Daily Links - No Dilly Dally Edition
No bush beating today. It's...
Link time!
The huge news is, of course, that the Red Sox signed Aaron Cook to a minor league contract with an invitation to Spring Training. (This is according to Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports.) The Providence Journal's Tim Britton is all over this one, with a few notes on Cook. In short: he's an extreme ground ball pitcher with extremely no strikeouts. He enjoys extreme skiing, extreme body-boarding, extremely high buildings, extremely cold ice cream, and bobbing for apples. Cook's signing is, I'm sure, a depth move, and doesn't preclude the Sox from going after sexier names, like Paul Maholm. And yes, that was a joke.
MLB.com's Peter Gammons says that the luxury tax has kept the Yankees and Red Sox out of the free agent market making this winter. The lack of big bidders has upset the apple cart, so to speak, though even if the Sox and Yankees were out to spend, spend, spend, neither had a spot for Prince Fielder anyway. And as Mr. Gammons says later, the Yankees could very well still sign Edwin Jackson. Big market inaction isn't confined to just Boston and the Bronx. The Mets and Dodgers, two huge market teams, are both suffering from severe money problems due to ownership containing the financial acumen of spray cheez. And, even without those four teams (for the most part), big money teams have been making big moves. The Angels signed Albert Pujols and CJ Wilson (on the same day, no less), the Rangers won the bidding on Yu Darvish, and the Marlins are throwing money at anything that isn't nailed down. Still, any year which doesn't feature at least the Yankees picking over the market is, as Mr Gammons notes, a weird one.
Over at Fire Brand of the AL, Charlie Saponara thinks the Red Sox should sign Rich Harden as a reliever. It's far from a terrible idea, though I'm not sure where Harden would fit in exactly. The Red Sox currently have nine relievers on their 40 man roster. That means to sign Harden, they'd have to get rid of one or more of Aceves, Albers, Bailey, Achison, Bowden, Doubront, Jenks, Melancon, and Morales. Aceves may or may not be in the rotation, though nobody seems to think that will stick, Achison could be lost with little problem, and Jenks may not make it out of the garage, but that still leaves six guys. So the question is, would having Rich Harden (and his salary) be much better than keeping Michael Bowden and probably someone else?
The folks over at Yankee Analysts have a piece up about what it would take to trade for Matt Garza. The Red Sox aren't thought to be in the Garza sweepstakes, but considering who is running the show over in Chicago, it makes sense to monitor the proceedings. Thus, you should read this and this update as well. Then you should pray to the God of Expectoration that Garza's spittle-emitting face remains west of the Appalachians.
The Daniel-Bard-to-the-rotation thing is a sticky topic, and not just here at OTM. Writing a column on recent confusing moves at SI.com, Cliff Corcoran labels the Red Sox plan to move Bard a mistake. It's not really the piece's intent to cover the topic in detail, but Mr. Corcoran does give a rundown of the deal that made it possible for Bard to make the jump to starting, the Andrew Bailey for Josh Reddick trade.
Speaking of polarizing topics, I'm a fan of the Red Sox TV announcers. Sure they can get a bit silly from time to time, and Remy's hawking of just about everything under the sun can wear on you, but mostly I think they do an outstanding job of going with the flow of the game. They point out the subtitles of the game when it warrants, astutely analyze when called upon to do so, and they aren't afraid to talk about some guy who just chucked a slice of cheese pizza at some other dude either. I bring all this up because Fan Graphs is having an off season crowd-sourcing exercise wherein you answer four questions about your team's TV announcers. You can answer them here. The whole idea is explained here. I gave them high marks.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
An interesting quotation of Bard in the Gammons piece
I’m really looking forward to the opportunity [to start]. I think I can use all those pitches [fastball, slider, two-seam, changeup]. But my preparation for Spring Training really won’t change. My throwing program remains the same. I might do a couple more bullpens than last year, but the bullpens really begin in Spring Training. Last year Jon Lester came to visit me near the end of January, and when we went to do our throwing work, I’d actually done more bullpens and longer sessions than he had.
This raises a number of questions, like what does this say about Bard’s off-season regimen? What does this say about Lester’s off-season regimen? I lack the frame of reference to know. Most pressingly, though, what does this say about Bard’s prospects for performance this year? Anything new?
Nothing new
But I’m conflicted on the Bard to the rotation thing. I guess the kid deserves a shot if that’s what he really wants to do, and who could blame him; even a middle of the road starter will make more money over a career than all but elite, long-term closers. The issue is that you have to project him a a #5 starter in terms of innings pitched. I don’t see him pitching more than 170 innings in 2012.
That’s why I belive that the Sox need to go out and find another 190-200 inning pitcher like Kuroda. Nick Carfado has a nice piece on this over at boston.com. If Lester/Beckett/Bucholz can’t deliver @200 innings each, I don’t see how the can insert two (Bard, Aceves) bullpen arms in the rotation. Bard + another veteran OK, but not Bard + Aceves.
The answer is Dice K.
The answer is always Dice K.
Theoretically, he will be ready to go by August. That’s the time when Bard gets sent to the bullpen. If Bard was successful as a starter, you may want to give him a few starts in September if he is in place to start in the postseason.
Of course, any plan counting on Dice is probably not going to work out too well. But, we’re talking about the rotation. The only thing we know about the rotation is that we don’t know anything.
Anyone else think MLB is seriously regretting the new CBA yet?
Congrats MLBPA, you successfully knocked the two biggest spenders from the last decade out of the big-money bidding. Way to go.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
Maybe the MLBPA is regretful...
…but not sure why this would make MLB regretful. Limiting teams in the market creates less competition, thereby keeping salaries lower. While MLB might, in some sense, prefer to see the Yankees and Red Sox be great every year, there’s definitely an advantage to having salaries lower and the perception of greater competitive balance in terms of payroll. It’s not like Boston and the Yankees are going to be middle of the pack. They should still have excellent teams that draw big ratings.
The MUCH bigger problems are the ownership situations with the Mets and Dodgers that is really inhibiting spending from two clubs that should be among the biggest spenders. That needs to be resolved ASAP.
by UltimateCranston on Jan 9, 2012 9:44 AM EST up reply actions
I also believe...
…that the problem has been overstated a bit in terms of the Yankees and Red Sox. Both teams will spend and spend a lot when it suits them. It seems they both want to reset their clocks for luxury tax spending before the biggest free agent classes come out. Also, this class was heavy in 1B and RP, which neither team necessarily wants to spend big money for. If there were a bunch of top-end starting pitchers in this class, I’d think that Boston and New York might be more aggressive — especially the Yankees, since they lack a true No. 2 or 3 starter.
by UltimateCranston on Jan 9, 2012 9:49 AM EST up reply actions
I like how Ben says he is looking for pitchers with "hickeys"
What a bizarre phrase.
One Rotation Option Down:
Source: #Cubs close on Maholm. #MLB
-Rosenthal’s Twitter
by South Coast Ghost on Jan 9, 2012 12:28 PM EST reply actions
I don't
we’d of had CJ Wilson for $ohshit/fuckno, and Jose Reyes for $ohgod/killme
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
Not a fan of NESN broadcasts
I watch maybe 2/3 of Red Sox games on NESN and see a lot of other games via DirectTV, and I’d rate the team of Orsillo and Remy as the worst I see. I find Orsillo’s play-by-play to be wooden and formulaic, and he is hurt greatly by having to read promos during almost every at-bat. He is better doing non-NESN games. For me, Remy is just awful. His color or analysis almost invariably consists of saying the pitch type and speed (the only analyst I’ve ever heard who never expresses any uncertainty about the type) and then follows that with an abbreviated restatement of Orsillo’s play-by-play.
Interesting...
That’s funny, dougfir, because while I hear you on the promos, I think Remy can be insightful about the game and I find the chemistry between he and Orsillo to be enjoyable. To each their own, I suppose.
Writer at Over The Monster. Follow me on Twitter! It'll be super awesome fun! @mattymatty2000
Better than Harrelson
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 10, 2012 7:48 AM EST up reply actions
Might not be a popular opinion...
…But I enjoy Eck when he was doing it or when he fills it. He is a homer when it comes to wanting balls and strikes for the Red Sox Pitchers (“I gotta have that call!”) and he throws out the “this guy is throwing the cheese today” type lines. I don’t mind either of those things at all, and he does provide some insight while being entertaining.
The fact that he’s kept the same “flowing locks + magnificent moustache” look for like 30+ years doesn’t hurt.
by The Name is Dalton on Jan 10, 2012 8:16 PM EST up reply actions

by 




























