The Rockies closed the month by taking two of three from the new-look Dodgers and ensured that August would be the first winning month of the season. Surprisingly, the Rockies have played well without any real contribution from Carlos Gonzalez who has a triple slash line of .107/.242/.214 over the last 14 days. The relatively unknown “bunch of minor leaguers” (thanks, Mike Francesa), have performed well and could be a source of optimism in the midst of the 2012 disaster.This week, we discuss ifwe are buying what the Rockies are selling, if Dexter Fowler should be given a contract extension, and what September call-ups we are looking forward to seeing.
If the Rockies were a stock, would you currently buy or sell?
Brendan:Definitely not buy. The improved play of late has been fun to watch, but this team is not a worthy investment. The two stars (Tulo and CarGo) both have big warning signs: Tulo is an injury waiting to happen, and CarGo does not have the mental makeup to be the team leader. The stars set the tone for the team and it is hard to lead from the DL. The pitching has improved from “possibly the worst ever in MLB” to “bad” which has been nice, but it is still a subpar, albeit young, staff. The supposedly best part of the team is the young core, but their ceiling is a .500 ball club. Although consistent mediocrity would be a big step in the right direction for this franchise, striving to be average is not something that I would consider a strong buy.
Kevin: Absolutely buy. Everyone is down on the Rockies, and rightfully so. They have been an embarrassment this season, and the stock is about as low as it has ever been. But this team is much closer to being competitive than most people realize. First, the offense is very good. A healthy lineup next year will be one of the most productive in the league, and not just because of Coors Field; ballpark adjusted stats show that this team can hit. Second, the pitching is closer to being good than the stats show. If the Rockies can get a healthy Chacin and De La Rosa at the top of the rotation next year, which is well within the realm of possibility, then they only need two of the other pitchers to improve. Among Friedrich, Pomeranz, White, Nicasio, Sanchez, and Chatwood, it’s reasonable to hope that two will turn into decent starters for next year’s four-man rotation. Third, the four-man rotation is working and might even be a good idea. Reasons to not buy: (1) Tracy is still managing; (2) Helton and Cuddyer will play a lot; (3) the defense will probably still be terrible; and (4) there’s a good chance the pitching will still be terrible.
Ned:There is a third category: Hold. The young Rockies’ position players like Rutledge, Colvin and LeMahieu all are very promising. Blending the promising young players with the proven but still young talents of Tulo, Cargo and Dex is an exciting prospect. Pitching is an ongoing problem for the team, but has recently shown some improvement. However, unless and until ownership completes what we have speculated is the soft termination of Dan O’Dowd, the team still has its Captain Ahab at the helm of the ship steering the franchise erratically but relentlessly toward disaster. If DOD is gone, the Rockies are a buy. If O’Dowd remains at the helm, the team is more than a sell—in fact, we should short the stock. By the way, Mike Francesa exemplifies all that is wrong with talk radio with his shameless, extreme-voiced pandering to the ineducable, angry east coast fan.
Should the Rockies try to sign Dexter Fowler (no longer a Scott Boras client) to a multi-year contract?
Brendan:Yes, but not this offseason. Going back to the second half of 2011, Dex has looked like the player the Rockies thought that they had all along. However, he is arbitration eligible through 2015, so the Rockies have some time. Dex is on pace for career highs in nearly every single offensive category and his .308 average is currently 8th in the NL. Although I have been very happy to see Dex fulfill his potential, I do not think that it is a good idea to enter contract negotiations during what very well could turn out to be the high water mark of his career. There is nothing wrong with going to arbitration this year and then revisiting the contract extension next July. Waiting another half season would enable the Rockies to ensure that Dex can maintain his high level of play over multiple seasons and also provide more time to see how other players (namely, EY2 and Colvin) continue to develop.
Kevin:Look, he’s a top 10 offensive outfielder. He is an on-base machine. He has great speed. He has decent pop. His defense needs to improve (according to somewhat reliable defense metrics). Sure, he might be in the middle of a career year. But, he’s 26 and he only started hitting left-handed when he started playing minor league baseball. Dexter is a big part of this team going forward.If you want to see if he’s the real deal by waiting to lock him up until next year, fine. Just understand that the price will be higher after he has a successful 2013.
Ned:The answer depends on whether you consider Dex to be an important part of the Rockies nucleus for the next five to seven years. Dex has had a very nice year, but he still isn’t in the offensive league of either Tulo or Cargo. Nevertheless, Dex seems to have permanently corrected the holes in his swing, especially from the left side. Doesn’t Dex make you feel confident when he is at bat with men in scoring position? He has become a solid hitter who consistently takes very professional at bats. While EY and Colvin are both excellent Coors Field centerfielders, Dex is the best of the three. Therefore, the Rox should definitely try to lock-up Dex for the long term, especially now that he is no longer represented by Scott Boras.
Which potential September call-up do you want to see the most?
Brendan:Troy Tulowitzki. He may not “count” as a traditional September call-up, but we have already been watching a team full of traditional September guys all year. I am ready to finally see Tulo again and I am looking forward to watching a Tulo-Rutledge middle infield. Much has been made of how good these young hitters are, but I want to see how everyone responds (especially CarGo) to Tulo being in the lineup every day. The Rockies are a much better team when Tulo and CarGo are anchoring the lineup and I am excited to see how dynamic the offense can be. Sure, I am interested in seeing guys like Nolan Arenado (who is not even on the 40 man roster) and Tim Wheeler, but I will be tuning in to watch Tulo, not the kids.
Kevin:After winning MVP of last year’s Arizona Fall League MVP over Bryce Harper and Mike Trout, Nolan Arenado has had a decent season at AA Tulsa and has been called out as a bum. He is by far the most important minor league call-up, and hopefully he can turn it on in the majors. That being said, the guy I’m excited to see is Corey Dickerson. He started the year in Modesto and raked there. He was promoted to Tulsa, and he has hit better than Arenado there (granted, Dickerson is two years older than Arenado). Also, an important quasi-call-up is Jorge De La Rosa. It would be great for him to get a few starts under his belt this season in order to prepare him for leading this team to its first division title next season. Dare to dream.
Ned: Everyone wants to see the highly touted Nolan Arenado. Although the Tulsa third baseman has posted a mediocre .281 BA this season, he has a respectable .758 OPS. It would be good to see his defense in person, and also try to gauge his attitude which has been the subject of some negative whispers. In addition to Arenado, let’s take a good look at Tulsa catcher Lars Davis who has hit for average (.288) with some power (.390 SLG and .723 OPS). We could evaluate whether the Rockies have a young catcher in the system who can actually catch cleanly, frame pitches, block balls in the dirt, and still hit the ball. Rockies fans could then see first-hand that it is possible to be both a decent hitter and a good catcher. If Davis works out, the Rockies could send Rosario to Tulsa or Modesto until he learns how to be a baseball catcher.
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...
72 comments
1 ping
TroyF
September 1, 2012 at 4:28 PM (UTC -6)
I just know I will never be let down by Ned O’Dowd. He won’t go two of these things without bashing Rosario.
So we are coming off a streak where we played very well. I suppose the guy with splits of .304/.367/.667/1.034, 17 RBI, 16 runs scores and 7 bombs is the guy who should be sent down to AA.
Really good call Ned. I think we need to make sure Rutledge and his 9 errors in 22 games should probably go back to AA. Cargo and his horrific defense this year probably needs to head to AAA as well. (and no, that isn’t a joke, look at advanced metrics, they brutalize Cargo this year)
As you need to see old Lars in person to figure out if he’s good, let me fill you in on him:
He’s a 26 year old in AA (OLD for that league) He has a .390 slugging percentage this year. In six career minor league seasons his triple slash is 252/317/349 He has thrown out 21% of would be base stealers this year. That would put him 60th if he were in the major leagues. Sadly, he isn’t trying to throw major league basestealers out right now, he’s trying to throw out AA runners.
So I will answer the question for you. He won’t hit or field decently. But I’m sure he’d be a heck of a fit in the clubhouse as he’s a really good guy and a hard worker. Lets throw him in there and get worse hitting and worse control of the running game and we can all see if he can maybe place balls a little bit better.
Or we can let the kid who is producing continue to work on things while he’s just finding his stride as a hitter and is becoming a true force with the bat.
I’ve seen some bizzare things, some truly bizzare things. I never thought I would see someone write that Lars flippin Davis should take at bats away from Rosario. At this point, you have to be writing it simply so you can see my responses.
Kevin Giles
September 4, 2012 at 8:41 AM (UTC -6)
Agreed about Cargo’s defense. It has been terrible this year. Sunday’s game was a perfect example. First he bobbled and dropped a waist-high bounce off a hit that allowed two runners to advance one base each. Then he twice sailed throws to home plate over the cutoff men in futile attempts to throw out the runners at the plate. Neither throw was close to getting the runners, and each time his throw allowed the other runner to advance from first to second. Brutal defense.
Seth
September 1, 2012 at 10:35 PM (UTC -6)
The two prospects to look out for should be TIm Wheeler and Kyle Parker, although I do not think Kyle Parker will get called up but those two could be the most intriguing for a few reasons. Everyone on here is eager to get rid of Michael Cuddyer (including me), well here is the chance to get rid of him. Both Parker and Wheeler have power needed for a corner outfield and the arm for right field. If either one of them have a good showing and show that they can stay in the big leagues and be a reliable player, this could push the Rockies to make Cuddyer an extra and therefore expendable. Yes we probably know Cuddyer will most likely play first base next season with Helton but if Parker or Wheeler do well and make the team, there is no way they are going to give Colvin away after he has bounced back this year so I think this will force the Rockies to play Colvin at 1st and then Wheeler or Parker can take over in right. No only do we get younger and cheaper in both spots but also more productivity at both positions too. These guys are our best chance to get Michael Cuddyer shipped out of town by next season.
And Ned, you are a fool to completely disregard all of the good things about Rosario. His good outweighs his bad by a lot, he is going to be our catcher for a long time to come and be very good at it and you will end up looking like an idiot.
Kevin Giles
September 4, 2012 at 8:43 AM (UTC -6)
Kyle Parker looks very promising. After a decent season last year in Ashville, he has really taken a big step forward this year in Modesto. His walks are up, his strikeouts are down, and he still has good power. I agree that he probably won’t be called up, but it will be interesting to see how he does in the Arizona Fall League this year.
Kurt H.
September 2, 2012 at 9:24 AM (UTC -6)
While Ned is right on Dexter Fowler, I do not understand his hatred of Rosario. In fact, he goes out of his way to make negative comments about Rosario. Rosario hits homers at a pace that has not been seen in Rockies rookies. Ned can’t prove that Rosario is a bad catcher, but we can prove that he is a home run hitter. Ned really needs to stop ripping on Rosario. He would like to send Rosario to the Rockies A level minor league team. What a stupid move that would be. Even O’Doud is smarter than Ned.
Jeremy
September 4, 2012 at 12:42 PM (UTC -6)
I would dare to wager Rosario hits HRs at a rate that almost no Rockies player has hit them at, rookie or not.
Someone should extrapolate hit HRs/AB over a full season of ABs and let us know what the number is…
Jeremy
September 4, 2012 at 12:57 PM (UTC -6)
I just did the math and that extrapolates to 50 HRs annually.
Not likely that the math would just work out that way, but it shows how powerful he really has been.
JD
September 4, 2012 at 5:03 PM (UTC -6)
A catcher will never get 650 ABs in a season. Rosario would have to move to 1B to do that.
Jeremy
September 5, 2012 at 11:49 AM (UTC -6)
Agreed….that may be a reason to move him to first base.
Well, that and his sub-par catching performances.
Hard 2B a fan here
September 8, 2012 at 9:38 AM (UTC -6)
Dexter will be offered a long-term contract somewhere. I cannot understand why so many here would not have the Rockies lock him up. Great defense at a critical position and a fine hitter when not forced to bat leadoff. Another example of mishandling of talent that this organization seems to do time and time again. And unloading Cargo because of a few bases allowed? Who the hell wouldn’t lose focus now and then the way this season has gone? Hey, maybe he was exhausted from chasing all those Guthrie/Moyer/etc. laser shots all over Lodo. He’s put in more miles than a Kenyan Olympian, and for what purpose? So we don’t lose 100? He’s shown leadership by carrying the team often in the past three years, and is more consistent than Tulo.
‘The best GM in the game’ has this franchise looking for viable major leaguers to fill holes every year, and most posts seem to want to unload the only players that should be penciled in every day.
Also, why the (nasty expletive) does Apodaca still pull a paycheck?????
CodenameDuchess
September 2, 2012 at 4:42 PM (UTC -6)
DOD or not “shorting” the Rockies stock is just plain dumb. The Rockies are the worst team in the NLWest, one of the worst teams in all of baseball and possess the worst pitching staff in baseball. However, to think that this team wont improve with the additions of Tulo, DLR, Chacin, and Nicasio is just bad investing. As one mentioned above this team can hit and we haven’t seen what this offense can do with Tulo mixed in.
I’m a strong buy. If we have some health next year a core of…
1. Dex – CF
2. Rutledge – 2B
3. Cargo – LF
4. Tulo – SS
5. Colvin – RF
6. Cuddyer/Helton – 1B
7. Rosario – C
8. Pacheco/Nelson/FA – 3B
P1 – Chacin
P2 – DLR
P3 – Nicasio
P4 – Pomeranz
P5 – Friedrich
P6 – White
I think that is .500 team on the safe side and good for 3rd in the NL West behind SF and LA. That’s a pretty solid ROI.
If our new mutli-headed brain trust can flip Cuddyer (plus money and probably a prospect) for a serviceable 3rd baseman (Headley?) we could start Helton at 1st full time (for his last hoorah ala Chipper) and slide Pacheco back into a more appropriate utility role (3rd/1st/2nd emergency Catcher). Bring in a pitcher or two like Jason Marquis (not necessarily him but that type of serviceable veteran) and if some young pitchers develop (Nicasio/Pomeranz/Friedrich/White) this team could compete again and that investment turns into a home run.
Obviously the last scenario requires some luck on the health front and some development from the pitchers which the Rockies haven’t proven capable of but it is not out of the realm of possibility. I think there are a lot of hedge funds that would like that kind of return profile……
1. Almost zero risk of capital (Baring further injuries they can’t get any worse!)
2. Decent base case returns (Full year of Tulo/Chacin/DLR/Nicasio should make this a .500 team)
3. Potential for out sized returns (Everything in #2 plus the development of young pitchers and a decent move or two i.e. shipping Cuddy for a 3rd basemen)
JD
September 2, 2012 at 7:57 PM (UTC -6)
I would love to see us get Headley for Cuddyer’s money, and I’d give up about four of the AAAA players we have now to get him.
Eric Garcia
September 3, 2012 at 9:37 AM (UTC -6)
Interesting idea about trading for Headley. The prospect would have to be Arenado for San Diego to take Cuddyer’s contract. I think I would do it. Headley’s elevated himself to a top five third baseman this year. Arenado has a high ceiling, and he probably should have been playing in Denver for the past two months, minor regressions notwithstanding, but I would flip him for Headley.
Kevin: thank you for mentioning that the four man rotation might even be a good idea. At first I thought that the staff was simply not built for such an experiment. Now, I think the Rockies pitching staff (at least as it exists now) is perfect for it. It has to be competent veterans or budding youngsters. No free agent would come to a place that might limit wins (not that the Rockies have ever been an ideal destination for a free agent pitcher), which it turn might limit the chances for a big contract. It could work. I could do without a staff ace if a collective could accumulate more team wins.
Jeremy
September 4, 2012 at 12:53 PM (UTC -6)
“You guys are getting pretty excited over Headley. Take away his ridiculous August and he has once again been just average offensively this season.
I would rather wait to see if he can finish this month with the hot bat before assuming he has actually become an above-average player.”
The above is what I typed until I looked at Headleys OPS away from that crap-hole Petco where nobody can hit well…he has a .939 OPS away, and it was .864 the year before, so I retract my comments above.
It would be nice to get a third baseman like that, but San Diego won’t let him go, he is their lone offensive player. In all honesty, that team is just as bad as the Rookies, just in completely different areas. I guess it goes to show you how much better one or two real pitchers can make you.
CodenameDuchess
September 4, 2012 at 6:39 PM (UTC -6)
There was talk of them moving him at the trade deadline as well as last year. Who knows how serious they are or how big of a package they want but I think it is worth exploring.
Eric Garcia
September 5, 2012 at 10:50 AM (UTC -6)
I say the four man rotation has “worked” in that the Rockies have won more games than lost since implementing it. The record is 41-37 I believe. Not spectacular, and it included a terrible stretch against quality teams and a good stretch against bad teams. Still, I’m interested to see how it plays out in this last month against playoff bound or hopeful clubs. The problem with it will be the contract hopes of pitchers who will be unhappy with the system because it might cause them to lose monetarily valuable wins, even though we all know that that particular statistic is antiquated. To extend the political analogy, that can be seen as Republican obstruction that at best mitigates the potential of implemented policy and at worst renders functionally unworkable.
Still, the best we can all hope for right now, at the very least, a new front office that has to grapple with the continuation of the four-man rotation in the off-season.
Kevin J
September 5, 2012 at 7:37 PM (UTC -6)
According to a column by Troy Renck, the Rockies were 65 games in at 25-40 when they implemented the four-man rotation. Prior to 9/5, the Rockies stand at 56-78, meaning they are 31-38 under the new scheme. I noticed this same error in Jonah Keri’s power rankings this week on ESPN. What it means is that the Rockies are still losers under the four-man, just slightly less embarrassing losers (depending on how you look at it) and that the four-man isn’t really working. What is working is not trotting Guthrie out, Chacin pitching well, a favorable schedule and a little luck. Example: 9/4 against the Braves, Pomeranz gave up 5 hits and a walk, threw 72 pitches in just 3 innings, and snuck out without giving up a run.
More proof: The first 40 games of the 4-man resulted in a record of 13-27 (they lost game 41 as well), far worse than 25-40 with a regular rotation. After the Braves series ends, the Rockies have 26 games left, 10 against teams still in the playoff hunt. This means they’ll be facing mostly September call-ups the rest of the season, making it harder to include wins and losses in this little experiment. If this continues into next season, we’re pretty much guaranteed a repeat of the late 90′s/early 2000′s Rockies that never seriously contended.
Brendan Giles
September 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM (UTC -6)
It is convenient to attribute the recent success of the new strategy to the schedule while simultaneously pointing to the early struggles as a sign that of flawed strategy. Please remember that when the change was made, the Rockies immediate opponents included the pre-fire sale Phillies (twice), Texas, Washington (twice), St. Louis, and Pittsburgh, so scheduling was an issue there too. As far as determining whether or not it is working, here are some stats that I cherry picked because they fit my opinion:
Pre “paired pitching” (that felt dirty – a little too O’Dowdish, but calling it a four man rotation is not accurate):
373 runs allowed in 65 games (5.74 runs/game)
Post “paired pitching”: 363 runs in 70 games (5.19 runs/game)
extrapolated over a whole season the traditional approach was on pace to result in 930 runs and the new approach would result in 841 runs. I think that is a big deal. 841 is still stoo much, I am not arguing that, but it is a big improvement over 930.
The personel changes have no doubt impacted the numbers as well, but to deny the possibility that the change in strategy has had a positive effect is naive. Similarly, to claim that this strategy is the entire answer without considering the player turnover is equally ignorant. The answer lies somewhere in the middle and I am on board with seeing how this new approach plays out in 2013 with a healthy lineup and a full season of Chacin, DLR and Pomeranz.
Kevin
September 3, 2012 at 10:45 AM (UTC -6)
It must be hard to come up with things to talk about when the subject is an absolute nightmare of a franchise. How about a real topic … what do the Rockies need to do to rebuild the club? Until the owners perform a complete housecleaning of management and coaches, we can look forward to .500 at best with more seasons like this one. This also goes for the 4-man rotation. Eric/Kevin: are you seriously falling for this smokescreen? If by “working” you mean they use it everyday, then, sure, it’s working. But this is not a long-term solution and will only damage the club long-term. The minor league teams don’t employ it, so it’s going to mess with any pitcher the Rockies call up. Not only will free agent pitchers avoid the team like the plague, but draft picks might refuse to sign. They’ll be left trying to fill 8 spots with non-prospect rookies and veterans that nobody wants. I repeat, not even decent 5 starters will come here.
The team needs to make hard decisions and stop falling in love with every player that comes up through the system. If the idea for Fowler is to sign him long-term at a reasonable rate in order to trade him, then it’s a good idea. If the idea is to keep him long-term, they should wait to make sure he doesn’t regress to the .260 hitter who strikes out too much, that he was prior to this season. If he is staying, EY or Blackmon need to be dealt. Arenado should be considered trade bait considering Pacheco and Rutledge are already productive and viable starters. Colvin will share time with Cuddyer and Helton next season and hopefully prove to be Helton’s replacement (Cuddyer isn’t going anywhere; current management isn’t nearly smart enough to figure out how to deal him).
Next season should be considered a transition year and Pomeranz, White, Freidrich, De La Rosa, and Chacin should be the rotation and given every chance to prove themselves. Helton should play as much as possible to ride off into the sunset (for the sake of the fans as much as his). Rosario needs to continue developing behind the plate. They can expect to win around 75 next season (optimistic). If the team can sack up and trade Fowler and Arenado for one or two starting pitchers, maybe we can start to believe in this team’s desire to win again.
JD
September 4, 2012 at 5:12 PM (UTC -6)
Indeed, the four-man is “working” in the same way that Obama has had “success” – the agenda has been “successfully” implemented. That says nothing about whether it’s a good thing.
The positional roster has too many AAAA players, but it’s not our major obstacle right now. Tulo, Cargo, Fowler, Rutledge, and Rosario all look like plus players who can compensate for weakness at two infield spots. Pitching is THE problem.
Now, on one hand, the 75-pitch limit is unduly sabotaged by the fact that starters going under 5 innings can’t get wins. There’s no reason for it to be that way. If you throw four shutout innings and ultimately win 8-5, with each reliever giving up a run, the starter clearly outperformed any reliever, so he should get the win. Giving the win to some guy who threw three pitches is absurd by comparison.
At the same time, even if they could get wins, no starter will want to come here to be limited to 75 pitches.
Chacin’s recent outings, combined with the entire 2009 rotation, tell me all I need to know. You can pitch at Coors Field. You just have to be a good pitcher. O’Dowd can’t find enough good pitchers. That’s why he needs to go. And also, you need a manager who will pull a guy when he needs to be pulled. Maybe at Coors that’s earlier than for other teams. But it can be done.
If anything, the change to make is to play with 13 pitchers and 12 positional guys in the lineup, instead of the usual 12 and 13. Then we’ll have the pen arms to not fear pulling the starter early. If we stop carrying a Giambi type, we can do this. 4 OFs, 6 INFs, and 2 Cs.
CodenameDuchess
September 4, 2012 at 7:41 PM (UTC -6)
Good post. However I believe that Colvin has proven as much as Rosario, at least in respect to not being a AAAA player. Colvin had a tough 2011 but he was a solid player in 2010 (20 HRs, 113 OPS+). That said 1st and 3rd are clearly AAAA positions at this point. I’d love Helton to comeback an be a 3+ WAR 1st baseman but I think the probability of that is pretty damn low. Pacheco is a gamer and a line drive machine but is a defensive liability with no power playing a power position. Right now he is a stop gap. I do like his potential as a utility player.
JD
September 5, 2012 at 10:21 AM (UTC -6)
I don’t consider Colvin a AAAA. I just don’t expect him to be the positive difference-maker that the five I listed can be. Rosario is far younger and has more room to grow. Dex adds speed, switch-hitting, walks, and fewer strikeouts (not that that’s saying much) to what Colvin brings, at the cost of some home runs. I expect a lot more WAR from Dex than Colvin in coming years.
Our AAAA list:
Herrera (actually, he may just be AAA)
Nelson
Pacheco
Lamehieu
EY2 (needs to prove he can hit over the long term)
Blackmon (maybe just AAA here, too)
Brown (maybe just AAA here, too)
Throw in Helton and Hernandez, who have fallen to AAAA level, and Cuddyer, who performs way under his contract and is too old to be part of the future, and we have our share of issues. If we could move a collection of these guys for a Headley, it’d be a great deal. Doubt the Padres would want our scraps, though.
Kevin J
September 5, 2012 at 7:50 PM (UTC -6)
I doubt they would trade Headley for all of those guys in one package. Maybe Fowler for Headley straight up or with Arenado thrown in, but that would be a silly trade. Like you said, the problem is pitching and bringing Headley in does nothing to solve that problem.
I don’t understand everyone advocating for Rosario to move to 1B. The guy can’t block pitches in the dirt or sometimes even catch the ball – how does 1B make any sense at all? Plus, it’s going to take just as much work to teach him 1B or even 3B and you lose his arm behind the plate. Since he needs work regardless, and the Rockies have no option at catcher, but lots of options at 1B and 3B, leave him back there. Even if his defense never improves, the Dodgers and Mets put up with Piazza behind the dish; a universally agreed defensive disaster who couldn’t even throw out runners.
How do justify including Pacheco on your AAAA list? He’s hitting over .300, hits in the clutch and his power stroke is starting to show up. That list should stop with Herrera and Nelson, two guys who’ve proven they’re utility players at best. The rest are young guys who should be given a chance and EY (jury’s still out).
JD
September 6, 2012 at 11:51 AM (UTC -6)
Pacheco plays corner infield with below-average defense for a corner infielder. Such players are expected to be plus players offensively. Yet Pacheco’s dreadful power and low walk rate yield an OPS of .772, which is not a plus number for a corner infielder. This is why ESPN’s stats page lists him with a WAR of -0.7.
If he’s that bad when he’s hitting .312, what do you expect over the long term? I don’t expect him to hit .312 forever.
With his power, walk, and defense issues, he needs to hit .350 to be a worthwhile MLB starter. He’s a utility player at best.
Which answers your other point. You say “the Rockies have lots of options at 1B”. They don’t. They have Cuddyer until the albatross contract is up, old man Helton who shouldn’t start anymore, and AAAA players. Rosario could trump all of that. He’d be at least as good as Cuddyer defensively (and Cuddyer WILL be the starting 1B for the next two years, so that’s really the only comparison I need to make).
By moving Rosario to 1B, we’d add 250 ABs/year for his bat, improve the D at catcher substantially, and lose only the difference between Cuddyer’s bat and that of some new catcher. It won’t happen, but it’s a good idea.
Brendan Giles
September 5, 2012 at 11:47 AM (UTC -6)
i completely agree about the “wins” stat. too often the win is awarded to an undeserving reliever. You also hit the nail on the head with the 13 pitchers on the active roster: if this rotation is going to stay, then it has to happen.
the number of starters in the rotation does not matter. and, by the way, the rotation experiment is working: the last 28 games: 18-10 record with 5 shutouts. regardless of the competition, that is a pretty big difference. anyway, this is all about limiting the exposure of the starting pitchers. the 4 man rotation and 75 pitches are a result of trying to implement the strategy and back calculating how to figure out how to make it work on a 25 man (12 pitcher) roster. the 4 man thing is not working: guys cannot and will not stay healthy, so a 5 man roation is going to be in order. even staying with 3 “partners” leaves only 4 spots for the traditional bullpen arms (7th, 8th, 9th inning guys and a lefty specialist). that is not enough so carrying 13 pitchers is going to be required.
As far as getting “good” pitchers fr the Rockies, I would love to trot out guys like verlander, strasburg, halladay, sabathia, and kershaw everyday, but it is not happening. Even Rockies pitchers that have had success at Coors do not maintain it (Hampton, Jennings, Chacon, Jimenez to name a few). The same thing will happen to Chacin or DLR or Pomeranz or whoever. It is a matter of when, not if. The general rule is that a starter needs 3 “out” pitches to be able to get through the lineup more than twice and between the thin air and fatigue, this has proven to be too much to ask. If the expectation is dropped to 2x through the lineup and guys only need 2 “out” pitches then suddenly there are many more options.
The whole rotation issue can actually be looked at through a “moneyball” point of view: exploiting market ineffeciencies. Everyone wants pitchers who have 3+ out pitches and can be your ace, but supply and demand on the market means these types of guys are not coming to Colorado of their own free will, not matter who the GM is. However, the pitchers that have 2 out pitches and make up the back end of rotations around the league are plentiful and easier to acquire. The paired pitching strategy positions the Rockies uniquely to take advantage of this saturated market. The only question was will it work? It took Tracy a while to figure out how to manage it (especially how to get the ball to the from starter to partner during a clean inning without burning a third arm), but it seems to be coming together.
Kevin J
September 5, 2012 at 8:10 PM (UTC -6)
So are you on the thin-air causes extra fatigue bandwagon as well? Until someone provides concrete medical evidence, this should remain a myth and we should all scoff at this. 1) This phenomenon only seems to affect starting pitchers. 2) Rates of Tommy John surgery are rising across the board, not just in Colorado, and I’m betting the ratios are the same everywhere. 3) You can’t tell me that pitching games in thin air is any more taxing than pitching summers in Cincinnati in on-field temperatures topping 130F in 85% humidity (an umpire actually died on the field in Cincinnati). 4) These guys have access to world-class trainers and facilities and are often called world-class athletes, yet less oxygen for the equivalent of ~36 hours spread over 24 weeks is enough to wreck their bodies? I’m going to go ahead and be a little skeptical of that claim.
Bottom line: this is an excuse thrown out by DOD and Rockies’ management to lay blame somewhere other than themselves.
Brendan Giles
September 6, 2012 at 11:16 AM (UTC -6)
The oxygen content of the atmosphere does impact how much hemoglubin is on your red blood cells, so yes, thin air does actually impact muscle function in mammals. I am not saying that decreases in O2 saturation cause arm injuries or that it increases recovery time. Although debatable, I side with you that these guys are professional athletes and the thin air should not affect their training. The decreased density of the air reduces the efficiency of the break on a ball, so it requires more initial force to achieve the same movement. This is what inreases fatigue in the pitchers and, at leat in my opinion, explains why starters are preferentially affected (they throw more pitches). Playing baseball in hot muggy conditions is WAY worse than playing on a gorgeous 80 degree denver night – no arguments there. The point I am trying to make is that the fatigue issue is not a training problem, it is a physics problem: the pitcher’s arm must generate more torque on the ball which puts more strain on the ligaments which leads to more injuries. That is the fatigue argument i am buying (and selling).
Brendan Giles
September 6, 2012 at 11:18 AM (UTC -6)
apparently the oxygen content also makes me not be able to spell (or spell check). stupid big word hemoglobin.
Michael
September 6, 2012 at 9:42 PM (UTC -6)
I understand the idea that the “thin” air reduces drag on breaking pitches, but if it were that great of an effect would the reduced drag not allow fastballs to be faster? This does not seem to be the case.
Brendan Giles
September 7, 2012 at 7:55 AM (UTC -6)
You are correct in applying the physics to pitch velocity as well. Our colleague, Brandon Cloud, had an exceptional piece on pitch movement/velocity earlier in the year (you can find it here: http://www.blakestreetbulletin.com/2012/02/28/pitching-in-coors-part-ii/) that I would highly recommend if you are interested in the subject. To summarize (and hopefully not butcher his conclusions), he found that pitches do break less at Coors Field than at other parks, but then went on to point out that this actually affects movement on fastballs more so than on breaking pitches (at measured by percent change). But to the fatigue point, when pitchers see their curves and sliders not having that sharp break, I would imagine they put a little extra on it the next time. In trying to tie the two arguments together, I would say that the lack of movement on fastballs is the more important reason for Coors vs road performance disparity, but lack of movement on breaking pitches (and the resulting extra effort) is the more influential factor in fatigue and injuries. Of course, it is probably impossible to ever completely remove one factor from the other, but reduced air friction does impact the flight of the pitched ball.
JD
September 6, 2012 at 10:27 AM (UTC -6)
You realize that the “four-man” has had five men since we’ve been winning? And that pitchers like Chacin have been going 7 innings? It’s not a quirk in how we manage the rotation that’s doing that. The pitchers are just doing better.
Brendan Giles
September 6, 2012 at 10:59 AM (UTC -6)
correct. the rotation consists of 5 pitchers. the arms will not hold up on three days rest, which makes your suggestion that the Rockies carry 13 pitchers that much more important. chacin’s 7 inning performance, while nice to see, is by far the outlier. the majority of the starts have been for 5 innings or less and still result in the increased success. I am of the opinion that the pitchers are doing better as a direct result of the limited exposure. I’m in the minority on this. Fine. But there is no way to prove the point either way. I am trying to make it clear that the “4 man” thing or the ’75 pitch limit” thing are not the focus of the new strategy. Getting hung up on how many pitches a guy is allowed to throw or how many pitchers are in the rotation is missing the point. The strategy is all about limiting exposure. The first attempt to implement the strategy was a 4 man rotation with 75 pitch limits. It is not going to work because of the health of the arms. This does not mean the overarching strategy is flawed, it just means the implementation needs to be altered. I support a 5 man rotation with a more traditional ~100 pitch limit, but only two times through the lineup in most cases (a rare performance like Chacin’s is at the -gulp- manager’s discretion). Usually the pitchers should not need 100 pitches to get through the lineup twice, but it allows some wiggle room without being held to strict pitch counts. Again this brings up your point about 13 pitchers on the active roster. That is the change I think the Rockies will have to make.
Kevin Giles
September 5, 2012 at 8:45 AM (UTC -6)
Kevin,
Can you explain how the four-man rotation going to “mess up” minor league pitchers because they pitch on a traditional five-man rotation in the minors? It doesn’t seem like there will be much of a transition, especially because the evidence regarding the Rockies current starting rotation shows that they have better numbers in the four-man rotation. Here’s a Denver Post article: http://www.denverpost.com/rockies/ci_21431269/colorado-rockies-piggyback-four-man-rotation-2013
Here’s another article showing that it might just be a good idea: http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/35536/paired-pitching
What is this talk about not being able to sign free agent pitchers? The Rockies stopped signing free agents long before the four-man. When we talk about free agent pitchers, you have to go back to the likes Darryl Kile, Mike Hampton, and Denny Neagle. The Rockies haven’t signed a high-profile pitcher in a long long time, so this won’t have any impact on that.
Also, will a rational pitcher who is drafted by the Rockies not sign because of the four-man rotation? Remember Matt Harrington? Take a look at this: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=090423/harrington
And finally, don’t forget that Dex’s career OBP has always been about 90 points higher than his average. So, yeah, he strikes out too much, but even when he’s hitting .260, he’s still gets on base more than just about anyone else in the lineup.
Kevin Giles
September 6, 2012 at 9:35 AM (UTC -6)
How is the four-man rotation going to “mess up” minor league pitchers because they don’t pitch on it? Pitchers often go from reliever to starter or starter to reliever and do just fine. Also, the evidence we have from Rockies starters is that they are doing better under the four-man rotation than before it.
TroyF
September 4, 2012 at 9:07 PM (UTC -6)
Do not make the same mistake with Atenado as Ned is making with Rosario. Arenado is a 21 year old (he is the 5th youngest player in that league) He is not embarrasing himself either, hitting over .280 Only the idiot Rockies would be dissapointed in that.
Beyond that, be careful of the Pacheco hype train. Yes, he can hit. But he is mot a good hitter for power. His slugging at Coors has rivaled bad back Helton. He is aso terrible at 3B. Of the 83 players who have played st least 90 innings at the position, he ranks 82nd. If he werea 23 year old power hitting propect or a guy who had major speed, you live with the growing pains. A guy who turns 27 in January, who has no power and is a defensive liability? Groom him into a utility player and hope the power comes and he forces you to find a position for him.
But ack to the big mistake. . . If you are rebuilding, you do not trade any top prospect you control for 6 or more years. You do not giveup team controled players unless you think you ar one player away. The Rockes re not. You keep the kids in the system.
Kevin Giles
September 6, 2012 at 1:16 PM (UTC -6)
Any disappointment surrounding Arenado this year is that he hasn’t destroyed AA like he did the AFL. But, the guy still looks legit: his glove is way better than it was when they drafted him, he can hit, he doesn’t strike out much, and he’s young for his league. All of this is at a position of need for the Rockies.
…segue into Pacheco…
Totally agree about Pacheco. He really only does one thing well: hit for average. His defense is bad, he doesn’t walk much, and he doesn’t have much power. He never had much power in the minors, so although he has a knack for getting the barrel on the ball, it doesn’t look like he will develop much power. And he’s old for a rookie. Pacheco will be a quality utility player.
Lastly, giving up on Rosario should not be a consideration. He’s clearly a productive member of the team going forward. His receiver skills need lots of work, but his offensive and running game skills are sky high
Kevin Giles
September 5, 2012 at 9:03 AM (UTC -6)
Here’s a list of some starting pitchers from the past few years. Bottom line, the Rockies don’t sign free agent pitchers, so any disincentive for free agent MLB pitchers to come here won’t have any impact on the Rockies’ free agency prospects, because there were none to begin with
Aaron Cook – draft
Chacin – latin free agent
Jorge de la Rosa – trade
Jason Hammel – trade
Drew Pomeranz – trade
Alex White – trade
Tyler Chatwood – trade
Jeremy Guthrie – trade
Jonathan Sanchez – trade
Christian Friedrich – draft
Juan Nicasio – latin free agent
Franklin Morales – latin free agent
Jason Marquis – trade
Josh Fogg – MLB free agent
Jason Hirsch – trade
Jason Jennings – draft
Jeff Francis – draft/free agent
Rodrigo Lopez – trade
Here’s a list of every pitcher who has started a game for the Rockies.
http://colorado.rockies.mlb.com/stats/sortable.jsp?c_id=col#sortColumn=gs§ionType=sp&playerType=ALL&statType=pitching&season=&season_type=ALL&game_type='R'&elem=%5Bobject+Object%5D&tab_level=child&click_text=Sortable+Player+pitching&page=1&ts=1346856996232
JD
September 5, 2012 at 10:23 AM (UTC -6)
Saying that not making our free agent prospects worse makes a situation acceptable requires the assumption that today’s free agent performance is acceptable. It isn’t. Or at least, it isn’t so long as we draft and develop the way O’Dowd has. Something needs to IMPROVE. Holding steady is not acceptable.
Kevin J
September 5, 2012 at 7:55 PM (UTC -6)
I like how you left off Mike Hampton and Denny Neagle, two free agent pitchers who are arguably the whole reason why free agent pitchers don’t sign with the Rockies – a combination of DOD not wanting to screw up again and pitchers having a stigma about Coors Field. The point, as I stated above, is this screwy scenario of a rotation will keep the few still considering the idea away. And again, this will probably keep draft picks from signing as well.
Brendan Giles
September 6, 2012 at 11:37 AM (UTC -6)
Hampton and Neagle, while lightning rods, are hardly the only examples for not signing with Colorado. Darryl Kile, Bruce Hurst, and Greg Harris all were pretty terrible here too. The point is that the Rockies of the past 5 years do not sign free agent pitchers at a very high rate so going back to 10-15 years for examples is not really applicable (and yes, I realize the ones i threw out fall in that category).
I don’t agree with your suggestion that the unorthodox strategy will scare away all potential free agents and prevent draft picks from signing. The free agents that the Rockies would be looking at are lower teir and might not be getting major league deals from other clubs (Jeff Francis?) and draft picks declining to sing for any reason do not have a good history of improving their stock the next year so they are potentially giving away millions.
JD
September 6, 2012 at 11:53 AM (UTC -6)
You guys can talk all you want about how we struggled with free agents already before this year, but that’s only relevant if that struggling was acceptable. It wasn’t. We need to do better in pitcher acquisition, and the new rotation treatment is a step in the wrong direction.
Brendan Giles
September 6, 2012 at 12:18 PM (UTC -6)
I agree that pitcher acquisition must improve. Free agency, trades, draft, international signings, whatever, their needs to be more pitching talent throughout the organization and it absolutely requires a multifaceted approach. I think we can all agree on that. Where I differ is that I believe the new strategy will enhance the Rockies ability to acquire pitching because they are now looking for something that is readily available. 2-3 pitch fringe starters make up a much more saturated market that 3+ pitch top of the rotation guys. There will be cases of guys not wanting to come here because of the rotation, but there will also be plenty of guys just looking for a major league contract. Signing top of the rotation free agents is not something that fits into the Rockies salary structure (along with 75% of the league) regardless of the pitching strategy so it is not happening. If anything, by simply changing what they are shopping for the Rockies have given themselves a chance to sign an impact pitcher in free agency, something that was impossible when looking for the same thing that everyone else wants.
JD
September 6, 2012 at 12:30 PM (UTC -6)
Can we get Brad Pitt to be our GM and do this?
I get the whole “market inefficiency” and “play to Coor’s uniqueness” ideas. I just don’t think we can win that way. There’s this big middle ground between “scrap heap” and “top-of-the-line”, and that’s where the Rockies need to shop. We need more Chacins – guys who can throw a QS most times they start, even if it is at Coors. Those don’t have to cost a fortune, but they’re not scrap heap guys either.
I still have to remember the 2009 team. You CAN pitch at Coors. You just needs good pitchers.
Brendan Giles
September 6, 2012 at 2:02 PM (UTC -6)
I suppose it comes down to sustainability. Pitchers can have stretches of success at Coors, it just has not been sustainable. I like your thinking about looking for the middle 50%, but I think that those types of pitchers (Chacin included) have a better chance of sustainable success when only being asked to go through the lineup twice. I also am not convinced this is limited to Coors Field. Averages across the league have marked increases the third time through the lineup. This increase is exaggerated at Coors Field, but is a real phenomenon everywhere. I don’t disagree that quality pitchers can have success at Coors Field, it is just that after watching this team for 20 years, I do not think that any individual pitcher can have long-term success when used in a traditional manner.
Kevin Giles
September 6, 2012 at 1:00 PM (UTC -6)
Kevin,
You forgot to mention that I also conveniently left Jamie Moyer off the list. The list was from the “past few years.” Neagle and Hampton signed in 2000, so I do not consider them from the past few years. Do you think I was trying to sneak the two highest profile free agent signings past you?
Let me try to succinctly expose the fallacious nature of your logic: You say the four-man rotation is bad for the Rockies because it will deter free agent pitchers from signing with them. This statement relies on the premise that the Rockies pursue free agent pitchers. The evidence from the past 5 seasons shows that the Rockies have negligible interest in free agent pitchers. Thus, the premise on which your logic stands (The Rockies pursue free agent pitchers) does not exist. Your logic simply does not make sense. It would make sense if the Rockies tried to sign free agent pitchers, and maybe they should, but that is separate issue.
I think now I will spend my time on more useful discussions, like debunking the myth of Jordan Pacheco
JD
September 6, 2012 at 2:34 PM (UTC -6)
Too many Kevins…
“This statement relies on the premise that the Rockies pursue free agent pitchers. ” – that’s where you’re wrong. It relies on the premise that the Rockies NEED to pursue good pitchers, both in free agency and the draft. Both free agents and draftees will be more reluctant to sign with the Rockies if we use them this way.
That we haven’t even tried to sign decent free agents in recent years is O’Dowd’s failing (both in creating an environment that discourages them from signing and in not pursuing them). But to say that this means we don’t need to care if they want to sign is wrong. Most of us operate from the premise that true progress for the Rockies requires the removal of O’Dowd. This puts free agent signings back on the table, regardless of recent history.
Kevin Giles
September 6, 2012 at 3:19 PM (UTC -6)
If the Rockies never sign free agent pitchers, then pitchers’ reluctance to sign with the Rockies because of the paired pitching is completely irrelevant because the Rockies were never going to sign them the first place. How does that not make sense?
The issue of whether the Rockies should pursue free agent pitchers is a different subject. The Rockies probably should go after free agent pitchers given the current state of pitcher development. But, only when the Rockies start pursuing free agent pitchers will the criticism that paired pitching drives away free agents start making sense. Until then, the idea that paired pitching is bad for the team because it drives away free agents that they were never going to sign in the first place is nonsense.
Nevermind the fact that the Rockies probably couldn’t sign pitchers even if they wanted to because pitchers would rather go to a town that pays more, wins more, and doesn’t destroy their ERAs.
Kevin J
September 6, 2012 at 9:57 PM (UTC -6)
JD and I agree here. We’re predicting that even fewer free agents will consider coming here due to this scenario. Maybe we’ll be proven wrong, but I doubt it. The fact that DOD doesn’t pursue free agent pitchers is just more proof he is inept, but the Rockies have shown they can’t develop pitchers either. How does throwing 100+ pitches in the minors prepare them for this absurd system? Maybe it won’t necessarily hurt them, but if it’s such a great idea, why isn’t it being instituted throughout the organization?
In the end, we’ve all named about a dozen reasons why the Rockies can look forward to more Jamie Moyers and won’t even be able to sniff a Josh Fogg. Stats, money, and the fact that the system has improved the team to mostly stinks instead of wretched. If you’re okay with this, you can have it and the 75-win seasons it promises.
Kevin Giles
September 5, 2012 at 11:43 AM (UTC -6)
Free agent pitchers don’t want to come here are because (1) they can get more money from someone else (this brings up the ownership issue, which is the elephant in the room) and (2) Coors Field is a notorious hitters park. The four-man rotation stealing wins might factor in, but the first two reasons prevent free agent signings regardless of the rotation situation.
Also, the four-man rotation might not steal wins from good pitchers. If you are a good pitcher, you can probably get through 5+ innings on 75 pitches. For example, Chacin has three starts in the four-man rotation, and he has averaged 6 innings per outing (6, 5, and 7 innings), and he has two wins to show for it (yeah, I know, sample size). Also, under the four-man rotation you will have more starts and thus more opportunities for wins. Averaging 15 pitches per inning is tough but doable….so it’s harder to get a win but you have more opportunities.
Saying that the four-man hurts the Rockies because it prevents them from landing free agent pitchers just doesn’t hold water. Which good pitchers wanted to sign here in the past?
Kevin Giles
September 5, 2012 at 11:46 AM (UTC -6)
also, if wins are such a huge issue, then the Rockies should petition the commissioner to tweak the winning pitcher rule to give these starters a fair opportunity for wins. The official scorer already has some flexibility in awarding a win among relief pitchers, so why not extend some of this flexibility to starting pitchers?
Jeremy
September 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM (UTC -6)
I agree with this. Everyone accepts that the wins rule is a joke, why not start petitioning to get it changed, if only down to 4 innings pitches, that is still a victory.
I have always been curious why there aren’t a few pitchers out there who would welcome the challenge to pitch at Coors. Is everyone so obsessed with stats and records these days that they don’t want to try competing at the highest level? Because hitter friendly Coors has to be about as competitive as it can get, especially with what could become offensive juggernauts in the Diamondbacks and Dodgers with their new check book.
And the Rox could spend money if they wanted, they just need to stop being afraid of another failure. They will not succeed if they don’t take chances, and as long as a competitive player gets paid, he should have no reason to avoid pitching here except that they are scared.
Hell, get pitchers in their twilights who don’t need to pile up stats to land future big contracts (Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling for the D-Backs, for example).
JD
September 6, 2012 at 10:29 AM (UTC -6)
Nobody gets an AS appearance or HoF consideration for posting merely average stats in a supreme hitter’s park. Pitchers won’t embrace the “challenge” until there’s recognition for beating it.
Brendan Giles
September 5, 2012 at 2:48 PM (UTC -6)
Free agents will usually make their decisions based upon two criteria: the dollars and the chance to win. Different guys will prioritize the criteria differently depending on many factors, but the two non-mutually exclusive parts are always 1) getting paid and 2) winning.
The Rockies cannot compete with the big boys in the dollars catagory no matter what. NY, Boston, Chicago, LA will always be able to spend more than the rest of the league, Rockies included. So it comes down to creating a winning atmosphere to lure free agents. Veteran pitchers (like Roy Oswalt) that no longer care about the contract are interested in getting that ring and that also disqualifies the Rockies. Free agent pitchers aren’t exactly clamoring to go play for the Twins or Indians (teams with similar payrolls to the Rockies). Add in the fear of Coors Field and it is not going to happen. Retreads (Jeff Francis) and reclamation projects (Jonathan Sanchez) are the best bets for the Rockies getting value out of free agency and trades involving pitchers.
Hitters, on the other hand, are a whole different animal. Why the Rockies have refrained from spending big money on position players escapes me (other than that pesky detail about $200M probably being a little over budget). Cuddyer is the big catch? really? Go all in on someone like Prince Fielder or Josh Hamilton. Will it be a great deal in 7 years? Probably not, but it will be an exciting first 6. Look what happened with Larry Walker. That’s where i would like to see the Rockies spend money. Not overpaying aging pitchers.
CodenameDuchess
September 5, 2012 at 4:13 PM (UTC -6)
I like this line of thinking. Move Rosario to 1B make a deal for Chase Headley and bring in a serviceable veteran catcher. Those moves with our current linieup has 200+ HR potential. Deploy Mr. Giles plan to target solid two pitch pitchers that can run through a lineup 2x and at least that is a plan.
My biggest concern is that the Rockies close out the year strong and that no changes are made to the front office and no big changes are made to the lineup under the assumption that with a little improvement from the youngsters in place that this team will be able to compete.
Dan
September 6, 2012 at 9:43 AM (UTC -6)
Strong finish or not, little to no change is going to occur…we are talking about the Rockies. Anyone see the Rockies mailbag in the Denver Post yesterday? Just a bunch of excuses and no plans for anything different. Man it is hard to like this organization.
Seth
September 6, 2012 at 6:51 PM (UTC -6)
Lots of comments on here, I like it. Anyways, throughout these comments there are a few topics going around. 1) Rosario moving to 1st base. This is not a good idea plain and simple. This guy has has one season under his belt as a major league catcher, let him have some more time before we move him. You all preach patience with pitchers, why is it not the same with Rosario at catcher. Yes, I do agree that it would be helpful for him to get the extra at bats at first base, at bats he would miss by missing a few days a week catching. But I think this guy has more upside at catcher and has shown improvement throughout this season. My suggestion would be to keep him catching, he is young and durable, has a great arm, and as we all know can hit a ball with the best of them. Let him catch for a few more years and down the line in about 3-4 years move him to first then.Then not only does he get his fair shot at being a great big league catcher but then later on gets those extra at bats as well. Right now there are too many players at 1st base. Not only do we have Helton, but also Cuddyer (unfortunately) as well as Colvin and Pacheco. I dont want to see him take away at bats and playing time from one of those guys if the benefit is only very little. Plus, the next promising catcher coming through the minors is currently in single A and is at least 2-3 years away. So yes we could get another free agent catcher but look how it has worked out with Hernandez, he is flat out terrible offensively and defensively.
Now on to Pacheco, the guy can hit for average no doubt about it. No he may not have the best power in the world but I dont think he necessarily needs it. You all talk about how there must be power supplied by 1st and 3rd base. Well what if the power is coming from another position like catcher with Rosario, wouldnt that make up for the lack of power at either position? I do not believe in the idea that there must be power from certain positions, I think you should find the best player and put him at his best position, power or no power. You make references to “moneyball”, if you remember they had Scott Hatteberg at first, not great power nor defense, yes he did get on base and walk a lot (unlike pacheco) but their power came from an unlikely position, at that time, at SS with Tejada. So with that being said and knowing everything we know about Pacheco, I think he should be a utility guy but play at least twice a week or more at first base (This is based on Cuddyer being gone of course). We know Arenado should be coming up soon (do not trade him), but he doesnt have great power either, I think in the majors he will mostly be a guy to hit maybe 15 homers but will hit lots of doubles and hit above .300 as well, so better than anyone else we have on the roster now.
Now the hot topic of pitching. The 4 man rotation has worked recently just because our pitchers started throwing more strikes consistently and our bullpen is phenomenal right now. I do not think this is a product of the 4 man rotation. I think the 4 man rotation should be thrown out the window along with Odowd and Tracy too. There is a reason why no team has ever done this before and I believe many of you are being blinded by one good month. They need to go back to a regular rotation with 5 MAJOR LEAGUE starters and not these AAA pansy throwers. It has worked before as we all know. No to tier free agent will ever come here so we need to build from within. Start drafting pitchers who pound the strike zone and get ground balls, I know that is easier said than done, but it must happen. No more fly ball pitchers. Everyone is throwing out these fancy stats all around, but the one stat that should stand out when looking for pitchers who can pitch at Coors is the ground ball-fly ball out ratio. That ration needs to be over 1.5 to even have a chance. One reason why I think the Rockies undoubtedly won the Ubaldo trade is because we have a guy sitting in the minors who has a ratio of a little over 2.0 (which is extremely good), that guy is Joe Gardner, the last guy to be thrown in the trade. This guy could have the best success out of the three pitchers we got from the Indians (unless Pomeranz starts pitching consistently which I believe he will). Start drafting pitchers like him and another guy like Tyler Anderson, our first draft pick from 2011 whose ratio is near 1.8. There could be some help in pitching soon. But to put it simply, we need to do way better in drafting and bringing players up through the minor leagues than recently for us to be successful.
Brendan Giles
September 7, 2012 at 9:58 AM (UTC -6)
Right on with Rosario. His home is catcher and that is where he needs to stay. It is an incredibly difficult position to learn, both in fundamental techniques but also having the responsibilities of calling the game. He has shown tremendous upside and with that cannon for an arm, his ceiling is an All-Star level of player. Leave him alone and let him develop. We haven’t even begun to see what this kid can do.
I also agree that the addage “power on the corners, defense in the middle” has passed its time. That was best served for the days when your CF and SS were skinny little dudes and your 3B and 1B were lumbering hulks. The athletic makeup of teams is vastly different now and has made the Vince Colemans, Ozzie Smiths, John Kruks, and Troy Glaus’s of the world dinosaurs of a bygone era. Do the Rockies have a solid 1-6 in the lineup? Yes, so who cares what defensive position the middle of the order plays. Besides, 3rd base has been a position in decline across the league for years now, so the Rockies are in a similar boat as most teams. That doesn’t mean Pacheco is the long term answer, but does suggest he or Chris Nelson are servicable at that position for 2013.
You are right about throwing out the 4 man part of the strategy. I will disagree with you about the need to return to a traditional approach, but I understand your point and won’t rehash my tired arguments from above. What is abundantly clear is that the organization needs more pitching talent at all levels. Ideally, these are pitchers who produce ground balls and strike guys out – essentially what every team in the league wants.
JD
September 7, 2012 at 10:06 AM (UTC -6)
Of course we play Pacheco so long as we have no one better, but saying we shouldn’t be looking to upgrade is foolish. We may get more power from SS than other teams, but we need it, with our pitching! That doesn’t excuse having negative WAR at first or third base. That’s what Pacheco is – negative WAR. His OPS is below league average for a 1B, and his defense is bad wherever he plays. And that’s while he’s hitting over .310, which I don’t think he’ll sustain in the long run.
Moreover, if we don’t find a more competent 1B, Rosario should move there. It will extend his career as well as his number of ABs in a season, and we can find a Pacheco-equivalent (in terms of OPS/WAR) behind the plate who defends better. Saying Rosario is young is suggesting that all young catchers defend like Rosario. That’s not close to true. There’s no good reason to expect Rosario to become even an average defensive catcher given time.
Brendan Giles
September 7, 2012 at 10:16 AM (UTC -6)
Not to be nit-picky, but size can be an issue at first. Listed at 5’11″, Rosario is a little small to be over there, while the 6’3″ Colvin profiles more like a 1B. Not saying that the 4 inches is a huge deal, just pointing it out…
Seth
September 7, 2012 at 10:53 AM (UTC -6)
Same could be said for the pitchers though. I am not suggesting that all young catchers defend like Rosario just like I am saying not all young pitchers pitch terrible like White. Some players develop faster than others or not at all. You are willing to give time to a pitcher where there has been no evidence of improvement but you are willing to give up on a guy who has star potential at a rare position and has improved all season?
Sometimes you go too deep into the numbers when sometimes all you have to do is watch some tape and know what you have and see what you could have. Numbers are great and all, and I love using them to compare players, but sometimes numbers dont tell the complete story.
JD
September 7, 2012 at 3:20 PM (UTC -6)
Giving up on a pitcher is giving up on him completely. I’m not giving up on Rosario – I’m saying let’s move him to a place where he profiles better.
If you ran the Brewers, would Ryan “E5″ Braun still be your third baseman?
Seth
September 7, 2012 at 3:54 PM (UTC -6)
I dont think you can simply just play a player because he fits that “profile.” Profiling is what gets teams and some players in trouble. He needs to play the position that fits him best, and right now and for the forseeable future catcher is the place for Rosario.
Kevin J
September 7, 2012 at 5:58 PM (UTC -6)
Interesting thought on Braun so I did a little research. The Brewers were going to keep him at 3B in 2008, in fact he was being praised for his improvement. Then, the Brewers acquired Mike Cameron to play CF, so they moved Bill Hall to 3B after discovering Ryan Braun was an excellent left fielder.
Unless the Rockies sign a 3-time gold glover (like Cameron), I’m okay with Rosario getting another season behind the plate.
JD
September 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM (UTC -6)
“Profiling is what gets teams and some players in trouble. He needs to play the position that fits him best.”
That’s a contradictory statement. A “profile”, if done correctly, would reveal the position that “fits him best”.
People talk of moving Tulo to third, and not Rosario to first? The latter is far more sensible. No other position change involves adding 200 ABs/year.
TroyF
September 7, 2012 at 8:21 AM (UTC -6)
Guys, I’m sorry, but to make a deal for Headly, you are giving up a top prospect. He simply is not worth it. Our best overall prospect is in AA and is playing ok. Pacheco is a disaster at third and has no power, but if we have to go another year with him, we could. Trading for Headly jshould not be a consideration at this point.
What should happen? This is just my mind:
1) get rid of the four man. I know it’s been debated on, but I don’t like it. At all.
2) Get out of Cuddyer’s contract. Clear it from the books for a AA guy if you have to, just get rid of it.
3) Decide what Rosarios long term position is. If you don’t feel good about him catching, make him start working at new positions this offseason.
4)Resign Fowler. Get it done.
5) Be prepared for Helton to suck. That means having a VERY good plan B next year if he cannot go.
6) Stop jerking the kids around. Pick your 5 best starters in spring and send the losers to AAA (not the bullpen) If the staff struggles, call them up. All of these guys are likely to improve next year. The question is how much. I would be fine if the season started with DLR, Chacin, Pomeranz, Friedrich, White or Chatwood at the fifth slot to start the year.
7) Get rid of O’Dowd and Abbracadabra. Get them out of this system for good.
As for who we should sign, there aren’t a lot of guys out there that look that good this offseason. I could actually live with us sitting on the sidelines this year. Just don’t make a move for the sake of making a move. Getting rid of Street last year was great. Spending the money on a 33 year old was not. Be smart. OK, we are screwed.
Seth
September 7, 2012 at 10:45 AM (UTC -6)
I agree with everything #1-7! Especially #6, they need to be consistent with who pitches every FIFTH day that way these young pitchers can start to pitch consistently. It never helps a player when he has no clue when the next time he is pitching/hitting or what position. The game is hard enough as it is, why make it harder and have them guess and be unprepared every day. I guarantee that you will start to see some improvement from every player and the team as a whole if Tracy can put a consistent lineup together every day, it will build the players confidence a whole lot.
Kevin J
September 7, 2012 at 1:55 PM (UTC -6)
Great list.
1) It’s already gone and was never really there in the first place. Since it’s inception, only 20 times out of 71 games has a pitcher pitched on 3 days rest. Since Chacin came back, the Rockies have been using a rotation of Francis, Chatwood, Pomeranz, White, Chacin, in that order. The only element left is the pitch count.
2) Easier said than done. Giambi should not be re-signed either. If achieved, it would eliminate the Colvin/Cuddyer/Helton/Giambi/Pacheco fiasco and clear space for Arenado, if he’s ready.
3) Rosario should catch. Period. The Rockies only two other prospects in 20 years were Iannetta (a flame-out) and Ben Petrick (Parkinson’s disease). 1B and 3B are much easier filled (in general) than trying to teach Rosario a new position and finding another catcher. We can revisit this issue if he does not improve next season. But, like Pacheco at 3B, let’s give them at least half of next season to improve (both are rookies this year).
4) Should come with caveat to trade Blackmon, EY, Herrera, or Nelson or even Fowler (who would fetch much more in trade). There simply isn’t room for all of them and we’ve seen Herrera and Nelson’s ceilings. Time to move on.
5) What do you suggest for VERY good plan B? Right now, Pacheco and Colvin are plan B and are decent plans at best. I think everyone’s preparing themselves for Helton to stink except Rockies management. If the Rockies shed Giambi and Cuddyer, maybe Colvin at 1B/RF, with Blackmon filling RF when Helton sits. But let’s throw positive thoughts and Helton and wish for a Chipper-esque final year.
6) Amen, though bullpen work has proven to be effective for pitchers like Chris Sale and Kyle Medlen. Done correctly, bullpen work can help development young pitchers (though, who am I kidding – this is the Rockies).
7) We can all hope, but pigs aren’t flying and hell is still toasty.
Logan Burdine
September 7, 2012 at 10:55 AM (UTC -6)
Great content here. We really appreciate the comments, everyone. Truly. You have my word that more content is coming this week. We plan on finishing out the year strong.
Ned Giles
September 10, 2012 at 8:56 PM (UTC -6)
Hey all you Rosario fans: Is four passed balls in game one of Sunday’s double header enough of a stat to convince you that Rosario is the worst catcher in the major leagues. Oh, wait–I forgot. He hits homers and bats at a HOF pace of .251.
I was wrong–Modesto is too advanced for him. He needs remedial catching lessons with the rookies in Grand Junction.
Kevin J
September 10, 2012 at 9:43 PM (UTC -6)
It sure didn’t help his case. Of course, puting him in the infield would be crazy too. If he can catch a ball thrown to him in the air, how can he be expected to field balls hit on the ground?
JD
September 11, 2012 at 6:26 PM (UTC -6)
Give me a break, that’s just a stupid comment. You actually just suggested that 1B is a more difficult defensive position than catcher!
Kevin Jordan
September 11, 2012 at 7:20 PM (UTC -6)
No…I suggested that a guy who can’t catch a pitch in the air (typo in my last comment) would be frightening playing an infield position, regardless of difficulty.
Selling Snake Oil (aka Paired Pitching) - Blake Street Bulletin » Blake Street Bulletin
October 11, 2012 at 9:41 AM (UTC -6)
[...] September 1, again in 3 Up – 3 Down, Kevin stated, “Third, the four-man rotation is working and might even be a good idea.” As I [...]