Sunday, February 21, 2010

A Transitional Lazy Sunday

While everyone’s attention these days is turned to Antawn Jamison and Tiger Woods and Google Image searches of Lindsay Vonn and Julia Mancuso and Tanith Belbin, the calendar on the wall tells me that pitchers and catchers report today and that the first full-squad workout is scheduled for this Friday. That’s right, friends of the feather, Spring Training is upon us and, while that may be the biggest news some places, the bigger news on the Reservation is the official passing of the moniker of “The DiaperTribe” from the 3-year-old to the 1-month-old by virtue of having only one boy in diapers. While Spring Training is unquestionably an exciting time of year that we’ve all been waiting for, the news that there’s only one diaper-wearing boy in the house once again supersedes all other developments that could happen anywhere in the world around these parts.

Nevertheless, the long winter finally seems to be relenting (not with snow on the ground in Cleveland, but at least in terms of being able to watch baseball under the Arizona sun) and baseball season is inching closer to being a reality once more and not just something that is debated in print, on computer screens, and in projection models. No, they’re getting ready to actually throw that ball around and are getting ready to swing those bats in preparation for the 2010 season. Since they’re getting ready for the 2010 season, we probably should do the same and get going on a Lazy One.

Before starting off in the news of the week that’s worthwhile for inclusion here, let’s get the pleasantries out of the way, in that I won’t be including the weekly dissection of the lunacy that’s coming from The Three Amigos (Hoynes, Ocker, and Ingraham) in anticipation of the 2010 season, who seem to be stuck in this endless rut of ignorance and pessimism. In the best interest of everyone here, I won’t examine how absurd the process by which these guys come to their conclusions truly is nor will I allow myself to get myself all worked up about how they’re the major source for Indians’ information despite their weekly failure at attempting to remain relevant.

You can find their inane ramblings and their misuse of things like PECOTA projections and sit-on-the-fence “insight”…I know you can. The fact that you’re reading this is a pretty good indication that you harbor many of the same thoughts and feelings as I do. Just for some perspective before moving on, realize that more people are subscribed on Google Reader to this site than they are the Indians’ coverage on cleveland.com (no, seriously…check it out) and while I don’t mention that to beat my own chest or use that gauge as some great barometer of what people are reading, it is telling that we now find ourselves in this digital age when people are able to seek out opinions and information that they value…and the coverage from the three long-time beat reporters (and subscribers to Ocker and Ingraham combine for about 10% of the subscribers here) for the Tribe simply don’t qualify as such.

With my blood pressure in check, let’s finally get this thing going…
Outside of the return of Rusty Branyan to the Indians, the biggest “news” of the week for the Indians involved the long-expected announcement that Chris Antonetti will be ascending to the position of GM at the end of the 2010 season, with Mark Shapiro moving up the corporate ladder to Team President. The move came as a surprise to nobody, as this has been in the works since the Cardinals offered Antonetti their GM post after the 2007 season and the Indians countered to retain Antonetti with GM-type money and with the understanding that Antonetti would be Shapiro’s heir apparent as Indians’ GM. That understanding will finally come to fruition at the end of this year and, while there’s not that much of interest in this story, the timing of it does present an interesting scenario.

With 2010 looking like a certainty as a transitional year, Shapiro will be completing his tenure as GM helming the early stages of the second rebuilding process that he oversaw. Thus, does anyone else find it interesting that Shapiro’s final year (if he’s choosing when that final year is) at the GM helm is a season in which the Indians are very unlikely to compete?

That is, Shapiro could have insisting on sticking around until after the 2011 or the 2012 season, when the prospects of the team competing look to be brighter or when he could hand the reins off to Antonetti, with the team contending or at least closer to contention. Instead, the transition will come about half of a season after the second rebuild/reload/whatever began in earnest, with Antonetti coming in more or less after Shapiro will have been the point man on most unpopular decisions.

There’s no question that Antonetti has been instrumental in every move that the Indians have made with an eye past 2010 and Shapiro has on more than one occasion called him “my co-GM”, with Terry Pluto even asserting that “Antonetti has been handling much of the daily GM duties for at least a year”.

The interesting aspect of this revelation is that, if “Antonetti has been handing much of the daily GM duties for at least a year”, that would mean that Shapiro was the GM and the point man (in terms of public perception on who was pulling the trigger) when the Indians made the decision to trade Lee and Victor this past summer. Now, realize that Shapiro will still be the GM (again, at least in terms of public perception) when…not if, when the Indians trade (or at least attempt to trade) Westbrook, Wood, Peralta, and maybe even Branyan this coming season. By the time that Antonetti will assume the GM reins, all of the dirty work will have been done in the rebuild, with the roster purged and the contract situations of Lee, Victor, Wood, Westbrook, and Peralta in the rearview mirror…all completed in the “Shapiro regime”.

You can almost hear the howling this July when…again not if…the Indians trade Westbrook and Wood and Peralta – that it’s more of the same from Shapiro, who will have traded those three, along with Sabathia and overseeing the moves of the 2009 summer. After the 2010 season, with the dirt from the unpleasant portion of the rebuild on Shapiro’s hands, he steps aside (or up, more accurately) and Antonetti comes in with a fresh slate and with the idea that he’s a new man in the post, who will bring a fresh perspective for the 2011 season and beyond.

Now think about what figures to happen going into the 2011 season, with the contracts of Westbrook, Wood, and Peralta coming off of the books and with some of the questions facing the Indians now hopefully answered. Antonetti then has the opportunity to come in, identify the needs of the 2011 team and with the financial flexibility to make the moves that were not feasible or even prudent this off-season.

Remember, if you’re following the idea that the 2010 season is going to be similar to the 2004 season, the Indians made the move to sign Kevin Millwood to front a young rotation to start the 2005 season and something similar could happen prior to the 2011 season…all under the watchful eye of Antonetti.

Maybe it’s looking too deeply into the timing of this and it’s certainly not meant to assert that Shapiro is nobly willing the take the brunt of the blame for the ugly portion of the rebuild, but not interested in receiving any credit that may be coming down the line. Rather, it’s to imply that public perception is important to a team that struggling to sell tickets and if people want to believe that things are going to change after this season because Antonetti will replace Shapiro (and not attribute it to the extenuating circumstances in play), perhaps that’s by design. The way that the off-season after this year figures to run in stark contrast to this one certainly does look like the timing of the “power transition” is designed put Antonetti in charge when the team’s flexibility is greater and with the young players they’ve been stockpiling one year closer to contributing to what could be the next incarnation of a contender.

While that timing aspect may simply be for public perception, there’s not much doubt that The Polo Shirt Mafia – or as Anthony from Willoughby (who is probably in the air right now on his way to Goodyear) brilliantly calls them “Lacoste Nostra” – lives to fight another day and the Indians figure to make similar moves that we’ve seen for the past seven years or so.

That doesn’t mean that Antonetti will simply be a clone of Shapiro, if you’ll remember that Shapiro was (a long time ago) the protégé of John Hart and Hart’s hand-picked successor, and while there is a difference here as Shapiro will stay in the organization (which Hart did not), time will tell what kind of GM Antonetti will be.

Antonetti’s unquestionably highly-thought of in MLB circles and has been for quite some time if you remember that he was courted by the Cardinals and was famously the subject of a grassroots campaign (complete with campaign buttons) by USSMariner.com to have Antonetti named the Mariners’ GM position (albeit while Bill Bavasi was still the GM, strip-mining the farm system for marginal veterans) back in late 2006, then again in mid-2008. Those links (both of them) from USS Mariner are worth the read by the way, if only to see how quickly perceptions change in MLB (fair or not) as the Indians were seen as the model franchise making all of the right moves not more than 2 to 3 years ago, an honor currently bestowed to…the Mariners.

One question that would seem to follow in this expected news would be to ask who Antonetti surrounds himself with, in that it could be telling if certain Front Office types who may be held in high regard by Shapiro may find themselves in other (less influential) places in the organization. While Shapiro and Antonetti may speak in the same dialect, with the same diction, while dressing similarly (hence, “Lacoste Nostra”), does anyone really believe that they don’t have differing opinions on matters such as which other Front Office members contribute the most to the success of the team?

As for a best guess as to who plays the role of Assistant GM (formerly occupied, to some critical acclaim, by Antonetti) in the new arrangement, a name to remember would be Mike Chernoff, the current Director of Baseball Operations. Back in June of 2008, Will Carroll put together a list of potential future GM’s with Chernoff coming in at #6 on the list with Carroll stating that:
The youngest person on the list, Chernoff has become the de facto No. 3 in Cleveland, and likely would have taken over the Assistant GM slot if Chris Antonetti had left for another organization. While having Antonetti and Shapiro above him on the organizational chart might seem like a tough ceiling, it's also giving Chernoff the chance to learn from some of the best in the business. Shapiro and the Indians have a great internship program, and have developed a number major league staffers in the past decade. Even so, Chernoff might end up being the best. The son of WFAN’s program director, no one thinks that Chernoff will be intimidated by the media, though his age will likely be held against him in the near future. “Someone's going to go after Antonetti,” a GM said, “and end up with Chernoff. That’s not a bad thing.”

From that list, 3 of the names that appear above Chernoff (Jed Hoyer - #1, Jack Zduriencik - #2, Mike Rizzo - #4) have become GMs in the past year and a half and the list was actually written based on the idea that Antonetti was being courted by St. Louis.

For a national perspective on the transition, Ken Rosenthal has an interesting piece on how the new structure appears to be part of the Indians’ “plan” for dealing with their status as a small-market club, in that it creates a new arrangement for the organization, both in terms of baseball decisions and business decisions. Rosenthal touches on the new arrangement, but also gets into each of the men whose titles will be changing:
Creativity is paramount for such clubs, particularly now that high-revenue teams such as the Yankees and Red Sox are operating with ruthless efficiency.

The Indians, at least, are trying.

Much as they appear to be going about business as usual — Shapiro and Antonetti will remain 1-2 on the executive depth chart once they assume their new positions after the 2010 season — the team's latest plan is actually fairly unique.

Shapiro will oversee baseball and business. His goal will be to fuse the two more seamlessly, helping the business side build revenue to support the baseball operation. In a market as limited as Cleveland, the Indians need such a cohesive vision.

While Shapiro admits that he has "a lot to learn" about the business of baseball, leadership is perhaps his greatest strength. He will spend part of the season attending marketing and budget meetings. Antonetti will assume an even greater role on the baseball side.

--snip--

So, after this season, it will be Antonetti's turn; Shapiro still will be involved, but he, too, looks forward to the franchise being re-energized by fresh ideas, fresh energy.

The Indians' new manager, Manny Acta, is excited to be in Cleveland; he chose the Indians over the Astros. Antonetti, meanwhile, is highly regarded within the industry, and has spent years waiting for his chance.

Some of Shapiro's friends wonder if he will remain fulfilled in his new role, but for now he wants to stay in Cleveland. If he grows disenchanted with his position, he can always become GM of another team.

The Indians' position is not hopeless. Oh, Shapiro gave out his share of bad contracts, like every GM. He also drew criticism for the Indians' lack of success in the draft. But he compensated for those failures with shrewd trades, and the Indians' farm system again is ranked among the game's top five.

A rapid turnaround is possible in a division that lacks a financial behemoth, and the front-office stability should only help.


Moving on, The Hardball Times presented their compilation of prospects, with the Indians ranked as the #3 farm system behind only the Rays and the Rangers and that’s included because it goes back to the Rosenthal piece and the creativity that some of the small-market teams attempt to employ. Notably, and since the Rays are always at the top of lists like this one from THT, I thought it would be interesting to pass along this little nugget from the Rays’ owner, who appeared on a local radio show earlier in the week and had this to say:
“We did out-spend ourselves last year (at $63-million) and completely have out-spent ourselves this year…and unfortunately we’re going to feel the effect of that the next couple years for certain. … There’s no $60-million payroll next year either, let alone a $70-million payroll. It’s going to be a tough transition, but it’s something that given the economics of the game and specifically the economics of what we are in Tampa Bay and in St. Petersburg, it makes it impossible to do it for more than a couple of years.’’

Sound familiar and sound like a team that hopes to make the “transition” to perennial contender through young players who aren’t earning the salaries that FA creates?

To that end, there’s an interesting piece from Ben Reiter in this week’s print edition of SI that examines how small-market clubs may be making some headway in attempting to compete in an unbalanced system. While the piece is entitled “Hope Springs Eternal”, Reiter doesn’t mince words in pointing out the disparity at play in MLB as well as laying out how certain teams have attempted to play with the big boys:
It's a cliché to say, with pitchers and catchers reporting to spring training this week, that this is the most optimistic time on the baseball calendar. It's a moment when hope springs eternal for all 30 major league franchises, when the low-revenue have-nots dream of those long-ago days when championships didn't seem directly tied to franchise financial statements. Most of the time it's also a delusion—it has been six seasons now since a club with a payroll ranked in the majors' bottom half has won the World Series.
--snip--
Small-market teams such as the Twins, Rockies (the World Series runner-up in 2007) and Rays (who lost in the Series in '08) have followed a four-part model: draft well; trade mature assets (players who are stars but who are likely to be plucked in free agency by a rich team once they become eligible) for top prospects; sign cornerstone young players to long-term deals, thereby buying out some of their arbitration and free-agent years at what might prove to be a below-market salary; and be selectively active in the free agent market, signing players to one- or two-year deals that will not handcuff a team down the road.


Look again at Reiter’s “four-part model” for small-market teams to compete and apply it to the Indians over the last 8 years or so…what did they miss, the “draft well” component?

Maybe…but more importantly, a couple of those long-term deals that they did hand out to players that they thought would be cornerstones of the franchise blew up in their face, effectively “handcuffing the team down the road”. There again, we get back to this dead horse that we’ve been beating this whole off-season, in that the universe that the Indians exist in MLB is one that forces them to be nearly perfect in their decisions, with any miscalculation forcing them to blow it up and attempt to build it back again in short order every few years.

So, we’re back to the “build it back again in short order” portion of the show and the performances on the diamond start this week in Goodyear. To that end and just to bring this all back around to pitchers and catchers reporting today, Tribe Daily continues their countdown to Spring Training, examining the pitchers, then position players, on the 40-man roster who will be under the Arizona sun, competing in Cactus League action (with their schedule available here) as the 2010 season is close.

Pitchers and catchers are in Arizona, a plan is in place for the Indians past 2010, and changing a 3-year-old’s diaper no longer looks to be on my radar…yeah, things feel right in the world on this Sunday morning.

Friday, February 19, 2010

Muscling into the Mix

The Indians finally made a “significant” foray into the FA market as they signed Russell Branyan to a one-year deal for $2M with another $1M in incentives and a $5M mutual option. He returns to the Indians after posting career highs in HR and RBI in 116 games with the Mariners last year, which he spent exclusively as a 1B. Branyan’s modus operandi is well-known and he’s a polarizing figure for nearly everyone who has watched him blast majestic HR and emulate a windmill in consecutive AB.

Everybody knows what the Indians are getting in Branyan, a guy who strikes out a lot, a guy who walks a lot, and a guy who hits the most awe-inspiring HR you’ve ever seen when he makes connection with the ball – all of this is known. Where the cloudiness starts to emerge is when you start to examine what Branyan’s role projects to be with the 2010 Tribe as the initial talk this off-season was that the Indians were looking for a veteran bat that would play the role of a reserve/bench player to complement the young lineup by being able to move around the diamond and outfield.

Despite this being the Indians’ stated desire, Branyan allegedly chose the Indians over the based on the idea that he was going to get more playing time with the Tribe. Seeing as how Tampa had a tailor-made role for him, as the LH complement to Pat Burrell as a DH, it makes me wonder how often Branyan is going to find himself in the lineup for the Indians…or at least how his role was presented to him in any negotiations that led him to believe that he’d see more playing time in Cleveland than he would in Tampa. If you believe what Ken Rosenthal reports, Branyan was sold on Cleveland with the idea that the Indians intend on getting Branyan “everyday at-bats at multiple corner positions” while “the Rays had less playing time to offer. They would have used Branyan mostly as a DH, and also in right field.”

“Everyday at-bats at multiple corner positions” causes a bit of a problem though, as it can be questioned as to whether Branyan can legitimately be considered a corner OF or even a 3B anymore at this point in his career, particularly in light of his back issues that caused him to miss the final month of the 2009 season. Just looking at Branyan’s recent usage in the field, he’s played 100 games at 3B over the course of the last four seasons in and has played LF in 34 games since the 2003 season, yet the idea is that he’s being considered as an option for 3B and the corner OF positions in 2010 for the Tribe?

Perhaps the Indians envision using him in a 4-corners role (1B/3B/LF/RF) as well as using him as a DH and maybe he’s just taking Marte’s “spot” (if that ever even existed) on the roster, but a closer look starts to reveal how the Indians figure to use Branyan and how the dominoes would fall around him.

While the Indians may be selling that 4-corners role idea, I’m just not buying Branyan at 3B (where the Indians have every reason to play Peralta everyday, if for no other reason than to attempt to increase his trade value) or in the outfield, where he has never excelled and has only played in 13 games over the last three seasons.

What does that leave him with, outside of a sporadic start (maybe) at 3B or in LF?
Ultimately, we’re talking about Branyan as a 1B and as a DH…or at least DH insurance.

Follow the line of thinking that Branyan is being brought on with the very real possibility that he’s the Indians’ 1B (at least to start the season), a notion backed up by Buster Olney:
The Indians were expected to try Matt LaPorta at first base, but there is concern that he may need more time to be groomed at the position.
Branyan presumably will have a shot at being the Indians’ regular first baseman, and be part of what is expected to be a good offense.


If you’re following this, that would mean that LaPorta would be platooning with Branyan (please Lord, no) at 1B, or would head off to LF, which doesn’t seem to be his long-term position given the presence of Brantley, for ½ of a season or a season before returning to 1B or would begin the 2010 season in AAA as a 1B because “there is concern that he may need more time to be groomed for the position”. Maybe the concern is there that LaPorta’s injuries will prevent him from starting the season healthy and effective, but he’s been cleared for full workouts after hip and toe surgeries recently and, if a concern exists about LaPorta’s health, wouldn’t 1B be a position that would cause less strain on any injuries, the same way it would Branyan’s back?

If Branyan is the sudden 1B (and sometime DH perhaps), mainly because that seems to be his only logical fit on the roster, particularly given the idea that the Indians sold him on “everyday AB”, it would certainly seem to represent a death knell for the idea that Mike Brantley’s going to be handed the starting LF job out of Spring Training. Of course, there’s no smoking gun to point to that Brantley is unquestionably ready for the lineup, much less the top of the lineup, as his AAA numbers last year were still underwhelming (.711 OPS) and while he made a nice impression on the Indians in his cup of coffee with the parent club last year, more time in AAA may benefit him.

It’s possible that the Indians are looking at Branyan as a first-half 1B (and occasional DH) with the idea that they’ll start the season with Branyan at 1B, LaPorta in LF, and Brantley in Columbus, but the issue that I have with that is the idea that LaPorta (who “may need more time to be groomed” as a 1B) is suddenly being bounced around the diamond to accommodate Russ Branyan. If nothing else, the Indians should be determining which position LaPorta eventually projects to and allow him to develop at that position, instead of allowing the presence of a guy like Branyan to be a major factor in the LaPorta’s 2010 position in the alignment.

If Branyan is that first-half 1B (while providing insurance that Hafner’s shoulder still isn’t right), maybe the idea is to play him everyday in MLB, start Brantley in AAA with the idea that he needs to “force” his way onto the team instead of being handed the LF job. The end game may be play Branyan for that first half to see if Brantley is indeed ready for MLB and, if so, the Indians could flip Branyan (assuming he’s playing well), moving LaPorta back to 1B and with Brantley ascending back to LF. The idea that Brantley needs to “earn” that spot is not the troubling one, rather it’s the notion once again that LaPorta (who is now 25-years-old) could still be bouncing around the diamond, attempting to master two positions during a season in which he’ll be trying to establish himself as the middle-of-the-order hitter he was purported to be when the Indians acquired him.

How this all shakes out and who’s still standing when the music stops in this game won’t be answered until Spring Training fleshes these questions out and innings and at-bats start being divvied up. Brantley could suddenly be the odd man out to start the season and LaPorta could be bouncing around the diamond as he attempts to find a toehold in MLB, all to add Russell Branyan to the mix. The upside with Branyan is there, but so is the confusion regarding how his presence on the team affects players that do figure into the Indians’ plans past July of 2010. All told, Branyan arrives in Cleveland as a LH hitter in a LH-laden lineup as a likely 1B (and insurance for DH) on a team that is looking for some level of stability at the position. Whether his presence helps to stabilize the lineup or throws it into a greater state of flux is another question in a season that figures to be full of them.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Ten Little Indians - Part III

Rolling on in the overview of potential arms for the linchpin of the Indians’ 2010 season (and, let’s be honest about this, past 2010 more importantly) that is the starting rotation, let’s cast our eyes to the two arms on the cusp of the parent club who may project as the missing top-of-the-rotation starters that seem to be lacking. Thus, having examined the “sure things” (and if I could use the term any more loosely, I would) and the two southpaws that should be given long leashes to establish themselves in MLB in 2010, the two highly-regarded, absurdly young for their level righthanded options that could ultimately project higher in the rotation than any of the previously examined pitchers are Carlos Carrasco and Hector Rondon.

As the 2010 season draws near, it would seem that they figure to themselves just beneath the surface for now (for entirely justifiable reasons) in that they both could probably use more time in the Minors. However, both should figure legitimately into the mix in 2010 and, given their talent and upside, each may figure in more prominently than anyone else at the upper levels of the system who figures to start a game this season past 2010.

Lest anyone think that this will be a plea to allow Carlos Carrasco and Hector Rondon to take their lumps in MLB in 2010 because that’s the only way to truly get a sense of how a pitcher eventually projects in MLB, that isn’t happening here. That’s mainly because there are some pretty stark differences between the cases of Huff and Laffey (for whom the case can be made to “take their lumps”) and Carrasco and Rondon…and I don’t just mean because Carrasco and Rondon still haven’t really had a chance with the parent club to date.

Whereas both Huff and Laffey have been exposed to MLB as starters and have experienced some success with little left to prove in the Minors (particularly given their age), Carrasco and Rondon enter the 2010 season as a 23-year-old in Carrasco (he turns 23 next month) and as a 22-year-old in Rondon (he turns 22 next week) with terrific numbers throughout their MiLB careers but with more refinement needed on their repertoire. Given the pitchers ahead of them developmentally in the organization and realizing that 2010 is all about development, the refinement of each pitchers’ arsenal should come in AAA with the idea that they’ll be called upon to contribute in the Indians’ rotation at some point in 2010 and having either closer to being a finished product (or calling either up while they’re in the midst of a “roll” in AAA) makes more sense for either of these highly-regarded young arms.

Some would scoff at the notion that either of these players is “highly-regarded” with the idea that either project as a top-to-middle-of-the rotation starter, but the body of work is there for each that have placed them in the upper echelon of pitching prospects. While it’s popular to take the stance that Carlos Carrasco is a “batting practice pitcher” on the basis of his performance with the Indians, I still have a little trouble believing that the luster came off of a not-yet-23-year-old Carrasco’s star as quickly as it did in some people’s minds. While Kyle Drabek became the “flavor of the day” in the Phillies’ organization, Carrasco became the “disappointment” and the “bust” as he suddenly went from being a 5-star prospect prior to the 2009 season (and he was, at least according to B-Pro) to a 3-star prospect (which is where B-Pro sees him this year) because of…what exactly?

Was it the 3 lousy months in AAA Lehigh Valley as a 22-year-old (when he was the youngest pitcher to throw a pitch for Lehigh Valley in 2009) or was it the “hide the women and children” cup of coffee he had with the Indians last September…you know, the 22 1/3 innings?

Lest anyone forget, Carrasco’s performance in Columbus after joining the Indians’ organization was a 3.19 ERA, a 0.90 WHIP, and 36 K to 7 BB in 42 1/3 IP and while his numbers in Lehigh Valley may count as a disappointment in that he was repeating AAA, he did strike out 112 batters in 114 2/3 innings in Lehigh Valley and posted peripherals that were pretty much in line with his career numbers, other than the 5.18 ERA. But what of that ERA, in that Carrasco’s FIP (that’s Fielding Independent Pitching, which attempts to measure the things that a pitcher is directly responsible for) was 3.96 in Lehigh Valley.

Interestingly, if you take a look at how Carrasco’s 2009 numbers compared to those of another highly-touted arm in Tampa’s Wade Davis (who is still well-regarded), more confusion sets in:
Carlos Carrasco 2009 in AAA as a 22-year-old
3.71 FIP, 1.24 WHIP, 148 K, 45 BB, 17 HR allowed in 157 IP

Wade Davis 2009 in AAA as a 23-year-old

3.82 FIP, 1.25 WHIP, 140 K, 60 BB, 14 HR allowed in 158 1/3 IP

Seeing as how Davis is still considered a top prospect (he’s #33 in B-Pro’s recent ranking heading into 2010 and #15 in Keith Law’s ranking a few weeks ago) and Carrasco is nearly summarily dismissed as a disappointment, where’s the disconnect here?

Was it unreasonable to expect Carrasco to thrive in AAA to start 2009, seeing as how he posted a 1.72 ERA, 11.3 K/9 line there in 2008 over 36 2/3 innings?
Not at all and he unquestionably got off to a rocky start (though his WHIP in Lehigh Valley in both 2008 and 2009 was identical at 1.36 and his BB/9 rate and H/9 rate stayed wildly consistent), but what exactly causes a player like Carrasco to go from the 16th highest rated pitching prospect going into 2009 by Baseball America and the 25th highest rated pitching prospect going into 2009 by Keith Law to being an unmitigated disaster (at least in terms of perception) in such a short window of time?

Prior to the 2009 season, Kevin Goldstein at B-Pro wrote that, “Carrasco is the total package, combining a power frame with three above-average pitches and plus command. His fastball sits in the low 90s and can touch 94 mph, but his best pitch is an outstanding changeup with plenty of late life. He also has a nice curveball that he can throw for strikes or use as a chase pitch.” While Goldstein continued to write that Carrasco has issues with allowing small problems into bigger ones, doesn’t the idea that “the total package” who has a low-90’s fastball and an “outstanding changeup” with a third pitch in a curveball hold some merit?

This off-season, Goldstein wrote that Carrasco “parks his fastball in the low 90s, the pitch features good movement, and he tends to stay in the strikezone with it. His changeup is a true plus offering with hard, late movement, and his curveball is solid” meaning that the arsenal is still there, but Carrasco needs to refine his pitches and mature as a pitcher...something he can still do in AAA as a soon-to-be-23-year-old and eventually in MLB.

As for his MLB stint last year, were Carrasco’s first 5 starts an absolute trainwreck?
Well, the numbers associated with those starts are almost above the level of “trainwreck” on the disaster scale as he improbably gave up 6 HR in 22 1/3 IP while posting a 2.28 WHIP over those 5 starts.

However, age does matter here as does level of development when you realize that Carrasco was taking his lumps as a 22-year-old in MLB. For some perspective on that, 13 pitchers threw more than 20 innings exclusively as a starter in MLB in 2009 that were 22 or younger and while Carrasco unquestionably performed the worst among the 13, did you know that both Bartolo Colon and Cliff Lee were pitching in High-A ball as a 22-year-olds?

Again, that’s not to suggest that Carrasco WILL be a front-of-the-rotation starter, but the tools seem to be there for him to perhaps grow into one. To start the season, the Indians should put Carrasco in the back pocket of Charles Nagy in Columbus in an attempt to get Carrasco to refine his secondary pitches and to not let little problems become big problems. Carrasco’s been a highly-touted prospect for multiple years in the Philadelphia system and the Indians should take the beginning of 2010 to rebuild his confidence and to refine that repertoire in AAA to get some momentum back for him. Once Carrasco finds that groove (hopefully) in Columbus, that should be the point when a promotion is to the parent club is considered, if only so the trainwreck of his cup of coffee would be far away from his memory.

As for the other RHP that figures into the Indians’ rotation (just not right now), Hector Rondon will go into 2010 attempting to continue the momentum of his 2009 season when he dominated hitters in Akron and, after a brief experiment as a reliever, continued his effectiveness after being promoted to Columbus. When it was all said and done in 2009, Rondon’s line in 2009 read like this:
3.38 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, 8.4 K/9, 4.72 K/BB in 146 1/3 IP

I know that I’ve brought up the idea before that what Rondon did in 2009 is not all that different than what Dave Huff did in 2008 as Huff’s 2008 cumulative line (also in AA and AAA) lookd like this:
2.52 ERA, 0.96 WHIP, 8.8 K/9, 4.93 K/BB in 146 1/3 IP

However, as was discussed earlier, age is important in the development of a pitcher and if Dave Huff is thought to have a ceiling of a #3 or #4 starter at some point when he’s putting those numbers up in the Minors as a 24-year-old, what is to be made of Rondon putting them up as a 21-year-old at the same levels?

Certainly his floor looks to be higher and his adjustment to the upper levels, where hitters are more selective and feast on a fastball-heavy diet, is going to dictate what kind of success Rondon has as a legitimate MLB pitcher. That being said, let’s remember that Rondon’s 146 1/3 innings in 2009 are the only he’s made above Kinston and, while that was also true with Huff to start the 2009 season, there’s a difference in development and expected arrival time to MLB between a 24-year-old former 1st Round Pick and a 21-year-old in that time still exists for Rondon before he approaches his mid-20s to develop further and refine his secondary pitches.

That refinement of his secondary pitches is how Rondon should be spending his 2010 season (at least to start it) with him getting handed the ball every 5th day for Columbus to get him back to some semblance of a routine after his 2009 season was interrupted for a brief moment when the idea that he could have been moved to the bullpen was in play. Perhaps he eventually ends up in the bullpen when it’s all said and done, but at this juncture he could certainly benefit from increased exposure at AAA and steady work. Another reason for Rondon to remain in AAA to start the season is because, while his overall 2009 line looks good, his performance in AAA wasn’t nearly as good as it was in AA:
Rondon 2009 in Akron
2.75 ERA, 1.06 WHIP, 9.1 K/9, 4.56 K/BB in 72 IP

Rondon 2009 in Columbus

4.00 ERA, 1.29 WHIP, 7.7 K/9, 4.92 K/BB in 74 1/3 IP

In terms of his repertoire, what stands out most about Rondon is his command and his reputation as a strike thrower, evidenced by the spectacularly steady K/BB rates in both AA and AAA. At this point, there’s very little question about Rondon’s fastball (which has hit 95 MPH), but like most young pitchers, his secondary pitches need refinement so more advanced hitters can’t just sit on his fastball so allowing him to start the season in AAA, under the watchful eye of Charles Nagy (who hopefully is in the organization for more than just PR and can teach both Carrasco and Rondon how to complement their fastballs) will allow Rondon to grow as a pitcher as well as allowing his confidence to grow.

Going into this season, Rondon is the 23rd highest rated pitching prospect in MLB according to Keith Law and he should get his chance to contribute some starts in Cleveland this season. Given the arms that factor in front of him (in terms of developmental level, not talent), he should start the 2010 season in AAA with Carrasco in an attempt to allow both RHP to become more finished products where MLB success is more of a possibility for each.

Now, don’t take this to mean that Carrasco and Rondon are two top-of-the-rotation certainties just waiting to be finished off in their development and that it’s only a matter of time before each is a perennial All-Star.

That’s not the purpose of this at all as it must be mentioned that just because a pitcher progresses quickly through the Minors, with success at each stop does not imply that MLB success is a given. It should be remembered that there was a time that Jason Davis, Danys Baez, Ricardo Rodriguez, and Francisco Cruceta were seen as young RH prospects who had the capability of becoming top-to-middle-of-the-rotation possibilities if they were able to…wait for it…refine their secondary pitches to complement their fastballs.

Perhaps Carrasco goes the way of Rodriguez or Cruceta (bouncing around after not being able to adjust to MLB, perpetually maddening teams with his potential), and maybe Rondon goes the way of Baez (to the bullpen) or even Jason Dangerously (into oblivion or maybe even taxidermy), but if the group ahead of Rondon and Carrasco figure to be middle-to-back-end-of-the-rotation arms in that Huff and Laffey may be what they are, here is the first organizational offering of high-risk/high-ceiling guys with each able to throw in the mid-90’s with developing secondary offerings. If the Indians are able to net a #2 or a #3 starter out of either Carrasco or Rondon, then the implications of having a young, under-club-control, and cheap arm cannot be underestimated.

Again though, don’t take this as an impassioned plea that either should be breaking camp with the Indians to start the season in the starting rotation as the quintet of Westbrook, Carmona, Masterson, Huff, and Laffey should be given that shot with some pretty long leashes. However, if Rondon and Carrasco are both sent to Columbus to start the year, allowing them to refine their secondary pitches with Charles Nagy, the moment will arrive when a spot opens up in the rotation either due to ineffectiveness, injury, or trade. That point is when the Indians should promote one of their young RH arms to take a spot in the rotation, it should be done with the idea of attaching that same long leash that should be already be attached to Masterson, Huff, and Laffey throughout all of 2010.

Development is the name of the game this year and the prudent path to take with the young RHP at the upper levels would be to start Rondon and Carrasco in AAA and to allow their success in AAA dictate when they arrive in MLB, coinciding with if (no, make that when) Westbrook is out of the rotation or if any of the principals get injured or are rendered ineffective.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

A Lazy Sunday Getting Closer

After being subjected to the Opening Ceremonies on Friday night and enjoying the Butler-CSU game on Saturday afternoon (which included my first experience with seeing a fan thrown out of a NCAA game by the refs…and him sitting next to me doing nothing incendiary enough to merit such an ejection), let’s roll right into a Lazy Sunday while I figure out what Valentine’s Day meal I’m going to make to warm The DiaBride this evening.

And with that…we’re off:
While this represents “old news” to some degree, I thought it would be worthwhile to delve into the whole offer that the Indians extended to 2B Orlando Hudson, who eventually signed with the Twins in that it represents the Indians’ first known foray (past Mike Redmond) into guaranteeing a roster spot, much less any money to a Free Agent. Before getting going on this, I should bring up that I thought that the Indians should have signed him after the 2008 season – albeit with my suggested purchase price for Hudson in November of 2008 as a (gulp) “4-year, $40M deal ($9M per with a $4M buyout of the 5th year, $10M option) – to allow the shift towards 3B for Jhonny and Asdrubal, a move that obviously was trumped by the Mark DeRosa deal.

Concerning the Hudson offer, Anthony Castrovince addresses it in his most recent “Indians’ Inbox”, particularly attempting to shed some light on the thought process of the Indians and what the offer means to how they view Louie V:
…I was told the Indians viewed Hudson as the one middle infielder on the open market worth pursuing in such a manner. In fact, he was probably the only player on the market they were willing to work out a creative, two-year contract with.

The Indians still have concerns about their infield defense and, specifically, about Valbuena’s range, as well as his ability to hit lefties. If they had their choice, they’d have Valbuena in more of a utility role where he could bounce around between second base, shortstop and third this season. But as things stand, Valbuena still projects as the regular at second, getting spelled against left-handed starters.


Concerns about their infield defense and, specifically about Valbuena’s range, are interesting when you take a look at the piece about Hudson signing with the Twins from Ken Rosenthal:
Defensively, Hudson remains outstanding on popups and above average to his glove side. He is weaker to his backhand, but again his wrist might not be the only explanation. A second executive says that even before Hudson suffered his injury, his defense was in decline.

“He used to be a difference-maker,” the exec says. “Now he’s a tick above average.”


The pursuit of Hudson is interesting in that it does seem to come a season too late and throws a cloud of uncertainty as to whether they view Valbuena as a long-term answer at 2B. If they don’t and see him “in more of a utility role where he could bounce around between second base, shortstop, and third base this season” , even if it’s just for this year, and with Hudson going to Minnesota, does that mean that the Indians going to keep looking for a 2B?

Not if you believe the notion (as AC was told above) that “the Indians viewed Hudson as the one middle infielder on the open market worth pursuing in such a manner. In fact, he was probably the only player on the market they were willing to work out a creative, two-year contract with.”

While that does explain the pursuit of Hudson, the cloud of uncertainty around the future role of Valbuena persists. While Louie V showed some glimpses of being an everyday player last year, poking laser beam line drives to all fields, if the Indians feel that his best role this season is that of a Utility IF, what does that mean for the future of 2B?

Well, not to introduce a largely-forgotten name here because of his injury-marred 2009 season, but what about Jason Donald?

If you’ll remember, the now-25-year-old IF was rated as the #4 Phillies’ prospect going in 2009 as per Baseball America and John Sickels (who had him rated as a borderline B/B- prospect), not to mention him coming in at #4 as per Phuture Phillies, #5 by Phillies’ Nation, and with Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus (who had Donald as #6 in the Phils’ system before 2009) writing this about Donald prior to the 2009 season:
The Good: Scouts are universal in their praise for the way that Donald plays the game. He has a big-league approach, a fundamentally sound swing, and he drives balls into the gaps with ease. He’s an excellent baserunner and a solid defender.
The Bad: Donald has average tools that play up due to his effort and instincts. He plays three infield positions, but does not profile well as an everyday player on the left side; he lacks range at shortstop and the arm or power profile for the hot corner.
--snip--
Perfect World Projection: He'll be a solid everyday second baseman.
Glass Half Empty: He becomes a valuable utility player and an occasional starter at multiple positions.


While all of those rankings put Donald in the upper levels of the Phillies’ prospects entering last season, consider that the most glowing praise of Donald came from ESPN.com’s Keith Law, who had Donald as the best prospect in the Phillies’ organization going into 2009, as the 6th best 2B prospect in all of MLB going into 2009 (and take a look at how many Indians populate that list from last year), not to mention #48 among all prospects in MLB, justifying the high ranking last year thusly:
He’s a line-drive hitter who uses the whole field well and has good patience, although he can open up a little early and get on top of the ball or swing over it entirely. He has a little loft in his swing but will probably max out around 15-20 homers barring a major increase in strength. His arm is average for short, he gets good reads on ground balls, and is very good on the double play both as a shortstop and on the pivot as a second baseman.

As a quick aside here prompted by Donald’s inclusion in that 2009 prospect ranking, take a look at the players that were in Law’s Top 100 going into last year who now find themselves in the Indians’ organization:
11. Carlos Santana
27. Matt LaPorta
48. Jason Donald
60. Carlos Carrasco
61. Nick Weglarz
66. David Huff
80. Chris Perez
81. Nick Hagadone
That would be 8 of the Top 100 from last year’s list with some of those guys not on this year’s list because of injury-marred 2009 seasons or because they lost their prospect eligibility. Add The Chiz (#26 on Law’s list this year), Rondon (#51 in Law’s 2010 list), and Brantley (#71 on Law’s list for 2010) and that would be 4 potential starters (Carrasco, Huff, Rondon, and Hagadone), 1 potential closer (Perez), a C (Santana), a 1B (LaPorta), a 2B (Donald), a 3B (The Chiz), and a LF (Brantley) who have been considered among the Top 100 prospects in MLB in the past two years by Keith Law. I know the starting pitching still feels like a stretch, but just from a lineup standpoint, did you notice what positions are missing in terms of having a top prospect close to being MLB-ready?

Would it be SS, CF, and RF – where the Indians have their most ensconced position players already on hand and under club control for at least the next three years?

But I digress…just to get back to Donald and attempt to put his prospect standing into the proper perspective by bringing in a comparison to Valbuena, prior to the 2009 season (when Donald was so highly regarded on all of these lists), Louie V did not make the cut among the Mariners’ Top 10 prospects according to Baseball America (though he was tabbed for having the best strike zone discipline) and he ranked #15 on John Sickels’ list of the Indians prospects (which was compiled after the trade from Seattle) going into 2009 with a prospect grade of C+, right between Matt McBride and Bones Meloan. Valbuena does not appear on any of Keith Law’s lists going into 2009, and appeared in the “Just Missed” section of Kevin Goldstein’s list going into 2009 at Baseball Prospectus.

What can be taken from all of this, in that Donald was nearly universally perceived to be a better prospect than Valbuena heading into the 2009 season, one that was essentially a lost season for Donald as he battled injuries both in the Philadelphia organization as well as with the Indians while Valbuena was given the longest leash to a young player by Eric Wedge in recent memory?

I suppose it’s a reality check on expectations for each player as so many have been quick to assume that Valbuena is the long-term answer at 2B while Donald is just some “Utility IF” type. Maybe the opposite is true though, in that maybe Jason Donald is the long-term answer at 2B who just needs to get his sea legs back under him for ½ of a season in Columbus and maybe Valbuena (who, like Donald, can play 2B, SS, and 3B) is the future “Utility IF” for this team. Of course, this isn’t to suggest that Donald should be the starting 2B out of Goodyear however, as he still needs to add to his total of 270 plate appearances above AA and show that the injury issues that derailed his 2009 season are behind him.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say this again – 2010 is the season to find out what the Indians have with their internal options and 2B is no different as a good portion of the playing time should be devoted to find out if Valbuena can hit LHP while giving him the opportunity to show that he can improve his range around 2B. If he struggles for the first half of the season (getting steady AB, even against LHP) to improve either, you have your answer that Valbuena projects as more of a utility player; but if he’s not given the chance to improve or get consistent AB, we’re back to where we’ve been for the past few years with guys who are given a limited amount of time to prove themselves in MLB.

Maybe you take ½ of a season to see what Valbuena can do, sending him back down to rectify his service time (particularly if he struggles) to be replaced by the RH Donald (with whomever staying on as the Utility IF until Valbuena’s service time issue is fixed) in mid-summer so the oil would be on the canvas to see how both Valbuena and Donald do as the everyday 2B in Cleveland and to plan for 2011 accordingly.

Maybe one of them figures in as the 2B in the near and long-term and (just as possibly) neither of them is the answer…but the idea of the once-highly-thought-of Donald could be seen as more of a long-term option (with the fact that he would be a RH bat in a LH-laden lineup) is something to watch as the 2010 season develops.

On the same topic of that RH bat in a LH-laden lineup, the recent rumors of the Indians looking into the services of Russell Branyan and Hank Blalock make very little sense to me as each is LH and the idea of platooning with LaPorta at 1B or adding another LH bat to the bench makes me cringe. The one name however, that does make some sense in terms of adding a 1B/DH type to the mix would be Jermaine Dye.

The initial reason why can actually be seen in a Fangraphs piece from Dave Cameron examining why Dye is so undesirable on the FA market in that, at this point in his career, Dye projects as a RH 1B/DH. That may not be an attractive combination for most teams as Cameron’s rationale for Dye having difficulty finding work goes like this:
Second baseman, third baseman, and shortstop all have to throw right-handed. It’s just the nature of tossing the ball to first base – left-handed throwers are restricted to first base or the outfield. Because one of the requirements of playing the three non-1B infield spots is throwing right-handed, it follows naturally that most of those infielders also hit right-handed.
--snip--
What does any of this have to do with Jermaine Dye? Well, if you’re a team that is already stocked with right-handers around the infield, you’re running out of spots to get a really good left-handed hitter to balance out your line-up. Unless you have an MVP caliber center fielder, he’s probably not that guy. You might be able to get a left-handed thumping bat in a corner outfield spot, but those guys are expensive, and a lot of teams are realizing that it’s more cost efficient to put a good defender out there anyway.


Let’s follow Cameron’s thought process in this…
The idea that Dye doesn’t work to “a team that is already stacked with right-handers around the infield” isn’t applicable in Cleveland because of Asdrubal’s ability to switch-hit and Valbuena (assuming he’s the 2B) being LH.

The idea that “unless you have an MVP caliber center fielder” would seem to have an answer as would the idea that “you might be able to get a left-handed thumping bat in a corner outfield spot” as all 3 of the Indians’ OF spots seem to be occupied by strictly LH hitters…even if Brantley is never likely to be confused with a “thumper”.

All told, it would look like the Indians are looking at 5 of their 9 everyday players batting from the left side of the plate and if LaPorta is not quite 100% to start the season, the RH options become Andy Marte and Shelly Duncan to balance out the lineup at 1B. Thus, in a LH-laden lineup, a RH bat like Dye makes some sense not only as insurance that LaPorta isn’t going to be healthy to start the season, but more importantly as insurance that Hafner is still not 100% and the trend of his ineffectiveness against LHP is going to continue.

Lest you forget, Hafner only faced LHP in 90 of his 383 plate appearances last year and posted a line of .210 BA / .289 OBP / .407 SLG / .696 OPS in those 90 plate appearances against LHP in 2009. If Hafner is going to take the occasional day off against LHP or still work at being an “everyday” DH in terms of playing multiple consecutive games, what’s wrong with the idea of bringing Dye and his OPS of .894 in 2009 against LHP (he posted a .757 OPS against RHP) into the fold?

I know…I know, I’m the one that’s been hammering away at the idea that the Indians need to figure out as much as they can about their internal options before doling out any money or guaranteed roster spots this off-season, but the RH options right now that would start the season at 1B if LaPorta is slow to recover or would provide RH protection at DH are essentially Marte and Duncan. Since Duncan was inked to a Minor League deal and Marte is on the 40-man, let’s just take a look at that most obvious internal RH option – Andy Marte. Over his career, Marte has posted only a .702 OPS vs. LHP in MLB (.597 OPS vs. RHP) and the difference in Marte’s career splits in MiLB is nominal (.867 OPS vs. LHP, .832 OPS vs. RHP), so it’s not as if Marte is some LHP masher waiting to break out.

Not that Dye is…it just becomes a question of whether Dye is really a better option than just giving Andy Marte one last chance to put some polish on his apple. Yes, maybe Marte needs more time and maybe the player that he was in AAA last year (under the tutelage of Jon Nunnally, now the Tribe hitting coach) shows that the unrequited potential still resides somewhere deep inside Marte.
But if Dye is sitting around, waiting for an opportunity (and this intimation from Frank Thomas in a recent Chicago interview that Dye’s considering retirement reeks of an attempt to drum up interest this late in the game), the question becomes – at what cost?

Dye reportedly turned down a $3.3M, one year deal from the Cubs, an offer that is no longer on the table due to that Cubs’ money making its way into Xavier Nady’s bank account and I'd be loathe to see that kind of money go to a player that ultimately counts as simply an insurance policy against LaPorta’s recovery and the possibility that Pronk is long gone. While Ken Rosenthal can sit and wonder “Why is Jermaine Dye Not Signed”, pointing out that Dye has the 2nd most RBI among MLB outfielders and the 3rd most HR for any AL player over the past 5 years, let’s remember what a contract should be paying for – future expectations, not past results.

So if the Indians can let market conditions allow them to ink Dye to an incentive-laden one-year deal where he’s only going to be asked to play 1B to give LaPorta a day off or sub for Hafner every so often…yeah, I'd sign up for that. It wouldn’t come without some caveats though, as the signing would make sense as long as his role is just that (sometime 1B and DH without taking legitimate AB away from LaPorta) and as long as there’s some sort of language in the deal that prevents him from ever stepping onto the outfield grass at the corner of Carnegie and Ontario with the intent to “play the field” as images of “Ryan Garko – LF” are just too fresh to subject anyone to Dye’s defense in the outfield.

Lest anyone forget, the last veteran 1B/DH that we signed to hit LHP (that would be Eduardo Perez) was famously flipped for a 20-year-old AAA shortstop named Asdrubal. Sure, that deal may be the exception (and does anyone else still marvel that the Indians received two All-Star caliber players for Benuardo back in 2006), but if the worst case scenario for a guy like Dye is that the team flips him in July to a team in need of a RH bat, I’m in for it…assuming the price is right and it just might be.

Moving on, with Spring Training so close you can almost taste it, Tribe Daily has started up their comprehensive look at the players that figure to be populating the fields of Goodyear this Spring Training, starting with the NRI.

Finally, it looks like Paul Hoynes finally caught up on this “when will Grady be traded” nonsense as he finally presents the proper contract terms in today’s mailbag…well, kind of.

Why is this noteworthy?
Well, because Hoynes didn’t want to let Jim Ingraham sit alone in the dark on this one for a while, here a gem from the comments section of Hoynes’ piece on Brantley where Hoynes parrots the Ingraham version (debunked here last week) of when the Indians would consider trading Grady Sizemore:
Posted by Paul Hoynes, The Plain Dealer
February 09, 2010, 6:50AM
I don't think the Indians will trade Grady this year. If you at the recent past, Lee and Martinez weren't traded until they were in their final year with the Indians holding a club option for 2010. Sizemore is signed through 2011 with a club option for 2012.

So unless ownership has a change of heart, or the Indians start playing better, Sizemore could be traded sometime in 2011.
paul hoynes


Again, not to take another swing at that dead horse lying on the ground over there (as Hoynes did get it semi-right today, albeit in his usual confusing language that “I do know they’ll trade him sometime in 2011 or in his club option year of 2012” then laying out why it wouldn’t make sense to trade him in 2011), but if you’re still relying on any of The Three Amigos (that would be Hoynes, Ingraham, or Ocker) as your go-to Tribe beat writer, you’re just wasting your time.

And I don’t just say that because of a cameo appearance in AC’s aforementioned “Indians’ Inbox” this week on the Grady contract topic:
I saw [elsewhere] a report that attempts to start the clock for Grady Sizemore leaving Cleveland. And while I don't pretend that Grady's going to be an Indian for life, this was something I have not seen. The report said the Indians have an option on Sizemore for 2012 for $10.5 million, which Sizemore can decline and thereby declare his free agency. Is this right?
-- Paul C., Cleveland, Ohio

In a word, no.
I've tried to use this space to prepare fans for the probability that Sizemore will not be with the Indians in 2013. It's a very real scenario because of the economic realities of the sport and the doubts, at this juncture, that the Indians could come up with the financial means it would take to be the top bidder for the services of a superstar-caliber player such as Sizemore when he reaches free agency.
Of course, last I checked, it's 2010, so any talk of trading Sizemore -- even when we're talking about a team that traded Cliff Lee and Victor Martinez a year and a half before they were eligible for free agency -- is premature. The Indians do hold an option on Sizemore for 2012, and it remains a club option as long as he's a member of this club. It only becomes a player option if Grady is traded. Otherwise, why would they even bother to call it a "club option"?
The Lee and Martinez examples taught us that the Indians are open to exploring the trade value of their star players well in advance of their free-agent eligibility. But the option clause in Sizemore's contract makes his situation quite a bit different than those Lee and Martinez examples. If the Indians traded Sizemore in 2011, the team acquiring him would (most likely) only be getting him through that season, as one would figure Sizemore would then decline his 2012 option because of its low value relative to his free-agent value.
Sizemore, therefore, probably won't have the trade value in 2011 that Lee and Martinez had in 2009. So the Indians, it would appear, would not have a compelling reason to trade Sizemore until 2012, which is the final year he is guaranteed to wear the Tribe uniform.


OK, so everyone clear on this?
Mr. Hoynes, get that hand all the way up like you finally do get this and somebody wake Ingraham up for goodness sake…Spring Training’s about to start!

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Ten Little Indians - Part II

After reviewing the “known quantities” that figure into the 2010 rotational mix (or at least the arms that seem to have a secured spot in the starting staff coming out of Goodyear), let’s get into the next batch of arms who figure prominently into the 2010 mix and (more importantly) beyond the 2010 season. Whereas it would seem that Westbrook, Carmona, and Masterson would all be locks to start the season in the rotation and stay there, until injury or trade removed them from the quintet, the other players who have logged significant MLB success in the past few years is where our eyes will cast today.

In Dave Huff and Aaron Laffey, the Indians have two young LHP who have graduated from the Minors for all intents and purposes, with very little left to prove in AAA but still retaining options, meaning that their roster “flexibility” could have them taking that “I-71 Shuffle” a couple of times this year. Looking at the coupling, there’s no way to ignore the fact that each has shown some promise in his brief MLB career, with consistency being the elusive factor for each in terms of solidifying a rotational spot above all other options. The question with both becomes whether starting every 5th game will give them the opportunity to settle into some semblance of consistency and allow them to take hold of a middle-of-the-rotation spot going forward past 2010 or if the regular work this year will reveal them to be simply what they may be – inconsistent, back-end-of-the-rotation fodder whose usefulness to the team is tied very neatly to their affordability.

For the pitcher who finished with the most wins on the team last year (as if “wins” is a suitable gauge of success), Dave Huff shook off some injury concerns to start the season and finished very strongly in the rotation, with his cumulative numbers over his final 8 starts, from the beginning of August to the end of the season, looking like many thought they would, based on his phenomenal 2008 season in AA and AAA:
Dave Huff’s Final 8 Starts (47 2/3 IP) – 2009
3.59 ERA, 1.43 WHIP, .706 OPS against

Those numbers look great and all, but just to illustrate what “inconsistency” means for a young starting pitcher, here are the pitching line associated with the 7 starts that Huff logged prior to those final 8 games from the end of June to the beginning of August:
7.94 ERA, 1.82 WHIP, .978 OPS against in 39 2/3 IP

And…just to illustrate the point further and to dip deeper into Huff’s 2009 season, here’s his line from the 6 games prior to those, from the end of May to the end of June:
3.41 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, .690 OPS against in 34 1/3 IP

See where this is going?
This is not a revolutionary concept, but young pitchers like Huff are bound to struggle with inconsistency as they adjust to MLB (which is why Tim Lincecum truly is such a freak) and determining what type of pitcher Huff eventually projects as is tantamount to realizing what the team has in a player like Huff, who turns 26 this August. That is, does Huff legitimately have the chance to put together a consistent line close to those stretches with ERA’s under 4.00 and WHIP’s under 1.50 or is he simply going to battle this inconsistency throughout his MLB career?

Obviously it’s too early to get a gauge on that, but the importance for a player like Huff to attempt to pitch through the difficulties (if the Indians are convinced that he can be a contributor to the next incarnation of a contender) can best be seen when you consider the “Tale of Two Seasons” by another mid-20’s LHP back in 2004:
Cliff Lee’s First 19 starts – 2004
3.81 ERA, 1.39 WHIP, .737 OPS against in 113 1/3 IP

Cliff Lee’s Final 14 Starts – 2004
8.22 ERA, 1.71 WHIP, .948 OPS against in 65 2/3 IP

Just to throw another bone of interest onto the pile, Cliff Lee was born in August of 1978 and Dave Huff was born in August of 1984, meaning that the comparable seasons of age and development for the two are Lee’s 2003 (9 starts, 52 1/3 IP) and Huff’s 2009. Ultimately then, the Indians should treat Huff’s 2010 just as they treated Lee’s 2004 season referenced above, to keep him in the rotation despite the options factors tied to him and others to see if Huff can become the middle-of-rotation starter that most people saw as Lee’s ceiling back in 2004.

Now, am I intimating that Dave Huff is Clifton Phifer Lee (the Cy Young Award winner, not the “simply Cliff Lee” guy who didn’t make the 2007 post-season roster) just waiting to break out?

Of course not, but since the two of them seem to have traveled very similar development paths in terms of age and level throughout their MiLB career, compare the cumulative numbers for the two pitchers put up over their MiLB careers in the upper levels, specifically AA and AAA:
Lee – AA in 120 IP
3.22 ERA, 0.99 WHIP, 10.7 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 3.76 K/BB

Huff – AA in 65 2/3 IP
1.92 ERA, 0.88 WHIP, 8.5 K/9, 1.9 BB/9, 4.43 K/BB

Lee – AAA in 147 IP
3.48 ERA, 1.41 WHIP, 8.7 K/9, 4.8 BB/9, 1.81 K/BB

Huff – AAA in 120 IP
3.45 ERA, 1.12 WHIP, 8.5 K/9, 2.3 BB/9, 3.65 K/BB

Again, none of this is meant to intimate that Dave Huff is a couple years away from winning a Cy Young here…mainly because something that is still unexplained happened to Cliff Lee prior to the 2008 season. Rather, the idea is that Dave Huff could realistically project to be what most of us saw Cliff Lee as back in 2004 and 2005 – a middle-of-the-rotation LHP who can contribute (at a low salary for a while) quality innings to a still-maturing club.

In turn, it’s also meant to point out that sometimes a pitcher simply needs to be given regular turns in a rotation before a level of comfort and consistency is achieved. This obviously does not apply to every potential starting pitcher, but for a pitcher with Huff’s pedigree as a 1st Round Pick and with a sparkling Minor-League resume, a long leash and steady use is necessary to properly get a read on a pitcher like Huff.

To that end, a long leash and steady use in the rotation is something that Aaron Laffey has never experienced as he’s ridden the organizational yo-yo on multiple occasions, moving back and forth between MLB and AAA and even between the rotation and the bullpen. When he’s been asked to start, his overall numbers are nothing to dismiss in 44 games started over 3 seasons as he’s accumulated a 4.42 ERA and a 1.51 WHIP as a starter for the Indians.

No, his K rate and K/BB as a starter aren’t impressive (career 118 K in 252 IP as a starter, against 96 BB), but Laffey turns 25 this April and his 3.60 career MiLB ERA and 1.30 career MiLB WHIP shows that there’s something to what he’s put together as a body of work both topside and on the farm. Lest anyone forget, Laffey was assumed to be the 5th starter out of Spring Training last year and was “beaten out” by Scotty Lewis, whose tenure as the 5th starter lasted for all of 4 1/3 innings. From the time Laffey was placed back into the rotation to the time he was moved to the bullpen in an effort to stop the bleeding in the bullpen, he posted a 4.09 ERA and a .731 OPS against despite a gaudy WHIP of 1.64 accumulated over 22 innings and 4 starts. Of course, Laffey then moved into the bullpen (where he thrived again, to the tune of a 3.65 ERA and a .604 OPS against) before he was placed BACK in the rotation when he came off of the DL in early July.

From his return from the oblique strain on July 8th up to (and excluding) his last start of the season (85 1/3 IP over 14 starts), Laffey posted a 3.90 ERA and, while that is just 14 starts in one season, he put up a similar 14 start stretch (over 84 IP) in 2008 from May 4th to July 18th, posting a 3.43 ERA.

What’s crazy about Laffey’s career with the Indians is that he has yet to get more than 16 consecutive starts in any of the three seasons that he’s been a part of the parent club. Whether he’s been injured or moved to the bullpen or was sent to AAA in the midst of a stretch of starts, he’s never simply been given the ball every 5 games from the beginning of the season to the end despite being a little better than league average (102 ERA+) as a starter in his career.

What can Laffey do being handed the ball every 5th day, without a break?
Can he be a Jake Westbrook, circa 2004 to 2007?
If you remember (or even if you don’t), Westbrook put up a line befitting of a middle-of-the-rotation starter over those four years in 121 starts to this tune:
4.07 ERA, 107 ERA+, 1.34 WHIP, 2.6 BB/9, 5.0 K/9, 1.93 K/BB

Not to keep these comparisons to the 2003 and 2004 pitching staffs coming, but take a look at what Jake Westbrook did in 2003 (the year in which he bounced around between the rotation and the bullpen) as a 25-year-old in those instances when he did start games:
4.64 ERA and 1.54 WHIP with peripherals of 3.9 K/9, 0.94 K/BB in 118 1/3 IP

Now, compare that to Laffey’s line as a starter looked like in 2009 as a 24-year-old when he…wait for it…bounced around between the rotation and the bullpen:
4.53 ERA and a 1.67 WHIP with peripherals of 4.1 K/9, 0.94 K/BB in 109 1/3 IP

Frighteningly similar peripherals, no?
Now, how about the leap then that Westbrook made in the subsequent 2004 season as a 26-year-old when he was a regular in the rotation?
3.38 ERA, 1.25 WHIP with peripherals of 4.8 K/9, 2.5 BB/9, and a 1.90 K/BB over 215 2/3IP

While that season ultimately proved to be somewhat of an outlier for Westbrook, it helped to establish him as a solid middle-of-the-rotation starter and if Laffey can make that leap to be the middle-of-the-rotation starter that Westbrook was for those four seasons relying on his groundball tendencies (like Westbrook), it would behoove the Indians to find out in 2010.

The reason that making that determination is so important this year is that Laffey is likely to be arbitration-eligible after the season and a middle-of-the-rotation starter is certainly worth a slight increase in salary given that kind of production from the rotation. On the flip side, if Laffey projects as merely a swing man or a reliever, the Indians need to determine his worth to the team as his salary begins to rise based on service time and comparable player salaries.

This makes the 2010 season that much more important for Laffey, still looking to legitimately establish himself as a starter able to thrive in MLB and for the Indians, watching Laffey’s service time clock click forward with more questions about him than answers. Handing the ball to Laffey every 5th game in 2010 is really the only way for the Indians to get a good read on whether The Babyfaced Bulldog could project as a middle-of-the-rotation innings eater that Westbrook eventually evolved into or if he simply looks like a long reliever/swing man/bullpen arm, a role that has rested on the shoulder of many LHP before Laffey.

With Huff and Laffey, the Indians need to find out if they’re sitting on two reincarnations of Lee and Westbrook, circa the mid-2000s, or if they simply have two middling LHP who will continue to struggle in their attempt to find consistency in MLB. The numbers of each would certainly suggest that it’s not a huge leap of faith to consider the former as a distinct possibility, particularly if you remember how Lee and Westbrook were viewed back then – as complementary pieces meant to fill out a rotation adequately and cheaply.

Huff and Laffey may present the Indians with a similar situation, as neither is going to be asked to suddenly become an elite pitcher in MLB. Rather, their track record shows that the possibility of being a league-average or above-league-average pitcher is there for each…and for 25-year-old LHP, that’s nothing to dismiss (particularly when you consider that the Twins won the Central last year with 1 starter that posted an ERA+ over 100, which actually defines league average) particularly in the situation the Indians find themselves in, both in terms of payroll and contention.

The opportunity is there in the 2010 season to answer questions about both Huff and Laffey, assuming the Indians don’t imprudently decide to start the season with out-of-options starters or bounce Huff and Laffey around to maximize the amount of pitchers that can all get MLB exposure this year. In light of the track record of each, the youth of each, and the affordability of each going forward, they should be starting 2 out of every 5 games for the 2010 Indians in an effort to determine if they can be counted on in rotations past this year of likely non-contention.

Sunday, February 07, 2010

Plowing Through a Lazy Sunday

With winter imposing its snowy will on the North Coast over the weekend and after a Saturday full of shoveling, followed by moving my sister into her new house, finished up with more shoveling, let’s get going on a Lazy Sunday before my knees and back give out on me and so I can clear a spot on the couch (next to some Dortmunders) to catch up on as-yet-unwatched episodes of the brilliant “Modern Family” as well as “Band of Brothers” (being re-cast on HBO and in turn, being re-watched by me), if only to avoid the 14 or so hours of Super Bowl coverage offered today prior to the actual game.

And with that and with the Motrin kicking in…we’re off:
Another slow news week in terms of Indians’ coverage and (while that’s not necessarily a bad thing, despite everyone focusing on who the Indians could still add from the FA scrap heap) the biggest “story” of the week was Grady Sizemore addressing reporters for the first time to discuss the “coffee cup” incident that occurred earlier in the off-season. While the actual story of “The Self-Portrait of the Outfielder as a Young Man” doesn’t really interest me all that much, I was astounded at the way that the same press conference of Grady talking to reporters was covered by the local media outlets.

It was fascinating in that the tone of the pieces differed drastically once it was past the discussion of the “Earl Grey-dy” pictures as all of the outlets touched on Sizemore’s injury and how he finds himself as the elder statesman on a young team, but the avenue that they took to broach the subject was more than a little telling in terms of media coverage of the Indians these days.

For the way that you would think that the “story” would be covered, the always solid Stephanie Storm of the ABJ (and this is the first time the ABJ makes it’s appearance on a Lazy One in over a year after the moratorium on Shelly Ocker’s work) takes a pretty standard angle on Sizemore in terms of his 2009 season and what 2010 looks like for him as does Anthony Castrovince (unsurprisingly) and you can read both pieces via the links if you are interested to see how a news story is generally approached and how both hit on all the high points while also bringing the context of Grady’s 2009 and 2010 into the mix.

Pretty standard stuff in both articles, after dispensing with the pleasantries (or lack thereof) associated with talking to a man about naked pictures of him surfacing on the interwebs…Grady was hurt and it affected his performance and he now finds himself on a very young team, on which he may be asked to assume more of a leadership position.

We know the story, and there was not really any other way to cover the press conference, is there?
Well…check out the opening sentence from Paul Hoynes’ piece on the topic from Friday’s paper:
It’s good to know Grady Sizemore hasn’t been traded.

No…seriously, and it rolled right on from there:
The Indians have Sizemore, 27, under contract through 2011 with a club option for 2012.
“I hope there is a long-term future for me here,” he said. “I've always enjoyed being an Indian. I’d love to spend my career here and be a part of this organization for as long as I could.”
CC Sabathia, Cliff Lee, Victor Martinez, Casey Blake, Ryan Garko, Rafael Betancourt, Carl Pavano, Paul Byrd, Edward Mujica, Kelly Shoppach, Mark DeRosa and Ben Francisco probably all felt the same at one time. Over the past two years, they were traded in an on-going fire sale that has reduced the roster to a few veterans and a lot of youngsters.
“I definitely feel like I've been left behind,” Sizemore said. “Some of the close friends that you had, that you formed relationships with as friends and teammates, have all been traded and moved on.
“I definitely think this is a good chance to start over with a new group of guys. I really like the young guys we've got and the veterans that we have. I’m looking forward to starting something new this year.”


Let me just clarify here that there is something valid about Grady being “left behind” and about how the team is unquestionably starting over, but don’t let your eyes deceive you – the names of Edward Mujica, Ryan Garko (who just got a $500K deal from the Mariners…which is about $100K more than the MLB minimum to show you how Garko is regarded around the league), Carl Pavano, Paul Byrd, and Ben Francisco were just included in a sentence bemoaning players who have been traded in an attempt to put the roster turnover of the past few years into context.

The title of that article by the way in the print edition that arrived on my doorstep on Friday morning was “Sizemore apologizes, says pictures on Web were meant to be private” and while I realize that writers have virtually no control over the headline, how about the train of thought for this piece - Grady apologizes for pictures (even if he really didn’t), he’s coming off of an injury, and (here’s the jump into the irrational) he’s going to eventually get traded because that’s what the Indians do.
Simple as that, the flames are fanned.

Not to be out-done, or allow any amount of research to get in the way of covering the story, Jim Ingraham tops the Hoynes’ piece in spades however in a story so absurd and so patently false that probably should have stirred up some sort of commotion in terms of basing an entire column on a false assumption.

To wit, Ingraham presents his “facts” and opinion thusly:
Despite coming off an injury-plagued 2009 season that resulted in career lows in most offensive categories and not one but two season-ending surgeries (elbow, groin), Sizemore is 27 and moving into what should be the prime years of his career.

Put those two factors together, and it means that the clock has already started ticking down toward Sizemore’s final game as a member of the Indians. He says he hasn’t thought about any potential exit strategy from Cleveland, but he doesn’t have to.

That's General Manager Mark Shapiro's job.

These are the facts:
Given their tattered pitching staff, and lack of financial resources to improve it, the Indians, who lost 97 games last year, with a Cy Young Award winner on the team for half the season, may struggle to avoid losing 100 this year.

Sizemore’s contract expires after the 2011 season. He will make $5.6 million this year and $7.5 million next year. There is an option for 2012 for $10.5 million, which Sizemore can decline and thereby declare his free agency.
In other words, the Indians have control of Sizemore for just this year and next year. That’s the exact same scenario that applied to Lee a year ago at this time. And five months later, the Indians traded Lee to Philadelphia.


The Indians may be facing the same scenario with Sizemore this year. Clearly, Sizemore is going to become a free agent before the Indians get good again.

The Indians, like most teams, almost never are able to re-sign their players once they become free agents, or are within a year of free agency.


The highlighting was done by me as the bolded assertion that serves as the keystone of Jim Ingraham’s outrageous argument that the Indians are at the same point with Sizemore as they were with Lee and Martinez were before this season is simply not true. After checking into the matter further on Friday (something Ingraham must not have done), I was informed (after about a 5-minute delay) that his 2012 option is a CLUB OPTION and becomes a player option only if Sizemore is traded prior to the 2012 season.

So, the idea that this is the “exact same scenario that applied to Lee a year ago at this time” is incorrect in a couple of ways:
1) The 2012 option is a club option if he is still a member of the Indians
2) That 2012 option becomes a player option if he is traded (one that would most certainly be declined given the low number), meaning that if the Indians traded him even next season, the acquiring team would get Grady only for the remainder of the 2011 season as his 2012 option would become his to decline.

Thus, this article by Ingraham comes about two years too early as the Indians wouldn’t entertain trading Sizemore even in the 2011 season for the reasons listed above and the idea would be that the Indians would be closer to competing going into the 2012 season…much more so than today.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m preparing myself and the now-3-year-old DiaperTribe (who sleeps under the security of a Grady blanket every night and only responds to being called “Grady” when we’re playing catch) for the very real possibility that Grady doesn’t end the 2012 season as a Cleveland Indian…but introducing the topic a solid two years early is nothing short of irresponsible.

Looking forward, going into the 2013 season (the one where he would be a Free Agent), Grady will be 30 going on 31 after the Indians will have paid him less than $25M for his age 27, 28, and 29 seasons. If the Indians find themselves in a situation in the 2012 season that comes anywhere close to resembling this off-season, what’s going on with Grady isn’t going to be the only topic of discussion as it’s likely that we’ll all be talking about the Indians’ new General Manager as well.

You’re tired of hearing it and I’m tired of harping on it, but if you don’t see the agendas at hand for particular “beat writers” that cover the Cleveland Indians and continue to go to those old wells for your news on the Indians, it’s no longer on me…that’s on you.

If this piece by Ingraham were written by a “some guy sitting in his parents’ basement in his pajamas” and not a newspaper writer, the newspapers would jump all over it as inaccurate and incendiary and the reason that access to sports teams by beat reporters is not only important but necessary. While I don’t disagree with the idea that access to sports teams by beat reporters is necessary, this particular article was written by an ill-informed rabble-rouser who should have the wherewithal (and contacts) to take the 5 minutes to check to see if the information upon which he based his whole story was true or not. Instead of being dismissed as the rubbish that it is, it will be chalked up as an “oversight” or a “misunderstanding based on ambiguous contract language” instead of for what it really is – a mainstream “journalist” not letting facts get in the way of his obviously slanted perspective (perhaps designed to sell papers by stirring up controversy) and allowing his agenda to be laid bare for all to see.

Reading this kind of drivel from the newspapers this off-season, is anyone else reminded of the old “Talk Back” sketches on “Saturday Night Live” with Buck Henry playing a hapless show host who introduces the most absurdly provocative topics in an attempt to generate some sort of response with only silent telephones in front of him?
How ‘bout this?
“Killing Puppies -- It Doesn't Bother Me”... That's me, Frank Noland, and I LIKE dead puppies!


How is this different from what’s been put out in the newspapers this offseason?
Alas, what’s frustrating about most of the newspapers’ coverage this winter is that this off-season has represented a perfect opportunity to look back at what went wrong and to look forward to imagine what’s coming for the organization.

To that end, I received a brilliant e-mail from reader Joel Shapira (known to some as chitowntribephan), who rejects the notion that the Indians simply don’t have any money to spend on the FA market. He doesn’t make the assertion that the Indians aren’t as financially squeezed as they say to hammer away at the absurd idea that the Indians need to be spending money foolishly in an off-season prior to a “transitional year”, but only in an attempt to shed some light on all of these reports that the Indians haven’t been active on the Free Agent market because they just don’t have any money.

In support of his assertion, he examined the spending of the Indians and the attendance figures for the Indians in the context of what teams similarly sized markets (Tampa Bay, Oakland and Milwaukee), close to Cleveland in geographical proximity (Cincinnati, Toronto, Pittsburgh and Detroit), as well as including the other divisional rivals (Minnesota and Kansas City) in the exercise.

The results, which can be seen here on a Google Spreadsheet support Joel’s idea in that the Indians’ attendance over the last three years has been greater than Cincinnati and their payrolls have been generally on par with each other over those three years. Yet the Reds (just to use an example which works because of the similarities in attendance, geography, and market size) are projected to have a payroll about $8M higher than the Indians’ 2010 payroll.

Again, the exercise was meant to debunk the idea that the coffers are completely empty and that the Indians aren’t spending money because they don’t have it. It’s easy to see that they probably do have some money in reserve (and Ken Rosenthal’s tweet that the Indians were actually the high bidder on Orlando Hudson for 2-years, $10M with a lot of the money backloaded would support that idea), it’s just that they don’t feel the need to spend it on players that aren’t going to be contributors in 2011 or 2012 just so they can win an extra 3-4 games this year.

No question that the financial situation is deeper and possessing more layers than just looking at attendance, market size, and geographical location, but I’m with Joel in that I don’t blindly accept the idea that the Indians don’t have money to spend and are likely using as a crutch to deflect noise from agents or just because they don’t see the value in throwing around the type of contracts that this team doesn’t need. It is important to remember that the Dolans reportedly told the Front Office that they could keep Lee and Martinez for the 2010 season, but couldn’t make any more additions this off-season.

We all know that the FO decided to punt on 2010 by trading the two of them and while the idea that the Indians were willing to swim in the deep financial waters of red ink to make another run at it in 2010 is a noble assertion, the truth is probably closer to the notion that the total that Victor and Lee would’ve earned in 2010 ($16M in club options) was too much to spend on the payroll (add that $16M to the $62 in projected salaries from Joel’s spreadsheet and see how it compares against the other organizations’ payrolls) of a team that wasn’t able to contend with Lee and Martinez contributing and the rebuild/reload/whatever started in earnest when looking at the larger number.

That being said, I think that the team will still spend some money this off-season, but it won’t be on the FA market as I can easily see them attempting to reach deals with both Cabrera and Choo during Spring Training or just after, which could be where this money (that they “don’t have”) is being reserved for. If that’s the case and money is being “saved” to extend Asdrubal and The BLC, anyone have a problem with that strategy?

Going back to Joel’s spreadsheet, I thought it was interesting to see the build-up of the team’s salary from 2004 to last year (an increase from $34M in 2004 to $81M last year), in that the team increased their spending as their “window” of possible contention opened with a 24% increase in payroll after the 2005 season and a 22% increase in payroll after the 2007 season. After the team showed the most promise (the near-breakthrough in 2005 and the ALCS in 2007), the payroll jumped accordingly as the Indians increased spending in an attempt to lengthen their stay at or near the top of the AL Central.

What else is interesting about Joel’s spreadsheet?
How about the fact that the year after the 2005 push for the playoffs (and yes, the Indians did come up short), the payroll increased by 24% but the attendance FELL from 2005 to 2006. Yes, it was a nominal drop (2,013,763 in 2005 to 1,997,995 in 2006) that was less than a 1% percent drop, but if the Indians “spent when the time was right”, where were the fans who claimed that they would return when the team would start winning again. Even more glaring is the fact that, after the 2007 season the Indians payroll jumped 22% after their ALCS run for the 2008 season. Guess what the attendance number did in 2008? It dropped again (2,275,916 in 2007 to 2,169,760 in 2008) and while the drop again was small (almost 5%), remember that was the year following 2007, when the team was one game away from going to the World Series. Again, the payroll increased when the Indians saw contention as a possibility while the attendance didn’t just remain flat…it fell.

Take all of that for what you will, but now that we’re back to square 1 in Rebuild v2.0 and the payroll is going to drop accordingly again. The interesting development to watch in light of this exercise is to see what happens in Tampa (who, like Cleveland didn’t get the attendance bump after their contention) or what happens in Milwaukee (who are living in the “Land of 455” these days) if the next couple of years for the Rays and Brewers go like 2008 and 2009 did for the Indians. That is, the Brewers and Rays are current poster children for all that is right in mid-market baseball, but their ability to win consistently AND continue to draw out fans to supplement the payroll will determine whether they can avoid the fate that befell the Tribe.

What 2010 holds for attendance and what it means for payroll in 2011 (when Westbrook, Wood, and likely Peralta) will no longer be in the books is a topic for another day, but it’s a lot to ponder (thanks to Joel Shapira’s diligence on the spreadsheet) on a day when most eyes will be focused on the game Miami…or at least the commercials.

Regardless of what happens in Miami today, the sun in South Florida serves as a nice segue to remind you that the equipment truck leaves tomorrow morning for Goodyear…which can only mean one thing – despite the snow coming down in waves from the sky on the North Coast, Spring Training and the eternal optimism that accompanies it are not far away.

On a cold February morning, that should be enough to warm your bones…

Thursday, February 04, 2010

Ten Little Indians - Part I

After a brief respite from the “Forward Thinking” series (OK, 2 ½ months), with pitchers and catchers set to report February 22nd, perhaps now would be a good time to delve back into specific portions of the 2010 Indians’ team. Interestingly, when this whole “Forward Thinking” series began some time ago, the idea was that it would set up the off-season and in turn, the 2010 season. However, since very little has changed since last November to today, the pieces on the Infield and the Outfield still ring pretty true. Sure, there’s been the trade of Shoppach and the addition of Redmond and (less notably) some flotsam and jetsam for the middle of the infield and 1B/LF, but where we sit today is not much of a different place than where we sat more than a few months ago.

Not that the inactivity is necessarily a surprising development (as even Anthony Castrovince asserts in his most recent “Indians’ Inbox” that “anybody surprised by the inactivity this offseason clearly wasn't paying attention to what was going on at the Trade Deadline last year”), it’s just that the expectations for what the team would look like in 2010 that were held in mid-October and early November of last year are pretty much in line with where the expectations are into February.

With that in mind and with expectations for the Indians’ season coming in from both sides of the ledger, next on the docket is the starting rotation, unquestionably the linchpin for the 2010 campaign and the reason that most are predicting a “transitional year” (to be charitable) for the club that occupies the confines at the corner of Carnegie and Ontario. Given that it’s foolhardy to attempt to continue a “series” after such a delay, we’ll start up on a new “series” (or sub-series if that fits better) on the starting rotation.

Thus, since the starting rotation is wild card in the 2010 deck of cards, I thought it would be best to break this up into a couple of parts, with each part identifying and delving into a group of pitchers that should be a factor in the 2010 season. Overall, it looks to me like there will be 10 pitchers (Westbrook, Carmona, Masterson, Huff, Laffey, Sowers, Talbot, Ambriz, Rondon, and Carrasco) that make up those groups and while each will be analyzed thoroughly, it’s important to note at the beginning of the series that the coming season could represent a tremendous opportunity for the team to legitimately use the innings thrown by starting pitchers to answer questions about each individual pitcher that figures into the long-term viability of the Tribe rotation going forward. That is, with 2010 representing a “transitional year”, the Indians have the chance to give the ball every 5th day to a number of options who could be a cog in the rotations when the Indians have legitimate hopes for contending in the AL Central.

However, since those days of contention look to be (optimistically) a year away, we’ll start off the series with a look at the three pitchers who, by most accounts, are assured of spots in the 2010 rotation coming out of Goodyear are, in no particular order:
Jake Westbrook
Fausto Carmona
Justin Masterson

At the “top” (termed used loosely for the presumed Opening Day Starter) the Indians will attempt to get more bang for their investment buck as they’ve only seen 34 23/ innings pitched for the $20M that they’ve paid Jake Westbrook over the last two years…read that again and try to keep your lunch down. That being said, the “bang for their buck” could very well be flipping him for a prospect in July as a best-case scenario if he proves to be healthy and effective into July. One would think that the Indians are hoping that the Jake Westbrook from 2004 to 2007 – the one that posted a line of 4.07 ERA, 107 ERA+, 1.34 WHIP, 2.6 BB/9, 5.0 K/9, 1.93 K/BB over 121 starts – is going to magically reappear in the desert air of Arizona to at least have something to show for their otherwise bottomed-out investment.

Are the numbers that he posted over that 4-year stretch from 2004 to 2007 those that you’d like to see at the top of any MLB rotation?
Certainly not as Westbrook’s best suited as a middle-of-the-rotation innings eater (or at least a middle-of-the-rotation presence given his absence over the last two years) and for the Indians, the best-case scenario that would emerge over the course of 2010 would be Westbrook being healthy and effective enough for the team to turn him into something of value in July…even if that something of value is a AA ballplayer as that AA ballplayer has a much better chance of contributing to the Indians past 2010 than Westbrook does. And right now, that’s where the focus is (or at least should be) – past this year. Past this year, the plans don’t include Westbrook and, assuming health and effectiveness, the team should be looking to move him in July with the hopes that a solid first half of the season would present more than just a Mitch Talbot…er, a salary dump.

As for the other veteran sinkerballer that figures into the mix, the Curious Case of Fausto Carmona is a long and fruitless journey into the depths of what can make a pitcher so good for a period of time (215 IP in 2007) and equally as bad for nearly the same length of time (245 IP since 2007). If we’re dealing in recent history and attempting to distance ourselves from the past two years, realize that Carmona ranks tied for last among starters with at least 245 innings pitched over the last two seasons among all of MLB (cumulative ERA+ of 72), worse than even Livan Hernandez.

Yeah…he’s been that bad.
And, as if on cue, here’s the rub – Fausto Carmona could be…wait for it…the key to the Indians’ 2010 season. Seeing as how I’ve said this the past two years, with the performance of Carmona mirroring how the team finished, is it any surprise that any hope that the Indians may have of contention (which shouldn’t be much) rest in the right arm of Carmona…again?

It’s not worth rehashing where Carmona sits today after two lost seasons since Dana DeMuth squeezed him in Game 6 of the 2007 ALCS, as he’s now posted a 5.89 ERA and a 1.70 WHIP in the 246 innings he’s thrown in 2008 and 2009, walking more batters (140) than he’s struck out (137) in those 46 starts. However, the disappearance of Fausto v.2007 played as much of a role as any for the reason that the Indians found themselves as sellers in the 2008 and 2009 season and as a reason for the “Rebuild/Reload/Whatever” currently underway as Carmona v.2007 on either of the last two incarnations of the Indians changes this franchise’s direction drastically in terms of competitiveness and not having to worry about the impending departures of CC and CP Lee.

Alas, a return to Fausto v.2007 is a dream these days and the hope that he learns to fly once again under the watchful eye of a new manager and a new coaching staff is just that – hope. Maybe Carmona can pull everything together once more and recapture his past glory, but the odds are that we’re going to find out with him getting the ball every 5th day in 2010. Since he’s owed $4.9M this year and guaranteed $6.1M next year with his final option used last year. If he can find that hangover-inducing effectiveness once again, let’s not forget that the team holds club options on Carmona in 2012 for $7M, in 2013 for $9M, and in 2014 for $12M. None of that money is guaranteed, but if Carmona can return to a form that is a modest facsimile of his 2007 self, those options could turn into legitimate options instead of simple reminders of what Carmona once was and what most thought that he would be.

As for what another sinkerballer could be in the starting rotation, 2010 represents the first year that Justin Masterson will be given an opportunity to show that he’s more than the reliever that he has been to date in MLB. At this point, everyone knows his split disparity in MLB (.583 OPS vs. RH/.843 OPS vs. LH) which has mainly come out of the bullpen. Going a little deeper than that however, it can be noted that when Masterson was in the Red Sox farm system, out of his 256 2/3 career MiLB innings, he threw 220 1/3 IP as a starter. His MiLB splits (which can be taken with a grain of salt) show the same disparity as seen in his MLB splits, but not nearly as pronounced:
Masterson MiLB vs. RH
2.83 ERA, 1.02 WHIP, 2.15 BB/9, 7.85 K/9

Masterson MiLB vs. LH
3.77 ERA, 1.30 WHIP, 2.21 BB/9, 5.73 K/9

Certainly he’s been better against RH hitters at all levels, but how he adjusts to thriving against LH hitters in MLB will ultimately determine whether he stays in the rotation or whether he eventually slots back into the 8th or 9th innings. While none of that is breaking any new ground, it is worth noting how Masterson has fared as a starter in MLB over 143 2/3 innings and 25 starts:
4.32 ERA, 1.44 WHIP, .735 OPS against, 1.53 K/BB

That may not light up anyone’s life, but for a soon-to-be-25-year-old pitcher still adjusting to MLB and to starting, that’s effective enough to merit a longer look in the rotation to see if it represents the spot that he provides the most value to the team. If there’s ever a year to figure out if Masterson projects as even a middle-of-the-rotation starter, 2010 is a pretty good time to start and his performance over the final 8 games of the 2009 season, when he was strictly starting and was no longer on a pitch count should provide a baseline of performance (4.21 ERA, 1.53 WHIP, .739 OPS against) to come up with expectations for 2010. The six games he started in Boston (4.58 ERA, 1.44 WHIP, .778 OPS against) prior to the trade look similar to what he did done the stretch for the Tribe.

The control issues are definitely there for Masterson, who walked 35 batters in 57 1/3 innings after his trade to Cleveland, including 27 in the aforementioned 8 final starts (throwing 47 innings in those 8 starts) for the Indians, so the key for Masterson to be successful is obviously tied to his ability to limit walks. Whether he is refine a three-pitch mix beyond his sinking fastball and his slider (and he threw those 2 pitches 97% of the time in 2009) will go a long way in determining whether he is long for the rotation or 2010 will just represent a brief experiment to see if the Indians can utilize Masterson in a more valuable role going forward for the organization.

What’s the best role for Masterson on this team going forward?
It’s far too early to say, but I think they're going to give Masterson a pretty long leash in the rotation as they know that he can thrive in the bullpen but that he's more valuable going 6-7 innings (hopefully) every 5 games instead of going an inning every couple of nights. If he shows that he's a reliever out of place starting games, then you make the transition back to the 8th or 9th inning, but with as much uncertainty as to who's going to be starting games for this team for the next couple of years, I don't have a problem giving Masterson a year to show he can do it.

Obviously the “sure things” for the Indians rotation coming out of Spring Training are far from “sure things”, but just you wait…those are the three out of the ten pitchers that likely figure into the 2010 rotation who have an MLB track record.
The question marks past these three only get bigger…