|
|
|
Yesterday, the Phillies made an offer to free-agent RHP Derek Lowe, according to the Boston Globe.
“Phillies GM Ruben Amaro Jr. wouldn’t confirm or deny that an offer had been made, but said, ‘I will tell you that I’ve talked to Derek 
Lowe’s representatives,’” reports Ken Mandel at MLB.com.
However, according to Jayson Stark at ESPN.com, the Phillies have very little chance of signing Lowe.
…i bet, since, from what i can gather, it was a very low-ball offer…plus, it’s pretty clear at this point, based on published reports and the buzz around lowe, that he hopes to re-sign with the Red Sox, for a variety of reasons, from family to redemption…that said, if another team on the East Coast, who trains in Florida, is willing to pay big, big bucks per season, i believe he’ll take the deal…
The Globe also believes a second team made an offer to Lowe, and it was not the Red Sox or Yankees.
…honestly, i’m getting a little nervous for the Mets, with regards to the starting pitcher’s market…i just don’t sense they will end up signing a front-end starting pitcher, like they hope to…it will not be for a lack of trying, but i sense the market will just shuffle out in a way that Omar Minaya is left in the cold…
…and so, the Mets may need to consider signing a player like Jon Garland, who would 
actually be a really good fit for them, while trading for a back-end pitcher like Edwin Jackson to compete with Jon Niese for the fifth starter spot…
…the thing is, i keep reading fans who are saying minaya should trade major prospects to get Jose Valverde or J.J. Putz, instead of a lesser package to Colorado for Huston Street…ok, but, you can’t trade Robert Parnell to three different teams, you know what i mean…so, if a guy like parnell is going to be needed to get a starting pitcher too, you can’t use him now to also get valverde…
…therefore, like it or not, we may be looking at the following game plan as a way to fix the pitching staff:
Trade Aaron Heilman and one prospect for Street; sign Garland and Francisco Rodriguez, which only costs cash; and, lastly, trade an additional prospect or two for a second starting pitcher.
…if the bullpen is strong and traditional, Johan Santana, Mike Pelfrey, John Maine, Jon Garland and a fifth starter could be more than sufficient…not ideal, but sufficient…
 |
 |
 |
RSS 2.0 You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Just posted this in the last thread, but it fits perfectly here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this might make me a heritic, but I think TRS would agree. The SPs isn’t really a big concern. They have some spots to fill, but the rotation did mostly OK last year, and the open spots were the weak links.
As-suming Maines issues were related to the bone spur (seemingly fixed) and he gets back to where he shold be, the top 3 are solid.
So you are replacing erratic Ollie, and the poo poo platter of 1/2 year or less of Pedro and whatever stiff had that spot.
Not sure what you get out of neise. So I prefer to not pencil him in out of ST. perfect for AAA getting his stuff sharp for the inevitable mid-season call up.
So, IMO, 2 solid guys (not just back end stiffs, but maybe legit #3 types) will be enough to get the job done.
Garland could probably do the job. Or marquis. Or Wolf.
Even better, go with Sheets (more upside, but injury risk) along with a durable back end guy. Or Randy J. Vazquez of course would have fit the bill.
Now, a nice young guy to slot in longer term would be great. Sonnastine? Still really unproven (no more so than Pelfrey I guess).
Maybe Snell, or someone like that? Rigth age, has stuff, just had a bad year? Could he be the 2009 Cliff lee?
Oh, and really don’t be surprised when the back end guy to fill in the rotation ends up being another year of Pedro. As the #5 guy instead of a marquis?
I had almost forgotten how upsetting the off-season can be. I read all of these posts about what other teams are doing, and poor Matt has to sit there and type the same things, in different order, day after day. It’s hard not to get discouraged, but if you think about the last few years, the Mets did end up with some of the biggest names available (Pedro, Beltran, Santana).
A while back I posted about the Mets going after Teixiera, then trading Delgado to Seattle for Putz. It seems like a perfect fit, yet the only one I know of that agrees with me is Matt.
I know the excuse will be that teams are worried about the economy, but the Mets really shouldn’t act like they are beggars in this market. They have a new stadium opening next year, they have their own cable network…. trust me, they will have money.
The big problem with signing Garland is that he’s not very good.
In a nutshell, why I don’t want him! He defines “serviceable” (aka an innings eater).
If you play it smart, I guarantee there will be 3 or 4 starters that fall through the cracks and are available for 1-year deals that end up putting up better numbers than Garland in 2009. You just have to be smart/lucky enough to sign one of those guys.
Exactly Danny.
You cant have 5 aces, Garland has been in the american league his whole career and is always around 200 IP, and his worst era season was last year at 4.90, take a half run off of that for a 5th starter in the NL and that is more than fine
There are terrible offenses in the AL West. And there are great offenses in the NL East. I don’t buy the ERA will automatically drop a half-run argument for pitchers coming over to the Mets. Maybe if Garland goes to the NL West where they can’t hit either.
The difference between the NL and AL ERA is always over-exaggerated. In 2008 the difference was .06 (4.29 to 4.35) and in 2007 the difference was .08.
That being said, I wouldn’t mind Garland as long as he is signed as a 4th/5th starter type. He’s not going to blow anybody away but he consistently pitches around 200 innings and his ERA\WHIP have been close enough to league average to make him a decent “back-end” solution.
The problem is that guys like this usually get bigger contracts than they are worth. So if another team wants to pay him as a middle of the rotation guy, I don’t think it’s worth trying to match that.
Stickguy, I agree. The last guy who came from the AL who was an “innings eater” was Joe Blanton, and his “innings eating-ness” disappeared once he started to have to bat every 2 innings.
but it worked so well when they signed Tracshel and traded for Appier…
Hahaha, true.
Garland IS the back-end rotation guy. I would actually rather have Jackson than Garland.
I think we should stay away from the Burnetts/Lowes of the world and look into a Sheets or Perez plus Garland or Pedro for the 5th spot. I like either Perez/Pedro with Niese at AAA or Sheets/Garland with Niese in AAA as well. One injury risk in each case, but some upside. Pedro will come back for an incentive laden deal without question, so why not?
Johan
Pelfrey
Ollie
Maine
Pedro
OR
Johan
Sheets
Pelfrey
Maine
Garland
Both of these are solid rotations without counting on a rookie but still having him as a fall back
Cool, another convert!
I dont get it
I am a big Sheets fan too. I think because of his injury history we can get him at a discounted rate. And then if we surround him with Johan, Pelf, etc… his personal burden wouldn’t be as great.
I kind of agree with you…It looks like things aren’t going to work out in Omar’s favor in the SP market, so he must think a bit outside oft he box. I honestly consider Sheets/Perez the same, in terms of the number of good starts you’ll get out of them in a season, given Ollie’s streakiness, and Sheets’ injury history.
At the same time, Ollie has dominated the Mets main competition (though struggling against lesser teams) while Sheets is a bit more consistent, and will be less expensive, allowing Omar to go after a guy like Garland for the number 5 spot, leaving Niese the insurance against injury. There will also be more money which can be allocated to either the pen or the lineup.
I agree that Ollie and Sheets are both very comparable, a ton of upside with a main concern, Sheets injury and Ollie consistency. They also will probable cost a similar amount of money per year.
Its got to be like 2/34 for Sheets or 4/55 for Ollie. I think I take Ollie because of his age but have a feeling the Mets would rather not make that commitment and would prefer Sheets in this scenario.
I’d take sheets in that scenario. Why compound the question mark with 2 extra years? I’m ready to wave goodbye to mister bubblegum. Sheets for 2 years would, in my mind, be perfect.
c’mon, sheets is worthless, he’s the next pavano.
hes not the next Pavano becuase the Mets wont give him that type of contract, he can be had for 2 years/ 32 million im sure, which is not a bad contract for someone who has potential to win 20 games and pitch like an ace
lol, what?
your comments get more and more ludicrous every day.
sheets is twice the pitcher pavano is. i’d tell you to check the stats, but i know that’s a pretty tall order for you.
if healthy sheets is top 5 pitcher in the NL!!
yup. I would rather have 24 ace like sheets starts and 8 fill ins (say by neise) than 32 lima like starts out of Garland.
Thats well said
yep
i’d rather have ollie than garland mostly bc i think garland would get shelled by philly and ollie has shown he can shut them down…also…this just proves that they MUST build this team around a strong bullpen as they did in 2006 and as the phillies did in 2008…bullpens mean the world…trade fro street, sign krod and fill in a couple of solid guys in between and i think given his young age ill give ollie a 4 yr deal as opposed to garland a 4 year deal
Id rather Ollie than Garland too but I think its an argument that doesnt matter because if they sign Ollie they can also have Garland, the argument is more like Ollie vs. Sheets and Garland vs. Pedro/Niese/Marquis
I really think the mets (unfortunately) view him as top of the rotation… or at least that’s how they’ll spin it.
What’s the status on Brad Penny? Now he’s a guy when healthy that can be a solid #2
probably pedro/marquis for 1 year vs. tying into garland for 4. Similar results, less commitment.
Anyway pay attention to how Eaton worked out (and is still dragging down!) the Phils? Think they want to reneg on that 3 year deal?
i completely agree with that. I would only be in favor of Garland on a 1 year deal, maximum 2. If Pedro takes an incentive laden 1 year deal hes my 5th starter choice, but I dont want another injury prone pitcher beside him.
Why do you think Garland will sign anywhere for 1 or 2 years though? He’ll get 3 at a MINIMUM.
I agree Garland would get lit up by Philly, but as a #5 starter I’m ok with him. He is not the top of the rotation guy this team needs.
With Sheets, I dont think the injury risk is as high as people make it out to be. Last year he had 31 starts and 24 the year before. He is gonna gibe you an ERA in the mid 3s and a whip in the low 1s. Doesnt walk many batters,
I posted this yesterday; sorry to post again, but I found it quite surprising (plus I think I’m proud that I did math)
perez–5.71 ips
wolf–5.76 ips
e. jackson–5.91 ips
sonnanstine–6.04 ips
garland–6.14 ips
lowe–6.21 ips
vazquez (for comparison)–6.31 ips
sheets–6.40 ips
I’m no sabermatrician, nor am I really good at math (or most other things) so I (perhaps erroneously) converted thirds of an inning to .3 and .6 when I divded innings by starts (jackson was the only one who pitched in relief).
I think it is pretty amazing how much sheets pitched last year, but I guess its when you pitch as well–el duque ‘06. and I think it’s how you pitch too. And I remember the Mets stealing a game in September (really?) when Sheets was dominant but had to give way to the likes of gange et al. I think the next week he pitched 2 and 2/3 innings.
sheets is the man.
And good point about Garland. he isn’t the mid-rotation guy (leaving you with the 5 hole to backfill). He is the 5 hole back fill, just at ridiculous money.
I see Garland and Blanton as the same pitcher..Blanton did ok in Philly
in fact they are VERY similar pitchers…at # 5 Garland is not a bad option if he lowers his $ demands…at #3 I don’t see it.
Yeh i agree, other than his 1st start vs the MEts where he got hit pretty bad, he did a very good job for the Phils