Diamondbacks Bullpen

Oden · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:44 pm Post subject:

"JB stated that he finds modern defense metrics more useable when looking at overall team performances, and does not quite trust them yet for individual performance analysis."

See, nobody listens to me.

DesertKnight · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:53 pm Post subject:

stu · Everyday Player Joined: 12 Aug 2006 Posts: 560

Oden: where were you during the Great Cintronista/Claytonian Wars?

Great summary by all you guys. Now that you, Shoe especially have done the heavy lifting, I can have my memory jogged and add something (maybe).

First, thanks shoe for the bold on GIGO. Bynres also said that he trusted his and his scout's eyes more than the numbers. I can have almost written his answer for him.

On Uggla, he said they knew someone was going to take him. They asked the league if they could Rule 5 their own player. They were hoping Uggla wouldn't stick with the team that took him.

Byrnes said they has a 3 fer 1 deal going that would have freed up a spot for Uggla but it fell through. Bynes said it was just a function of having a very deep farm system and the guys that were on the bubble had good years. I thought it would have be Schultz or Slatten. We have talked about Slatten.

Schultz did OK, not great this year, but it is easy in retrospect.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/stats/player.php?id=449128

I would have liked to have asked about the decision to bring Uggla to the AFL, but stupid Jeff Munn monoplized the questions and talk. He must have talked twice the amount Byrnes did and nothing posted here had anything to do with what he said.

Byrnes was very impressive.

dirtygary · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:39 pm Post subject:

Byrnes is the real deal. I think he is the least good at media relations, which is something that will progress rapidly. Behind the scenes, though, you know he is sharp. Nearly every move has been positive, aside from Uggla. And that's just one of those fluke things and wanting to protect the arms in the system. It's the Mets that effed the whole thing up for us.

Byrnes could wind up being be here a while. As long as somebody doesn't hurt somebody else's feelings. Watch Kendrick say "There's been whispers about Byrnes, you know, and how he was able to stay up four straight days at the winter meeetings, but we never thought any of it was true..."
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun

Oden · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:15 pm Post subject:

"Oden: where were you during the Great Cintronista/Claytonian Wars?"

Wisely (I think) on the sidelines with a day-to-day groin pull.

It's nice to know that Byrnes was aware of Uggla's promise and tried to make it work out. But there's no denying that he made the wrong decision.

However, I think we'll look at Uggla in a couple of years and won't think this is that big of a deal. I already don't think it's that big a deal. He has had 2 excellent months and 3 average months. Besides, would he have had a place with the D-backs this year? Next year?

levski · Veteran Presence Joined: 10 Aug 2006 Posts: 1765

thanks for the recap, shoewiz...

so when I laughed off the idea of Schmidt in purple and teal, I was onto something. one fools would give Schmidt something as idiotic as, say, $55m over 4 years...

McCray · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:34 pm Post subject:

i still don't like schmidt. that arm's got too much mileage, and he won't survive without that fastball.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.

levski · Veteran Presence Joined: 10 Aug 2006 Posts: 1765

schmidt is old, ridden harder than a mule, persistently on the edge of DL, and way past the time when he was dominant. these days, he just gets by...

he's got a mariners uniform draped all over his head next year...

McCray · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:53 pm Post subject:

i have a bet with shoe that he tanks in the next 2 yrs. i don't remember much of that night. i hope i didn't bet money.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.

shoewizard · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:59 pm Post subject:

McCray · Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:05 am Post subject:

all of what i know about schmidt i know from watching him beat AZ, which i'll admit isn't the greatest of benchmarks. we make shitty pitchers look good. but the guy needs his high fastball to set everything up, and the arm has a LOT of miles on it. if he loses even a touch of velocity, that high fastball is going to be the most hittable pitch in all the BOB, after russ's slop.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.

Robert S. · Everyday Player Joined: 10 Aug 2006 Posts: 530

I'm a Jason Schmidt fan, but he's not the answer for the D-backs.

His k-rate this year is a flashing caution sign, and his periphs don't paint a picture of a guy who is suited to Chase.

dirtygary · Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:11 pm Post subject:

Schmidt was the guy to get about 4 yrs ago.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun

levski · Veteran Presence Joined: 10 Aug 2006 Posts: 1765

Shoewiz, would you invest 4 years and 55-60M in Jason Schmidt?!

I really don't care what he's done in the past; I want to know what he'll do in the future.

And I've seen the future, brother, it is murder...

wedge · AA Prospect Joined: 23 Aug 2006 Posts: 41

I'm ready to catch guys in their primes again, no more 30 something Roberto Alomars on this team. I think leaving schmidt out of this would be wise for next year.

dirtygary · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:07 am Post subject:

Yeah, we need to focus on guys that are 24-27. They'll be in their primes until 30-32. Especially given the generation gap between players that are +28 and -27. There's been a giant leap forward in the abilities of this Generation Next. You know how different leagues go through evolutions in the gameplay? It's already happened in football and basketball because more younger players were able to make an impact earlier and at an earlier age, so we've seen them already. But baseball takes a little while longer to hone the skills and gain the consistency, but they're comin. It's partially why I think we should trade every player we can for younger players in the 21-23 age group, let them develop for two years and then kick ass in the bigs. The ability to develop quicker at an earlier age is just geting more and more pronounced. I see Ian Kinsler, Brian Anderson, and Chris Duncan doing what they're doing now, and I'm shocked because they didn't have "big leaguer" written all over them in little league, jr.high, or high school (well, the Duncan's did). I saw a lot of other kids that I thought were just as good, but younger than those guys.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun

matt · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:30 am Post subject:

Has the age at which star players are able to help a team out really changed that much? I didn't think it was a new thing for the truly great players to make the team and produce between the ages of 21-24.

dirtygary · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:44 am Post subject:

I don't think the age has changed that much, but you can definitely see an evolution in the younger players, and that more of them are able to compete with the big boys.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun

Aaron · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:23 am Post subject:

Roy Oswalt's where it's at.

Aaron · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:31 am Post subject:

moviegeekjn · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:36 am Post subject:

dirtygary · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:45 pm Post subject:

And he was no good til he got a jolt of electricty up that arm. Seriously. From an outlet in his garage.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun