Beane Having Trouble Getting Fat Off Of Blanton
by Nico on Dec 18, 2007 8:22 AM PST
in News
78 comments
It’s difficult to say exactly how good Joe Blanton is - or perhaps more importantly, will be. He has never missed a start, he rolls (literally) out of bed and gives you 200 IP, and the guy has won 42 games in 3 years for a team that is worse at scoring than a Senator in an airport stall.
On the other side of the coin, each of Blanton’s three seasons has been fraught with not-so-fasts. In 2005, Blanton was abysmal for two months and then unhittable for four, leaving pundits to speculate which was closer to “the real Joe Blanton”. In 2006, Blanton won a career high 16 games but also sported worrisome peripherals, including such a terrible hits/9 IP ratio (11.16) that it frightened small children and caused thousands of puppies to flee the city in terror. Then in 2007, by all accounts Blanton established himself as a pretty legitimate #2 starter, yet he actually gave only 21 “quality starts” out of 34 – a rather pedestrian 62%. Of course five of those 13 “quality lacking” starts came in succession in July, as the Dodgers were saying, “We really want Blanton!...We think...Sort of…Maybe…Not.”
He’s a tough one to predict. And as Beane is, reportedly, shopping Blanton the response has been appropriately perplexing. Here’s arguably the best right-handed starting pitcher being shopped and interest appears to be somewhat lukewarm to low. Why? I have it narrowed down to three theories:
• Ability: The consensus around the league is that Blanton’s best seasons are behind him, not ahead of him, and that even though he is entering his prime years, he is just not in fact #2 starter material - more "smoke and mirrors" than "control and competitiveness".
• Health: Blanton’s weight has scared off teams that think it reflects either a lack of conditioning, or a poor work ethic, a risky tendency, etc., and they believe Blanton is not nearly as good a health risk in the future as he has been in the past.
• Bias: There is actually a prejudice, be it conscious or subconscious, because Blanton is overweight and just doesn’t look like a good ballplayer. Yes, Bartolo Colon and David Wells made it work for years on an ample frame, but many others didn’t. If I saw Joe Blanton at the hardware store, it would be difficult to convince me that he was a top athlete who could make the strapping young All-American boy-wonder look foolish on a slow curve.
My question today is: If the offers for Blanton so far have been disappointingly low, which of these elements is most at play – ability, health, or bias?
0 recs |
78 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
This is why...
This is why I wonder if we won't end up holding on to Blanton. He's better than people give him credit for, so unless there's a GM out there who is more of a numbers person and realizes the value of a 230 IP at a 4.13 xFIP, we might do best to keep him around.
kawakami:
Does that mean Joe Blanton is next up on the trade block? It's safe to say he is, and maybe Street after that.
"Not necessarily," Beane said. "Only if it presents itself. Joe is still very young, too. He fits in wherever you're at."
that's the new Blanton branding campaign tagline
"Blanton -- he fits in wherever you're at."
more beane
http://www.mercurynews.com/athletics...
My words, not his: Basically, Beane didn't want to turn into a better bland version of the nervous, occasionally delusional and continuously unsuccessful Giants.
"No way I was going to sit there and sort of b.s. my way through this," Beane said. "You know, tell myself that everything's going to be fine and just relying on hope. I don't want to be sitting there in May and sort of shrug my shoulders, 'Hey, it wasn't my fault. We got hurt again.' It works once. I didn't want to use it again.
"Too many things had to be perfect for us health-wise. I can't just hope for the best. The thing that's a shame is, in order to do this, you have to trade the healthy guys. But that's the reality."
...
"I'm not real patient. But the fact of the matter is, if you wait for everybody to tell you to rebuild, you've waited way too long."
I don't think he's having trouble
just being careful. Its only been less than a week since the Haren trade.
Also his value may be higher mid season.
I'm not sold on the idea he's thrown in the towel for 2008 either. I think Haren was sold at his peak and he may have gotten more contribution back
I think he might get more
if he waits. Some of these teams will get more desperate as the winter (and the season) roll on.
I think Blanton's best seasons are still ahead. He has been getting more reliable as he gains more experience.
It's speculation, of course...
What he lacks in image and studly appearance, I think he makes up for in determination and intelligence.
I can accept he may never be a legit #1, but I can definitely see him as a solid #2/#3, and that's nothing to dismiss so easily.
d) none of the above
As much as we'd like to think that we know what's going on, unless somebody managed to hack into Billy's crackberry and see what he's been sending back and forth to Forst, there's really no way to know who has been making offers and what those offers have been.
Using the Haren trade as an example, everybody kept thinking that the Arizona deal was going to involve Gonzales and Scherzer as a PTBNL. Instead it was Anderson, who is a higher rated prospect than Scherzer anyway.
I'm sure Billy is just playing the waiting game. Spring Training is a long way away, so there isn't a pressing need to make a deal by, say, the end of the week. Billy is still in the position of advantage: He's got the guy that other teams are trying to get, and he's got time on his side.
Corporate parlance
Clearly, you haven't spent enough time enduring the absurdity of dank, soul-numbing cubicle dungeons. Which makes me both envious and slightly bitter.
Even brief exposure to the legions of distracted, khaki-clad middle managers compulsively thumbing through emails during meetings, in airport terminals, at urinals ... well, suffice to say the aptness of the term quickly becomes crystal clear.
I've seen people unconsciously work their fingers in email scrolling mimicry while sitting through Blackberry-banned meetings.
My favorite part, though, is when you send a considered email, chock full of complete sentences and specific questions, to a Crackberry-addicted co-worker, and get back something like this:
"YEs. Rev cap muST. syngy! MTG Tue. Good thx."
Sigh. The myth of effective multi-tasking, exploded daily.
Lastly: I don't know why you're loitering here when there are like six different trade/prospect/roster diaries you could be writing. Frankly, I consider this an unacceptable abdication of responsibility on your part.
Hell yes he is fat...for an athlete
Teams should use his training regimen as a means of evaluating him. I personally suspect that he got some bad exercise advice...I think he is doing the 6-minute abs tape...and everyone knows that six is ridiculous, and that 7 is the number, man....
CC Sabathia, Fartolo Colon, David Wells...
tons of fat guys are able to pitch well... being skinny is not a precondition for being a good pitcher
i would also add livan hernandez to that list
i've noticed it's the skinny pitchers on the A's who keep getting hurt... street, ducherer, harden... blanton is an innings eater like livan hernandez and cc sabathia
by johnjahafanclub on Dec 18, 2007 4:42 PM PST up reply actions
"Blanton is an innings eater"
I hear he also likes to snack on small children on occasion.............. #:>)
Pastry Boy Can Pitch
What's wrong with being fat?
Actually, what works in Blanton's favor is that he doesn't overthrow. His girth gives him a stability in his pitching motion that aids not hurts his control. I think if Beane gave him a long-term contract last year through his arby years he would have displayed the confidence in Blanton that other GMs would have looked for. ie he hedged his bet and lost on this one. If he turns around and takes him off the table (no pun intended), signs him then attempts to trade him, he may have a better chance than seeing him go through arbitration. Once he gets BB's "approval", other GMs will feel better about adding him to their roster.
Fat, he may be...
But he has a hot girlfriend.
It's good to be a MLB player.
I read somewhere
that he remarried this offseason.
by kkdaz on Dec 18, 2007 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
Wow, married AND a hot girlfriend
Being an MLBer sure sounds fun.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Dec 18, 2007 5:57 PM PST up reply actions
What do we think we're going to get?
Blanton is not an All-star. He probably never will be. He's as likely to have an ERA over 5.00 as he is to make an All-star team.
I don't think you touched on the reason at all. In 98 starts he has an ERA of 4.10. That's not going to fetch a top-notch player. He barely gets half a strike out per inning.
Now, you can make the argument that Beane is in a position of strength. He doesn't have to trade Blanton because he's cheap and, let's face it, we're going to need at least 5 MLB pitchers on the team. But, what Beane can do is see if the Reds or Mets get desperate enough to give Beane more than Blanton is probably worth.
If Beane is waiting for Humber, Bruce, or Baily then get ready for another year of Cupcakes.
If Beane feels he really wants to further re-stock the minor league system, then trading Blanton for 3 low-minors, high ceiling guys is as good as it's going to get. Which, in my opinion, would actually be pretty good.
If I'm the M's, Mets, or Reds, I sign Carlos Silva for $10 millon per year and keep my top prospects.
He's way more likely to be an all star
than have an ERA over 5.
Now come on folks...
who's to say he can't do both?
Uh, Humber?
As in Phil Humber of the Mets? Sickels rates him as a B-. I have a hard time believing Beane wants him, unless I'm missing something.
You may be right...
I was just trying to think of names off the top of my head. Humber probably isn't in the same class as the rest.
It would be cool if his first name
was also Humber.
The father of two England international
footballers (soccer) is called Neville Neville, which is pretty sweet.
It'd be cooler if those were his first 2 names ..
... and his surname was Land.
Carlos Silva
3+ Years of Blanton at the Price >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
4 Years of Silva at the Price.
If I'm the M's, Mets, or Reds, I trade a 3 Grade-B Prospects (Sickels Rating System) who won't be ready for another 2-3 years. A National League team should be all over this.
The friggin' Rockies made the World Series last year. Josh Fogg pitched Game3. I mean, come on!
by Colorado Fan on Dec 18, 2007 3:24 PM PST up reply actions
Adam Jones is a bad offer?
OK, OK, he hasn't been explicitly offered. But if Olney thinks that's what's going to be needed for the Mariners to pick him up, it indicates that (depending on how founded his beliefs are) at least Olney and possibly some number of insiders think he's worth at least one A-grade prospect (or presumably 2-3 Bs).
I think we may have a similar situation to Haren, where the "key player" is Erik Bedard, and Beane won't make a move until Bedard is dealt or appears to be staying in Baltimore. Seattle's getting mighty desperate at this point, but they clearly still have designs on Bedard.
Confession: I actually literally dreamed about this situation last night. (This is not as weird as it sounds-- I often have extremely pragmatic, realistic dreams, to the point that sometimes I'm confused and think the things in them actually happened.) In the dream, they wound up dealing Clement, Morrow and Triunfel for Big Joe. Then Beane turned around and dealt Clement for a pitcher. My retinas didn't tell me which one. Let's pretend it was Homer Bailey.
Seems like a decent "dream scenario" to me...
Yeah ... if that's on the table ...
Beane should probably accept it ...
And with good reason ... but be honest ...
would you really be surprised?
Of course it would be
That trade had virtually no impact on the Mariners' season. The team still had a very good bullpen and would have had a terrible rotation with or without Ramirez. Unless the team was planning to convert Soriano into a starter, keeping him wouldn't have improved the team by more than a win or two.
I mean, I know that trade has become kind of a "Bavasi is an idiot" trope for you all, but it really wasn't that significant.
Overstating your case
The trade is symptomatic of talent misevaluation, decisions taken too fast on bad data, etc. We contrived to turn our most valuable trade chip for the winter into a #8 starter, which basically scuppered our chances of being good.
You're right on Soriano not having a future with the team, but the return for a talent like that was absolutely painful, not just to us but to other GMs around the league who were completely thrown by how little value the Braves had to give up to get one of the better relievers in baseball.
"I mean, I know that trade has become kind of a "Bavasi is an idiot" trope for you all, but it really wasn't that significant."
Is a bit cheeky. You may be a smart guy, but LL and USSM know our team far more intimately than you do.
I'm just saying it wasn't that important
"Setup man for 4th starter" trades happen all the time. This one happened to be a particularly vile example, but it's not the Pierzynski trade... which basically singlehandedly cost the Giants two playoff appearances. (2004, because Pierzynski was Asshat McClubhouse Cancer and Nathan wasn't closing, and 2006, because the team had Benitez and Tomko instead of Nathan and Liriano.)
I'm not saying Bavasi isn't an idiot. He is. Just that obsessing over that one particular trade makes you seem kind of, well, obsessed.
The key word here is
Random observation . . .
. . . from someone who reads this site just about every day but doesn't post a lot. Have you noticed how often you have to explain yourself? And how those explanations invariably involve some variation of, "I didn't mean to be an asshole"? I'm reminded of the old saw about walking like a duck, talking like a duck . . .
Just sayin'
Que sera, sera
I have opinions; I share them frequently; I defend them pretty vehemently. If that's enough to make me an asshole in your eyes, so be it. I know my motives are clean, even if you don't.
Me too
to this part:
(This is not as weird as it sounds-- I often have extremely pragmatic, realistic dreams, to the point that sometimes I'm confused and think the things in them actually happened.)
I wonder what that says about us.
Sometimes I see TV shows with dream sequences where all sorts of bizarre weird freaky things happen, and I think, "Huh? my dreams aren't like that."
Blanton not leaving
That is my best guess is Blanton will be the A's ace this year. Here are the reasons. The biggest is the A's do not have enough starters to start out the season. With haren gone, Harden, Gaudin, and Dauscherer are question marks it leaves the A's a need for a innings eater. Blanton has not been offered as much as he is worth so a July trade maybe a better option for Beane. Third and last some in the A's staff feel blanton is less of a arm injury than Haren was so he is a better long term quantity. Of course I could be wrong and he is traded tomorrow but my best guess he starts the season with the A's.
Partially ability
I'm not sure why anyone would worry that Blanton's best years are behind him but I can see the arguement that he's not a classic #2 SP. I'd call him a #3 myself.
I'd agree that he's a #3, but one you
know will be there to hand the ball to every five days, and who'll go deep into every game. That's something I'd pay a fair amount for if I was a contending team.
In the first place
nobody including Olney have any idea what has been offered for Blanton. All we know for sure is that nobody has made an offer that BB was willing to accept, and why should he? There is no hurry, no pressing need. Even with arbitration Blanton will not cost a lot of money this year. BB is just using due diligence in listening and waiting. The one thing we know for sure is that GM's around the league make foolish decisions on players, and I would suspect BB is waiting for the right one. I am not so sure he would like to trade Blanton to Seattle in the same division. Hudson, Mulder, Harang and Haren all went to NL teams, I would suspect he is waiting for one of those teams to step up. He sent Bonderman to Detroit and that didn't work out so well. The fact that Blanton has not been traded is no great surprise and nothing should be read into it.
by china bob on Dec 18, 2007 9:36 AM PST reply actions
Sending Bonderman to Detroit worked fine
The guy's had one above-average season and four below-average ones. He's never developed a third pitch-- if Detroit had any rotation depth, they might be better served moving him to closer. Since they don't, they're kind of stuck with him as he is.
The Bonderman trade
worked out fine. It was Lilly for Kielty that was bad.
I would still rather have Bonderman
but I understand the reasoning for BB doing the Lilly trade and short term it helped. Does anyone remember who we got for Harang?
by china bob on Dec 18, 2007 6:00 PM PST up reply actions
rent-a -bat
for Harang we got a few months of Guillen, enough to make us good-but-not-good-enough, like always...in fairness to BB, though, at that time Harang had trouble getting into the 6th inning, and our bullpen was so bad that year...
Over on Red Reporter
they're talking about how Votto/Stubbs/Maloney would be enough.
I just don't see a good match with the Reds and the A's. The A's want MLB ready minor leaguers, but the Reds want to keep their MLB-ready prospects.
I, for one, would love to see the A's keep Blanton. It'd be awesome to see Harden pitch out of his mind (for 200 innings, too), Blanton pitch well, Duke and Gaudin hold up well, and Meyer to have a breakout year. That division title would be so much better knowing how strong our minor leagues became in the offseason. I know, I can dream!
MLB ready?
I don't think Beane cares a whit for MLB ready players, or even players with a chance of reaching the majors in the next two years. He's counting his chickens in Fremont....
by BerkeleyDawg on Dec 18, 2007 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
to see Harden pitch out of his mind
Well, that's likelier than him pitching out of his hand.
We should introduce him to Prof. Charles Xavier.
That's probably the most likely way to get Harden to pitch out of his mind net year.
Professor Charles Xavier ... Nady?
MLB Ready?
They didn't want MLB ready when they traded Haren. I don't think that is what they want with Blanton.
by jarforcefatherofforce on Dec 18, 2007 10:29 PM PST up reply actions
MLB ready prospects?
if BB wanted MLB ready prospects at this time, at least ONE of the SIX that we got last week from AZ would have been MLB-ready...he is thinking years down the road...(and miles, to Fremont...)
Blanton's size
Whatever else his size accomplishes, it doesn't seem to affect Joe's fielding. I can't find the link at the moment, but David Pinto's PMR rated him by far the best fielding A's pitcher last season. That suggests to me that he's in better shape than he appears.
Pitchers' fielding ability
has more to do with their motion than anything else. I mean, no one would exactly call Maddux "athletic," but he always ends up set and facing home plate-- likewise Kenny Rogers. Compare to, say, K-Rod, who practically ends with his back to the plate.
Haren and Gaudin both throw themselves into their pitching motion much more than Blanton does.
Remember Mitch Williams...
...and Will Clark's hit up the middle in the 1989 NLCS that people rave about? That hit wasn't so much a masterpiece of hitting by Clark as it was a total lack of defensive posture by Williams. That guy pitched in a similar way to K-Rod... completely unable to field anything easily due to his motion.
If Williams had been in any kind of defensive posture at all, he might have at least knocked it down and prevented it from being such a big hit. The Cubs still would have lost the series, though.
Compare to Silva (and parenthetic rambling)
Compare Blanton to Carlos Silva, who is rumored to be getting four years at $44M total (which, for the record, I think is insane) and you'll see that Blanton has a better ERA, WHIP, HR/IP, K/IP, and so on. Everything that I glanced at (disclaimer: I'm no stats guru) looked like I'd rather Blanton than Silva... and Blanton is under team control for several more years on the cheap (certainly cheaper than $11 friggin' million... and yeah a friggin' million is more than just a million).
Anyhows, the point I'm trying to make should be clear: If Silva is worth four years and $44M, then Blanton should certainly be worth a decent haul of prospects. It would appear that starting pitching (even a #3 starter which Blanton seems to be pegged as) is very highly valued right now.
I suppose this leads to a big question: Are teams currently valuing starting pitching more than good prospects?
(Ok, one last parenthetic... you'd have to define "good"... I will leave that as an exercise to the reader. I'm a coward.)
by Eric in Atlanta on Dec 18, 2007 1:25 PM PST reply actions
Well, you need to keep in mind what
the prospects are worth too.
For example, if Silva is worth $44M, what do you think Homer Bailey is worth? Just to use an example of a prospect? The going rate for a league average innings eater, Silva, Suppan, appears to be about $10M a year.
If Bailey is league average in his 6 years of service time, he would be worth $30M in his 1st 3 years. Even in his arby years he would still be worth below market rate: 1st year arb players typically get 40% of FA value, 2nd year 60%, 3rd year 80%.
The same applies to any other prospect. If Adam Jones is league average, he is worth $10M a year to the Mariners, based on what Guillen, Byrnes, Dye, got.
makes sense
Ok, that kind of comparison makes sense to me. Looking at it that way and imagining myself as another GM looking for a "league average innings eater starter", I would not consider trading a Bailey or Adam Jones type. However, what about a lower-level prospect? It seems quite reasonable at this point in their careers to bet on Adam Jones or Homer Bailey being at least league average. Betting on a guy in A ball is a different story, so how do you value lower-level prospects against 3+ affordable years of a proven #3 starter?
by Eric in Atlanta on Dec 18, 2007 2:17 PM PST up reply actions
I agree
Look at the Haren trade. Beane got back a whole bunch of guys who are further away from the majors; thus their projected values are / were discounted.
As to a lower level prospect, IMO, much like for higher level prospects too, it really depends on the prospect. Carlos Triunfel is in A+. A lower level prospect. However, he is also a 17 year old SS who didn't get embarrassed, despite playing against guys who were often 4 years older. He is a lower level prospect with tremendous upside. Is $25M or so, which is what the Mariners would save if they trade for Cupcakes worth more than Triunfel? A guy who is far from MLB yes, but who if things turn out right could become far better than league average?
The one caveat with this kind of comparison is for superstar players like Johan Santana. Principally because superstar players are hard to acquire, even as FAs.
the absurd contract silva's about to get
should help the market for joe. blanton is better than silva in pretty much every way. most importantly, he's not gonna cost you $11m per season. pitching is way overpriced, making young, good, dependable, affordable MLB-proven pitchers very valuable. blanton should fetch quite a bit. not as much as haren, but not a whole lot less. take away about 5 straight bad starts joe had last summer and you've got a very very good pitching season. he was very good minus that one stretch. i also agree that if we don't trade him before the season starts, we'd probably get a nice amount for him near the trade deadline.
by guy incognito on Dec 18, 2007 1:39 PM PST up reply actions
if I follow Nico's headline ...
... I think Beane's trying to flense him.
Bavasi: Soriano for Horam
I am an avid A's fan living in Seattle with a few equally avid M's fans. From my experience, as confirmed by what it seems like Graham is saying -- when an M's fan talks about "Soriano for Horam" they aren't just talking about the deal itself. They are talking about the backwards system and future implications of that trade as well as future trades.
Obvious point, I know, but I certainly can empathize with M's fans agonizing over that costly trade, when it wasn't too damaging, but rather wasteful, in impact.
by SwisherSweet on Dec 18, 2007 5:16 PM PST reply actions
yep
which is why I, and many others here still obsess over Kielty/Lilly.
It's the fact that an obviously valuable trade chit, the kind of chit that gets pondered in obsessive diaries, was turned into something not very valuable on first glance, and not very valuable on subsequent glances.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
