UTC -6)
Did YOU read the article? Renck never blames Rosario for pitchers giving up home runs. He blames Rosario for not being able to stop a pitch in the dirt or sometimes even catch the ball (13 passed balls). Renck says “It is when pitchers feel like they can’t spike breaking pitches or changeups with runners on third base.” He is absolutely right, but this extends to when runners are on any base. Having spent my entire life as a pitcher and several seasons catching, I can assure you the catcher does have an effect on pitching. As Renck points out, if pitchers don’t think the catcher can catch pitches out of the zone, they are going to end up making more mistakes in the zone by trying to be too careful. This, in turn, leads to more balls in play in general, thus more hits and home runs. Plus, the article doesn’t even mention Rosario’s positioning behind the plate, which all too often, is directly behind the plate instead of off to either side. And the article barely brushes on pitch selection, which is the responsibility of both of them. Yes, the pitching is atrocious, but bad catching adds fuel to the fire.
CodenameDuchess
August 9, 2012 at 2:49 PM (UTC -6)
From a common sense perspective what your wrote makes complete sense. My question is why hasn’t this been played out in the statistics. People on this blog have pulled the pitching stats for Rosario vs the other catchers and there really isn’t any difference.
That said I am 100% on board the Rosario to 1B or 3B train. You can’t teach 40 HR power and he has it. The team needs to find a permanent spot for him. In the off season pick up the next iteration of Torrealba or Olivo until the next prospect is ready.
Dan
August 9, 2012 at 3:20 PM (UTC -6)
Torrealba was just released by the Rangers. Wouldn’t mind seeing him back in Denver if a Ramon Hernandez trade can be worked out.
Kevin
August 9, 2012 at 6:25 PM (UTC -6)
With the way Rosario stabs at pitches, I don’t know that infield would be any better, defensively speaking, but at least the number of chances to miss a ball would go down. I think Torrealba would be a decent mentor, though probably not any better than Hernandez, from that perspective (of course, none of us knows how either of these guys is as a mentor, so we’re just guessing). Probably, the best option is to get a coach devoted to Rosario for the rest of the season and let him take his lumps. If Rosario really is causing pitchers to be more particular, they need to get over it and just pitch like they ought to. The season’s over, who cares about a few more passed balls.
JD
August 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM (UTC -6)
Exactly. Rosario’s bat needs to be in the lineup daily, not on the bench every third game. 1B is wide open if we just get rid of Cuddyer.
TroyF
August 10, 2012 at 1:31 AM (UTC -6)
For the love of God, then why does this not show up in the number? Forget catcher ERA. I posted simple runs per game with Rosario and all other Rockies catchers. If he’s so freakin disasterous, WHY ARE THEY NOT BETTER WHEN HE IS NOT CATCHING?
I mean, this isn’t hard Ned, simply give SOME PROOF. ANY PROOF.
Beyond that, lets say Rosario isn’t a catcher. OK, he can’t catch. Last I checked, he still has 35+ HR power. last I checked, he’s one of the only Rockies in the last ten years to even have a single year where he hit above average on the road. You find another position for the kid. It;s not like w have bunches of power hitters waiting for their big break in the minors right now.
What do you get for Rosario? You get a Chatwood type pitcher for a 23 year old power hitting prospect? Seriously? You think that’s a good idea? Please, God, Please tell me you never run this team. I have a hard time saying you would be as bad as DOD Ned, but you’d be darned close.
Again, just get some facts to prove your point. I’d even take some ridiculous stat like “When he catches against below .500 teams on the road, the Rockies have given up 4 more runs a game than with Hernandez in the same situation” I mean, really, I’d seriously take anything at this point. I”ve provided numbers not to try to prove my point, but to try to prove yours. The problem is, the numbers simply don’t back up what you say.
So try again. And rest assured that until you come up with something that shows some kind of proof that he’s really ruined this staff, I will continue to hammer for that information.
(For the record, I don’t think Rosario is a good defensive catcher either and I would strongly consider switching him positions in the offseason. But. . . just because I think that doesn’t give me the right to spout that he’s destroying our staff without some factual evidence. The evidence shows rather conclusively that the staff has given up less overall runs with him behind the plate than other catchers. Until you can counteract that with something more than “nuh uh, my dad is tougher than your dad,” it makes your analysis comical. (and not in a good way)
Ned Giles
August 10, 2012 at 8:18 AM (UTC -6)
Kevin–It is so refreshing to read your comment. The statistics slaves who continually blast me claim that they can’t find a stat proving that Rosario is a terrible receiver; and therefore he must not be having a ruinous impact on the pitching staff. Apparently, eyes are not sufficiently reliable for these guys. What statistic measures Cargo dogging it to first on a ground ball? What statistic measures Cuddyer busting hard to first on every ground ball? The answer to both questions: There is no such statistic. Because one can’t find such a stat in Baseball Reference, doesn’t mean that it is not happening on the field. Why are the stat slaves so unwilling to believe their eyes? Thank you for your perspective. I am certain the Rockies pitchers share your views in spades.
Kevin
August 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM (UTC -6)
Ned – thanks for the kind words. I’d love to see someone actually tackle the topic of which statistics are truly valuable (who isn’t already in love them). It seems like most columnists have forgotten that most of these advanced statistics were created as a way to assign monetary value to players for the poorer teams (that’s why it’s called Moneyball). I personally can’t stand WAR or FIP or ERA+, et al, because they don’t account for all of the other factors going on. They don’t account for daily changes in variables like weather for each game at each ballpark, hours of sleep by player, defensive positioning by type of pitch, velocity of pitches on balls put in play; I could go on. Counting statistics aren’t any better for evaluating players, but at least fans understand them. Plus, they are always calculated in exactly the same way (unlike WAR or FIP or ERA+, which are subject to change, depending on who is doing the calculating and other player’s statistics that year).
Just as an example, I once had a pitcher tell me he thought he pitched better when I played shortstop. I have no idea whether the numbers bore this out, but I’m guessing Rockies pitchers feel the same way when Tulo is out there. If they know he’s going to save them a hit now and then and rarely make errors, they’re going to be a little more comfortable and worry slightly less about balls in play. Same goes with catchers. If I know he’s going to block stuff in the dirt, I’m going to throw more pitchers that have that potential.
CodenameDuchess
August 10, 2012 at 1:25 PM (UTC -6)
Well feel free to take your chances with a team of Cuddyers and I’ll take mine with a team of Cargos. Look, everybody likes how Cuddyer approaches the game but don’t try to compare him with Carlos Gonzales and act like his hustle closes the gap in their production. With Cuddyer’s stat line the only thing his hustle has truly helped are the Dad’s in the stands looking to point out an example to their sons.
This kind of thinking has clouded this organization for far too long. I’m tired of the slow heart beats, clubhouse guys, and guys who are “just ball players”. Go find some talent that actually produces. Dan O’Dowd’s job is to field a baseball team that wins not provide jobs to average baseball players who happen to be great guys.
TroyF
August 11, 2012 at 10:34 AM (UTC -6)
I’m a stathead. Even I realize that you can’t base EVERYTHING off of stats. Stats cannot tell you that Cuddyer runs out every ground ball like it is his last. Stats cannot tell you that Bob gets to the park 2 hours early and is loved by everyone in the clubhouse while Jack shows up late and everyone hates him.
But stats CAN tell you if that pitcher truly pitches better when you play SS. Stats can tell you if a hitter hits better in the day or at night. Stats can tell you if a hitter hits horrible in day games after night games.
Sample size, is of course, critical to all stats. If I say last night proves that Rosario is not hurting the staff because the team pitched a shutout with him behind the plate, I’m an idiot. But when the numbers over 100 games show that the staff has given up less runs with Rosario behind the plate than with any other catcher AND said catcher hits better than any other one we have, it’s pretty conclusive that:
a) He isn’t destroying the staff
b) he’s the best option back there for now.
Don’t blame this on statistics. Don’t even blame it on your eyes. Again, simple conclusions can be made here:
1) Rosario is NOT a good defensive catcher.
2) The pitchers still give up fewer runs with him behind the plate
The real question is WHY is this the case? That’s what you should be asking. A big reason goes to a defensive play that both our eyes and statistics show he’s superior to any other catcher we have had this year. Rosario has a far better arm and controls the running game better. Rosario guns out 36% of basestealers, our other catchers do it at an under 20% clip. The league average is 26%.
You guys can both talk about “feeling” and “eyes” and throw out stuff like “statistics are ruining the game of baseball, you don’t understand how to watch a game” and be part of a Clint Eastwood movie. That’s all fine and good but that’s the line of thinking DOD uses. “that stupid GB/FB stat doesn’t have any impact on pitchers at Coors Field, I’ll just pick up another 10 of them and prove it to you”
If you want to assert Rosario is a bad defensive catcher, you will get complete support from this board and me. If you want to say Rosario is destroying this staff, you MUST come up with some proof to back up what you say. As of now, neither of you have done it. I fully expect no direct reply to my post with facts because YOU HAVE NONE.
Sorry, I’m not being a jerk here, I’m just asking for some facts to back up what you are saying.
FWIW, you also haven’t addressed the fact you want to trade a 23 year old power hitter who has shown he can hit on the road rather than look at a potential position switch. That’s the most mind blowing thing to me about you Ned. You would rather trade a potential we have salary control over for the next six years rather than give him more time to work on his catching or learn to play the OF. That is just flabbergasting to me.
Kevin Giles
August 14, 2012 at 11:25 AM (UTC -6)
How about this TroyF:
Rosario leads MLB in passed balls (14). The Rockies lead MLB in wild pitches (66), largely based on Rosario’s 40. The difference between the Rockies and the team with the second most wild pitches is the same as the difference between the second and the tenth most wild pitches. (!!!!)
Now, the catcher ERA is a terrible stat. Troy, you know this, I know this, everyone knows this. It’s problem is that it is based on the PITCHER, not the CATCHER. So, let’s say that Rosario catches Justin Verlander every fifth day, while Ramon Hernandez gets stuck with Armando Galarraga every fifth day. Do you really think that the fact that opposing teams score fewer runs when Rosario catches Verlander than when Hernandez catches Galarraga has any bearing whatsoever on the receiving abilities of the catchers? In order to quantify how a catcher impacts a pitcher, you would need to look at how individual batters fare against the same pitchers but with the different catcher. Then you would have quantifiable stats on catchers.
Troy, ask yourself this: if you were a young, developing pitcher with the Rockies, would you want to pitch to Rosario?
I absolutely, 100%, no doubt in my simple, small mind, would NEVER want to pitch to him.
One last thing, the grumblings I heard out of spring training were that the pitchers agree with me, and hate pitching to him.
Kevin
August 14, 2012 at 4:04 PM (UTC -6)
Troy, I agree with you that some stats can tell you things; all I said was I didn’t know if the numbers in my situation bore any proof because I don’t have those numbers. In Rosario’s case, you’re right about the strong arm, but that’s only 21 out 58 base stealers. He has allowed 54 PB/WP which more than cancels out caught stealing, even if we say a CS is worth 2 PB/WP. Thrown in his 9 errors and CS has to be worth 3 to 1 just to cancel out. As far as ERA, you being the stat-head, tell us how many games he’s caught road vs. home, which ball parks, injured or non-playing opposing players not facing his pitcher, opp. batting avg, just to name a few. Not to mention how the defense behind the pitchers have played with Rosario behind the plate, which nobody has bothered to assess. Maybe they’ve been a little more focused on positioning lately or when Rosario catches. ERA is simply not sufficient to evaluate a catcher’s effectiveness (just like pitchers).
I, for one, do not believe he is destroying the staff, nor should he be traded or moved to another position. The Rockies pitching staff stinks, regardless as to who catches them. He is 23 years old and has time to learn and get better, as do most of the pitchers. We also need to stop saying he’s an offensive juggernaut just because he’s hit a few homers. He’s hitting .238 with a .288 OBP and has probably the worst plate discipline on the team. But, again, he’s 23 and hopefully will get better.
And just for fun, stats don’t tell you anything or everything. Even by looking at the league average for attempted base stealers by catcher, you can’t possibly know how many guys DON’T try to steal against a given catcher; you can only estimate. A lot of advanced statistics rely on estimation and comparison, whereas passed balls, wild pitches, and OBP (to name a few) are black and white numbers.
TroyF
August 14, 2012 at 6:56 PM (UTC -6)
Thing is, I’m NOT using catcher ERA. I’m using actual runs given up. Again, if the pitchers hate pitching to him, they are doing an amazing job of showing it. Even with the wild pitches and passed balls he gives up, they give up less overall runs with him behind the plate.
Again, the real question we should all be asking is, WHY IS THIS THE CASE? Is it his arm controlling the running game? Does he call a better game? Does he calm their nerves better when they start to struggle? These are all questions, not answers. . . but isn’t that the fun of baseball?
I don’t care about the quotes from pitchers, I care about PROVING that they are right. This is what drives my interest in the game, especially since I am tormented by a garbage team on a daily basis.
Joel
August 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM (UTC -6)
O’Dowd should have been gone years ago. When was the last time we made a substantial upgrade to the team at the trade deadline? They have finished above .500 only 4 times in the past 12 years. How can a GM keep his job with that kind of record? Since 2000 they have averaged a 4th place finish in the division. This team has never been consistently good with O’Dowd in charge of personnel. He should have gone years ago.
Dan
August 11, 2012 at 4:33 PM (UTC -6)
Not only that, but they have only won over 74 games one other time, so only a total of 5 out of 12 season have finished with more than 74 wins. Unreal that he has been able to keep his job.