PDA

View Full Version : Are you in favor of a Blanton trade?



fewfirstchoice
02-11-2008, 12:15 PM
I was just wondering what you guys think.If the Reds have to give up Votto, Bailey/Cueto, and a prospect such as Roenicke,Soto,Viola, or Janish(all these prospects are in the 9 to 19 range).But what if they got Blanton along with someone else back.Say maybe Embree, Suzuki, or Barton.I know I would do the deal If it was Blanton and either of the other 3 for the above package.I say send the A's Bailey, Votto, and Roenicke for Blanton and Barton.That deal would work for both sides.Now what say you.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 12:16 PM
Absolutely not if thats the asking price.

I dont see how the Reds win that trade even in the short term.

Degenerate39
02-11-2008, 12:17 PM
I wouldn't trade anyone named Votto, Bailey, Bruce, Cueto, or Maroney for Blanton

TheBigLebowski
02-11-2008, 12:19 PM
I wouldn't trade anyone named Votto, Bailey, Bruce, Cueto, or Maroney for Blanton

If you're speaking of Matt Maloney, I'd include him in a Blanton deal 8 days a week.

Now, if this Maroney to which you refer is some sort of super-secret uber-prospect, then no.

Jefferson24
02-11-2008, 12:26 PM
I was just wondering what you guys think.If the Reds have to give up Votto, Bailey/Cueto, and a prospect such as Roenicke,Soto,Viola, or Janish(all these prospects are in the 9 to 19 range).But what if they got Blanton along with someone else back.Say maybe Embree, Suzuki, or Barton.I know I would do the deal If it was Blanton and either of the other 3 for the above package.I say send the A's Bailey, Votto, and Roenicke for Blanton and Barton.That deal would work for both sides.Now what say you.

Blanton would be a decent #3 on the Reds. Bailey is projected to be better than that. This year isn't the Reds year anyway, why make the trade? So we end up with 83 wins instead of 79, so what. Keep the kids, let them blossom and reap the benifits in 2 to 3 years, we will be better off for it.

Stephenk29
02-11-2008, 12:28 PM
I don't think I would ever do that trade. Giving up two of our top major league ready prospects for a #3 type guy is just nuts. Bailey could top out as our 3rd best starter this year as it is. Maloney though? Yeah!

Redsnake
02-11-2008, 02:04 PM
I would give up Maroney, Stubbs and Frazier for Blanton and nothing more. That's #5, 7 and 8 of the Reds top 10 prospects. It sounds like highway robbery, but I could live with it.

kbrake
02-11-2008, 02:14 PM
None of Bailey, Bruce, Votto, Cueto. I guess I could part with Votto if it was packaged right but no more than Joey Votto.

Degenerate39
02-11-2008, 02:15 PM
If you're speaking of Matt Maloney, I'd include him in a Blanton deal 8 days a week.

Now, if this Maroney to which you refer is some sort of super-secret uber-prospect, then no.

Typo, I ment Maloney. I might give him up with Stubbs but I'm not really impressed with Blanton. I really wouldn't want to overpay for him. Not to mention he's been pitching in Oakland's Pitcher Friendly Park this career. I might be wrong but I don't see Blanton doing any good for the Reds.

REDblooded
02-11-2008, 02:18 PM
I would give up Maroney, Stubbs and Frazier for Blanton and nothing more. That's #5, 7 and 8 of the Reds top 10 prospects. It sounds like highway robbery, but I could live with it.


I'd give up one of the 3 you named, but no more than that.

Blanton is so overrated it's nauseating.

idriveabucket
02-11-2008, 02:18 PM
I think I've made it clear where I stand on this. But being an A's fan, I comment with the same bias you as Reds fans probably do.

I think its somewhere in the middle:

I think Blanton is worth two of the big three. You guys don't think he's worth any of the big three.

How about a compromise:

The A's get 1 of the big 3 (Cueto, Bailey, Votto) 1 "B" level (Maroney, Stubbs, or Frazier) and a utility infielder like Keppinger:

A's get: Cueto, Frazier (PTBNL), & Keppinger

for

Red's get: Blanton, + filler

AccordinglyReds
02-11-2008, 02:35 PM
No. Do not want. After the names of Bailey, Cueto and Votto are said, No.

BEETTLEBUG
02-11-2008, 02:40 PM
Votto, Maloney, & Keppenger for Blanton and Suzuki the catcher.

RSNtransplant
02-11-2008, 02:41 PM
I'd take the major league proven talent over the unproven prospect again and again. Was just reading Blanton's Bio on mlb.com, he "was 9-1 when receiving four or more runs of support and is now 32- 2 (.941) in his career with run support of four runs or more...in his career" That's bullpen help right there.

BLEEDS
02-11-2008, 02:47 PM
Cueto, Stubbs, and "Take your pick Billy Beane (of anyone in AA or lower)"

Substitute Maloney for Cueto, and "Take your pick of 2 Billy Beane"...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

roby
02-11-2008, 03:05 PM
I would give up Maroney, Stubbs and Frazier for Blanton and nothing more. That's #5, 7 and 8 of the Reds top 10 prospects. It sounds like highway robbery, but I could live with it.

Maroney??? Is that you, Rastro Jetson? :thumbup:

ChatterRed
02-11-2008, 03:05 PM
I'm not a Bailey fan and I project him as a #4 or #5 starter and I project Blanton as a proven #3.

I do the deal straight up Bailey for Blanton, and throw in a lower tier prospect or utility major leaguer if you have to. But don't sell the farm. One top prospect is all I'm willing to go.

I think there are other teams that would step up to the plate to get Bailey straight up.

Bailey is unproven, has 2 pitches, and has a bad attitude in my opinion.

REDblooded
02-11-2008, 03:07 PM
I think I've made it clear where I stand on this. But being an A's fan, I comment with the same bias you as Reds fans probably do.

I think its somewhere in the middle:

I think Blanton is worth two of the big three. You guys don't think he's worth any of the big three.

How about a compromise:

The A's get 1 of the big 3 (Cueto, Bailey, Votto) 1 "B" level (Maroney, Stubbs, or Frazier) and a utility infielder like Keppinger:

A's get: Cueto, Frazier (PTBNL), & Keppinger

for

Red's get: Blanton, + filler

Sounds great. Then we can give the A's Matt Belisle for Brett Anderson, Trevor Cahill, and Daric Barton..... As that's what you are suggesting the Reds do..........

RSNtransplant
02-11-2008, 03:08 PM
Bailey is unproven, has 2 pitches, and has a bad attitude in my opinion.

In total agreement, for this reason moving Bailey versus Votto or Cueto would be the best choice.

BLEEDS
02-11-2008, 03:17 PM
I still like Bailey's stuff 10x more than Cueto. I'd take the "risk" that Bailey doesn't hit his ceiling, by leaving him in AAA longer and going with Volquez/Bailey/Blanton/Arroyo/Harang for the next 4 years until he bangs down the door.

Cueto's ceiling is lower, but he's closer to it, and as such, has more trade value at this time IMO.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 03:44 PM
I like the odds that one of our 3 young guys out pitches Blanton this year.

idriveabucket
02-11-2008, 03:51 PM
Sounds great. Then we can give the A's Matt Belisle for Brett Anderson, Trevor Cahill, and Daric Barton..... As that's what you are suggesting the Reds do..........

It's not even close:

Player Age VORP xFiP ERA+
Blanton 26 46.3 4.13 106
Belisle 27 7.7 4.32 88

Jefferson24
02-11-2008, 03:55 PM
Not sure why there seems to be a "down on Bailey" feeling around here. Remember he was injured during a number of his major league starts last year. The few games he wasn't injured he did a great job in, considering it was his first cup of coffee. He still ended the year 4-2, granted the era was higher but that was likely influenced by the injury. He will get better. I look for him to be better than Blanton by a quite a bit, maybe even this year. No way I move him for Blanton.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 03:57 PM
Like I said in the other thread if Blanton nets any of our top guys we should have traded Harang and gotten half a farm system.

757690
02-11-2008, 04:04 PM
MLBTraderumors is reporting that Beane is not asking for major league ready talent for Blanton. Considering what he got for Swisher and Haren, I'd say that sound accurate.

I also don't think that Krivsky will trade either Bailey or Cueto for Blanton. He didn't want to trade them for Haren or Bedard (if he did, I am sure the Orioles or A's would have worked something out, and Fay reported that Krivsky really wanted to hold onto them), so I doubt he will for a much lesser pitcher like Blanton.

The A's really don't need Votto, so I think that if a trade goes down, it will be for Stubbs, and other prospects further down the line. If that were the case, I would be in favor of it. Blanton would help the team, but he is not worth any of the big three.

RSNtransplant
02-11-2008, 04:05 PM
I like the odds that one of our 3 young guys out pitches Blanton this year.

Where do I take the other side of this bet?

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 04:10 PM
Where do I take the other side of this bet?

Ill talk to my bookie

757690
02-11-2008, 04:24 PM
Where do I take the other side of this bet?

I might not take that bet, but I would take this bet:

If Blanton is traded to the Reds, one of the three young guns will outperform him, if in the rotation all or most of the season.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 04:26 PM
I might not take that bet, but I would take this bet:

If Blanton is traded to the Reds, one of the three young guns will outperform him, if in the rotation all or most of the season.

Thats what I pretty much meant by what I said.

AmarilloRed
02-11-2008, 04:45 PM
I think everybody is in favor of a Blanton trade, as long as it does not cost too high a price. I would exclude Bruce in any deal, not include more than 1 of Bailey, Cueto, or Votto in any deal, and not include more than 1 of Maloney or Volquez in any deal. If we can structure a deal for Blanton under those parameters, I would be in favor of it.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 04:48 PM
I can already feel my hair falling out.

I give them ZERO MLB ready prospects.

redsupport
02-11-2008, 04:58 PM
i say their prospect go ;since the Reds love their prospects so much they last made the playoffs in 1995, but they love their "prospects"A 13 year drought but keep the love for the prospects, they will be fine in the next yuga

REDblooded
02-11-2008, 05:00 PM
Where do I take the other side of this bet?

You can PM me.....I'll let you take it.

OUReds
02-11-2008, 05:01 PM
I also like the chances that one of the "big three" pitching prospects flames out and has a career ending injury or ends up as bullpen fodder.

The trick is identifying which one and make sure HE is the centerpiece to the Blanton deal.

mound_patrol
02-11-2008, 05:01 PM
I think I've made it clear where I stand on this. But being an A's fan, I comment with the same bias you as Reds fans probably do.

I think its somewhere in the middle:

I think Blanton is worth two of the big three. You guys don't think he's worth any of the big three.

How about a compromise:

The A's get 1 of the big 3 (Cueto, Bailey, Votto) 1 "B" level (Maroney, Stubbs, or Frazier) and a utility infielder like Keppinger:

A's get: Cueto, Frazier (PTBNL), & Keppinger

for

Red's get: Blanton, + filler

Absolutely not. No way I do that deal. I don't trade any of Bruce, Bailey, Cueto, Volquez, Frazier, or Votto for Blanton. Actually i may do a votto for blanton 1 on 1 deal, but the rest are off the table.

Newman4
02-11-2008, 05:02 PM
I think the big problem with dealing with the A's is that they have Daric Barton already and he's too similar to Votto. I would and I don't think WK will either deal Cueto or Bailey (or Volquez for that matter) under any circumstances. Of course, Bruce is untouchable. That leaves Maloney, Stubbs, etc. and I don't think Beane will take a package headed by those guys.

BLEEDS
02-11-2008, 05:02 PM
I like the odds that one of our 3 young guys out pitches Blanton this year.

If you mean Bailey or Cueto, you are dreaming.

MAYBE if Matt Belisle pitches in the 4 or 5 spot, then he might get more WINS than Blanton, if he pitched in the #3 spot, but no way his metrics are comparable. Or are you thinking Belisle's going to post a sub 4.5 ERA this year?

Sign me up for that one.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redhawk61
02-11-2008, 05:07 PM
I think the big problem with dealing with the A's is that they have Daric Barton already and he's too similar to Votto. I would and I don't think WK will either deal Cueto or Bailey (or Volquez for that matter) under any circumstances. Of course, Bruce is untouchable. That leaves Maloney, Stubbs, etc. and I don't think Beane will take a package headed by those guys.

I don't know a deal like Stubbs, Maloney, Rosales, Lecure, Fransisco would be a rather tempting deal for the A's.....And I would do it w/o even blinking

757690
02-11-2008, 05:08 PM
If you mean Bailey or Cueto, you are dreaming.

MAYBE if Matt Belisle pitches in the 4 or 5 spot, then he might get more WINS than Blanton, if he pitched in the #3 spot, but no way his metrics are comparable. Or are you thinking Belisle's going to post a sub 4.5 ERA this year?

Sign me up for that one.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I believe he was talking about Bailey, Cueto and Volquez. But Belisle does have the ability to pitch better than Blanton, although that doesn't mean much.

BLEEDS
02-11-2008, 05:26 PM
I believe he was talking about Bailey, Cueto and Volquez. But Belisle does have the ability to pitch better than Blanton, although that doesn't mean much.

I don't see how - unless we start with the crazy metrics argument again.

I don't care how big that stadium is, you don't post sub 4 ERA's in the AL and put him next to a guy who pitches to the tune of a 5.32 ERA in the NL and get me to believe there is a middle ground to be had where the former bests the latter.

To get to 4.50 ERA, one guy has to cut almost .75 off his ERA, while the other guy is going to add .50 to his, while moving from facing 9 hitters to 8 hitters and a pitcher.

I say again, SIGN ME UP!! I got deeds and titles...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

757690
02-11-2008, 05:33 PM
I don't see how - unless we start with the crazy metrics argument again.

I don't care how big that stadium is, you don't post sub 4 ERA's in the AL and put him next to a guy who pitches to the tune of a 5.32 ERA in the NL and get me to believe there is a middle ground to be had where the former bests the latter.

To get to 4.50 ERA, one guy has to cut almost .75 off his ERA, while the other guy is going to add .50 to his, while moving from facing 9 hitters to 8 hitters and a pitcher.

I say again, SIGN ME UP!! I got deeds and titles...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Belisle throws low to mid 90's, Blanton throws mid to high 80's, maybe hitting 90 every now and again. I said ability, not skill or probability.

And when figuring out if I want to add a pitcher the Reds staff, and have him pitch half of his games in GABP, I care big time about how big the stadium is that he has been pitching in.

Look at Mulder, Zitio and even Hudson, their production went way down outside of Oakland, and they all switch leagues.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 05:35 PM
I think Blanton would do better than Belisle next year but I dont think its going to be much better.

BLEEDS
02-11-2008, 05:38 PM
I think Blanton would do better than Belisle next year but I dont think its going to be much better.

I would think Blanton would pitch more like Arroyo circa 2006 in his first year. That would put him WAY ahead of Belisles "best case scenario" for 2008 no matter how you sliced it... IMO.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 05:54 PM
I would think Blanton would pitch more like Arroyo circa 2006 in his first year. That would put him WAY ahead of Belisles "best case scenario" for 2008 no matter how you sliced it... IMO.

PEACE

-BLEEDS
Thats fine you can have your opinion. Arroyo at least came from a hitter friendly park though.

fewfirstchoice
02-11-2008, 06:00 PM
What about this deal?The numbers beside the prospect is their rank in the Reds farm system.

Stubbs OF(5), Roenicke RHP(9),Maloney LHP(10), and Valaika SS(13)

Thats 3 top 10 prospects and a top 15 aswell a deal I would do.But I dont think it would be enough to get Blanton.If the Reds do get Blanton I think 1 of Bailey, Cueto, or Votto will have to be added.I think it will take something more along the lines of this.

Bailey RHP(2), Stubbs OF(5), and Valaika SS(13)

Thats 2 top 5 prospects and a top 15.I say if we could get Blanton and maybe Embree for these guys pull the trigger.I know alot of you guys will cut a shine if something like that happens.But remember to get talent you have to give talent up.Blanton would make our rotation better than it hs been in a long time.So I say to the Reds FO make the deal if it only involves one of the 3 but I wouldnt give up 2 of the 3 under any circumstances(sp).

TheBigLebowski
02-11-2008, 06:00 PM
Just to shed some light on this discussion, here are Blanton's career stats:

Career Stats Pitching
Year Team G GS W L SV IP H R ER BB K CG SHO ERA WHIP

2005 OAK 33 33 12 12 0 201.1 178 86 79 67 116 2 0 3.53 1.22
2006 OAK 32 31 16 12 0 194.1 241 111 104 58 107 1 1 4.82 1.54
2007 OAK 34 34 14 10 0 230.0 240 106 101 40 140 3 1 3.95 1.22

I omitted '04 as he only pitched in 3 games.

Let's leave all the VORP/BABIP/GORF/NTTIAWWT/DHARMA stuff to the metric heads.

To me, the main stats that matter when evaluating a pitcher are ERA, WHIP, K/BB, Home/Away splits and ground ball vs. fly ball tendencies.

JB's got 3 full years of service in the bigs - 2 good, one bad. Nothing that could be considered great. He's got a decent K/BB ratio but does not miss too many bats. He seems to be more of a ground-ball pitcher which would help at GABP. His home/away splits are awful, which is even more telling when one considers his home park in Oakland is definitely a pitcher's park. However, to be fair, there are no DH's in the NL and the offenses he'd be facing will be slightly less potent than the AL's. He's thrown 6 complete games in his 3 full years, two of which were shutouts. Very average. He's thrown an average of 208 innings in his 3 years with the A's which means he's relatively durable while not being overused.

To sum, Joe Blanton would be a really nice #3 for most staffs, a #2 for the worst clubs and a #4 for the teams with excellent pitching. Would I like to see him on the Reds? Sure. Of course I would. But when I read that Beane asked the Dodgers for Ethier/LaRoche/+ prospect for Blanton, I get scared. When I see speculation that he's wanting Bailey/Cueto + Votto + prospect for Blanton I get downright petrified. He just ain't worth near that kind of package, folks.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 06:03 PM
Agreed ^

I wouldnt say no to Blanton if the price was right but if it involves any of our MLB ready guys Id rather take my chances with them.

fewfirstchoice
02-11-2008, 06:13 PM
Guys in order to get Blanton your going to have to give up someone.Im on the side of giving up one of the mlb ready guys(Bailey,Cueto,or Votto) but not 2 of them.Blanton would make the Reds a better team no doubt in 08.I want to watch a Reds team that cant compete for a playoff spot.I ahev watched the Reds lose for to many years now.Im ready for Mr. Bob to put a winner on the field.Bottom line if you want the Reds to have any chance of competeing ths year you better hope that they find another arm somewhere and Blanton is the best out there right now.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 06:18 PM
Im fine with giving up something, but for our MLB ready talent Id like to get something in return.

If we were that insane we should have just gave up Bruce for Bedard.

TheBigLebowski
02-11-2008, 06:22 PM
Let's think about this another way.

I think most would agree that Cueto and Homer will be producing at a high level in the bigs (IF they pan out) in 2-3 years. It may be foolish to expect great things from either of them in 2008 but, if these guys are going to become the great MLB pitchers we all think/hope they can be, those trees should start to bear fruit by 2009. Same for guys like Bruce and Votto. Personally, I think Frazier will be here in '09. He's not far away. I have no idea what we'll get from guys like Maloney and Stubbs nor when we'll get it.

Now consider Joe Blanton. Let's say we have to deal one of Bailey/Cueto, one of Frazier/Votto and another top 15 prospect (to which, friendly reader - there is a caveat: a top 15 prospect in our org is, in some cases, akin to a top 5-7 prospect in others as our system is deeper than it may have ever been at present) to bring Blanton over, which looks extremely likely. Do the stats I posted above show you a guy who will push us over the top in 2008? Are we THAT much more likely to make the playoffs with JB than without him? Because, if you buy my premise laid forth in the beginning of this post, a JB acquisition would have to be made with intentions of winning THIS YEAR or the trade will be a colossal waste of top notch talent.

Stephenk29
02-11-2008, 06:32 PM
Cueto/Frazier/someone

I do it

fadetoblack2880
02-11-2008, 06:58 PM
If the price is right, I'm 100% for a trade. The Reds need pitching, only way to acquire pitching is to pay for it. Billy Beane isn't stupid, so we may as well expect one of the four mentioned above to be dealt. I would hate to see Votto go, but for a decent pitcher, I'm all for it.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 07:00 PM
How does the road ERA not scare the ever living crap out of you guys?

REDblooded
02-11-2008, 07:18 PM
How does the road ERA not scare the ever living crap out of you guys?


Because.....he's from KENTUCKY so he's GOOD!

CRedsLarkin11
02-11-2008, 07:56 PM
My problem with this kind of trade is the Reds would have to overpay to get him. I honestly think he is due for a breakout year but at what cost? It's spring and part of me is optimistic again(when will I learn? haha) but the realist side of me asks would he really make that much of a difference this season on this team? Is Cincinnati really that close? I'm not so sure

Blue
02-11-2008, 08:05 PM
Why on earth would we give them more for Blanton than they received in exchange for Haren? It doesn't make any sense.

idriveabucket
02-11-2008, 08:07 PM
The Reds have one last season of Dunn + one last season of Griffey unless you guys pick up his $17 million option next season (which is highly doubtful)

The Cubs are the favorites early, but the Reds aren't to far behind talent wise.

If you guys are going to make a run for it, right now would be the best time.

Redsnake
02-11-2008, 08:27 PM
If the board is 50/50 on Blanton lets go after another A's starter. Rich Harden.
He's risky, but the A's might unload him cheaper than Blanton since it's unknown when the next Harden injury will happen.

I say all it takes is Frazier and Stubbs. ;)

idriveabucket
02-11-2008, 08:38 PM
Beane isn't likely to trade Harden while his value is so low. I don't know how much a team would be willing to give up for a player whose pitched a total of 75 innings over the last 2 years.

DannyB
02-11-2008, 09:02 PM
Freel,Castro,Stanton, and Coffey for Blanton.
Take it or leave it.

kbrake
02-11-2008, 09:02 PM
Ok after reading through another Blanton thread the question I have is where is this idea of Homer Bailey having a bad attitude coming from? I would love to hear someone back this claim up with something solid.

757690
02-11-2008, 09:13 PM
The Reds have one last season of Dunn + one last season of Griffey unless you guys pick up his $17 million option next season (which is highly doubtful)

The Cubs are the favorites early, but the Reds aren't to far behind talent wise.

If you guys are going to make a run for it, right now would be the best time.

The owner, and manager have said that they want to sign Dunn to a long term deal, and every Reds fan has been waiting for the day that Griffey's contract is off the books, so I am not sure it is fair to say that 08 is the Reds best and last chance to make a run for it.
Also, if the Reds hold onto all their prospects and say half of them work out, and they don't have to pay Griffey and/or Dunn, then they are in a great position in 09 to sign some top free agents or trade for some top talent.
I think most Red fans think that 09 is the Reds best chance to compete.

RSNtransplant
02-11-2008, 10:42 PM
Thats what I pretty much meant by what I said.

So if Blanton comes to the Reds, which of the three did you want, Cueto, Bailey, the last one is Belisle or Voloquez?

AmarilloRed
02-11-2008, 10:50 PM
I think if we have to trade one of the 3 young pitching prospects, I would trade Volquez. I expect both Bailey and Cueto will be quality starting pitchers in the future, and I don't want them traded under any circumstances. It has been quoted that Billy Beane does not necessarily want major-league ready players, so I try and make a trade without giving any up. I trade Volquez/Maloney, Stubbs and Frazier for Blanton.

Bip Roberts
02-11-2008, 11:00 PM
So if Blanton comes to the Reds, which of the three did you want, Cueto, Bailey, the last one is Belisle or Voloquez?

I dont count Belisle as a young one. I meant Bailey Cueto or Volquez.

RSNtransplant
02-11-2008, 11:05 PM
I dont count Belisle as a young one. I meant Bailey Cueto or Volquez.

Thanks for clarifying.

Z-Fly
02-12-2008, 07:16 AM
Freel,Castro,Stanton, and Coffey for Blanton.
Take it or leave it.
:lol: I think they call that two birds with one stone.

kentjett
02-12-2008, 09:19 AM
Does Volquez still have options. I thought he was closer to Belisle's age than Homers or Cueto's. I' haven't seen Volquez pitch yet but he is supposed to be more ML ready than either Bailey or Cueto.

BEETTLEBUG
02-12-2008, 09:23 AM
Volquez should be there unless he is on DL cause he is here by way of Hamilton.

BLEEDS
02-12-2008, 09:39 AM
FIRST - we STILL can't trade Frazier this year, so let's get off that one.

SECOND - no way we are trading Volquez, he's more major-league ready than Bailey/Cueto. BUT to put that in perspective, let's say we DID trade him (in a package of lesser prospects) - then you'd have essentially traded Josh Hamilton (and fodder) for Blanton. How could anyone argue with that? NOW, understanding that Volquez is miles ahead of Bailey/Cueto right now, take the rose colored glasses off and realize that giving up ONE of them for Blanton would be a good thing.

THIRD - put me in the boat with the guys who think we could throw quantity at Beane and keep the Fab 5 (Bailey/Cueto/Volquez/Votto/Bruce) out of the discussion. Maloney and/or Roenicke, Stubbs, others could get it done. I believe the reports that he doesn't necessarily need near-MLB ready prospects. Beane isn't trying to win in 2009 either, he's REALLY cleaning house and going for the future.

It's entirely too quiet on the K front, and his "denials" seem a little less firm and more cryptic than previous, definitely there is some major discussions going on, and the other "moves" look like the calm before the storm IMO. I expect something soon to break.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
02-12-2008, 09:41 AM
Does Volquez still have options. I thought he was closer to Belisle's age than Homers or Cueto's. I' haven't seen Volquez pitch yet but he is supposed to be more ML ready than either Bailey or Cueto.

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/redsinsider/2008/02/options-list.asp

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 09:45 AM
Ive always stated Id be willing to trade non major league ready talent for Blanton. I think there is a very strong chance we regret it still though.

I have no interest in trading young high ranked prospects no matter what position they play for 3/4 type pitcher who doesn't have much upside. If Blanton fetches any of our top 5 guys we should have sold sold sold sold this off season.

Caveman Techie
02-12-2008, 11:33 AM
I keep flip flopping on Blanton.

On one hand he gives up alot of hits, but he doesn't walk alot of players so that off-sets it.

He pitches in the AL (Big ballparks) West, however he would be coming to the non DH NL to offset.

The one good thing about Blanton is he is a ground ball pitcher so that does translate well to GABP.

I guess it would depend on who we send to Oakland to get him.

BLEEDS
02-12-2008, 12:21 PM
for 3/4 type pitcher who doesn't have much upside.

Not sure how you can translate a sub 4.00 ERA in the AL to a #3/#4 pitcher with no upside. Obviously his upside is 2005/2007 numbers...

I think he competes with Arroyo for our #2 as his upside.

But, I realize in your world, all of OUR pitchers get better, while all OTHER pitchers get worse.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 12:33 PM
Not sure how you can translate a sub 4.00 ERA in the AL to a #3/#4 pitcher with no upside. Obviously his upside is 2005/2007 numbers...

I think he competes with Arroyo for our #2 as his upside.

But, I realize in your world, all of OUR pitchers get better, while all OTHER pitchers get worse.

PEACE

-BLEEDS
In my world a guy with a era over 4.50 on the road who has a worse K/bb rate than Matt Belisle, who everyone hates, doesnt show much upside especially with 3 years of experience. I dont like his 10.35 h/9 hes put up out side of Oakland all that much in our ball park. Solid pitcher in the 3 spot yes, but to me he isnt going to improve much and its quite possible to me he declines.

Arroyo pitched in the AL east and also put up better numbers than Blanton ever has with out having the luxury of the pitcher friendly park. I think you are putting entirely too much stock into the NL AL hitting.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 12:45 PM
H/9 is far more general (and leaves a lot to luck) than anything I've shown like VORP, xFIP, & ERA+ which are also adjusted for League & Park. Using these metrics (I posted something really long in another thread to explain them and how they are relevant)

Blanton had a better season than Arroyo last year, and is a good bet to produce at his past levels given his age and where he resides on the age curve. (age 27 = just entering peak, safe against injury, etc) Arroyo is 30, Blanton turned 27 this past Dec.

Also, when there's budgets involved contract status and risk are a huge part of the decision making process. Why this gets ignored amazes me. His $3.7MM salary this season is FAR below market rate.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 12:49 PM
All of the below statistics try to summarize a pitchers performance (just like ERA) but in a way that reflects on a pitchers individual ability/skill level.

VORP is league and ballpark neutralized. (nobody gets a boost for playing in a better ballpark) This stat puts into context the value of a durable/healthy pitcher who puts up above average numbers for many innings. (Harang & Blanton are both VORP stars in 2007, Arroyo was a VORP star in 2006)

xFIP is defense independent and normalizes home run rate under the assumption that pitchers only have control over GB/FB rate, not HR rate. (it eliminates any "boost" a pitcher might get from pitching in front of a good defense)

ERA+ puts into context how much better than average (if 100 was average) a pitcher is. This metric is also adjusted for park factors.

Age is very important. A pitcher who is 26 is just entering his peak years (age: 27-28) before the window the average players skills began to decline (age: 29-retire)

Contract is also very important. Blanton will make $3.8 million in 2008 and is expected to make another $15 million or so in the final 2 years of arbitration. Blanton would come at below market rate for the final 3 years he's under Reds control. Freeing up budget and resources that can be more efficiently spent in other areas of the franchise.

Here's some important numbers to look at from last season:

Player | Age | xFIP | VORP |ERA+ |Contract
Harang | 29 | 3.81 | 53.8 | 125 | 4/$36
Arroyo | 30 | 4.76 | 30.7 | 110 | 3/$29
Blanton | 26 | 4.13 | 46.3 | 106 | 3/$18

Given the combination of age, and production, a good argument can be made that going forward Blanton is a good bet to out produce Arroyo and be the Reds #2 SP. When you add their contracts to the equation, Blanton clearly becomes an even more valuable piece to the Reds franchise.

Also, i don't know if you guys heard of the injury nexus or not. BP and other progressive statistical websites have done studies using the entire data pool of major league baseball. These studies showed a very high flame out rate for major league pitching prospects.

Pitching is a very unnatural motion on the human body and arm. Regardless of how much talent a player has, getting past the injury nexus, and being able to take the mound every 5th day; for 180+ innings a season, is a massive skill in its own right. This is a barrier all pitching prospects have to overcome.

Cueto, Bailey, (add any big name pitching prospect here) comes with a large risk that they never get past that injury nexus.

Many teams (depending on the direction of the organization) are willing to cash in on their potential (their prospects) to eliminate risk associated with babying/growing those prospects. (Blanton/A's provide that market)

Votto, Cueto, Bailey are all very talented prospects, but risk needs to be considered into the equation.

The A's want upside at the expense of risk (given the direction of the organization: rebuild)

The Reds might be looking to take advantage of one last season of Griffey & Dunn and try to make a run at the NL Central while there's limited competition in the division this season. Blanton provides the Reds a more certain opportunity of competing.

CySeymour
02-12-2008, 12:52 PM
From Neyer's chat on ESPN.com:

dave (erie, pa): Do you think joe blanton will get traded? And do you think bailey and votto is to much to give up for him?

Rob Neyer: (12:26 PM ET ) I think Joe Blanton will get traded, and I think Bailey and Votto is too much to give up for him. Especially as it's the Reds who would be doing the giving.

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 01:02 PM
H/9 is far more general (and leaves a lot to luck) than anything I've shown like VORP, xFIP, & ERA+ which are also adjusted for League & Park. Using these metrics (I posted something really long in another thread to explain them and how they are relevant)

Blanton had a better season than Arroyo last year, and is a good bet to produce at his past levels given his age and where he resides on the age curve. (age 27 = just entering peak, safe against injury, etc) Arroyo is 30, Blanton turned 27 this past Dec.

Also, when there's budgets involved contract status and risk are a huge part of the decision making process. Why this gets ignored amazes me. His $3.7MM salary this season is FAR below market rate.
I dont think anyone can have 3 years of good luck at home and 3 years of bad luck on the road. If Blanton didnt have such huge home/road splits every year i would indeed like him a lot more.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 01:17 PM
I didn't say his away splits were a product of bad luck. I said your logic using H/9 is highly susceptible to luck.

I have, however, given park and league neutralized metrics (from 3 different sources) VORP = BP, ERA+ = BR, xFIP = THT/Tango

I explained what each metric tries to accomplish. Again, these metrics are ballpark and league neutralized and Blanton out produced Arroyo last season. Thats not to take anything away from Arroyo, he's a valuable asset, but it does highlight how good Blanton has been under the hood.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 01:22 PM
btw, if you guys are into fantasy baseball check out my blog: http://www.brockforbroglio.com

AmarilloRed
02-12-2008, 01:44 PM
I went over and checked Athletics Nation to see what the other side was thinking, and they expect Blanton to be traded before much longer. Their farm system does not have any prospects comparable to ours, so naturally they are looking to get the best haul they can. I don't think a trade will be made without us giving up one of the Big 4, and surprisingly Keppinger was high on their wish list. They also don't believe any of their first base prospects will show the power Votto will, so they are interested in acquiring him. It is always interesting to see what the other side is thinking, and I am glad I checked on it.

BLEEDS
02-12-2008, 01:49 PM
All of the below statistics try to summarize a pitchers performance (just like ERA) but in a way that reflects on a pitchers individual ability/skill level.

VORP is league and ballpark neutralized. (nobody gets a boost for playing in a better ballpark) This stat puts into context the value of a durable/healthy pitcher who puts up above average numbers for many innings. (Harang & Blanton are both VORP stars in 2007, Arroyo was a VORP star in 2006)

xFIP is defense independent and normalizes home run rate under the assumption that pitchers only have control over GB/FB rate, not HR rate. (it eliminates any "boost" a pitcher might get from pitching in front of a good defense)

ERA+ puts into context how much better than average (if 100 was average) a pitcher is. This metric is also adjusted for park factors.
Age is very important. A pitcher who is 26 is just entering his peak years (age: 27-28) before the window the average players skills began to decline (age: 29-retire)

Contract is also very important. Blanton will make $3.8 million in 2008 and is expected to make another $15 million or so in the final 2 years of arbitration. Blanton would come at below market rate for the final 3 years he's under Reds control. Freeing up budget and resources that can be more efficiently spent in other areas of the franchise.

Here's some important numbers to look at from last season:

Player | Age | xFIP | VORP |ERA+ |Contract
Harang | 29 | 3.81 | 53.8 | 125 | 4/$36
Arroyo | 30 | 4.76 | 30.7 | 110 | 3/$29
Blanton | 26 | 4.13 | 46.3 | 106 | 3/$18

Given the combination of age, and production, a good argument can be made that going forward Blanton is a good bet to out produce Arroyo and be the Reds #2 SP. When you add their contracts to the equation, Blanton clearly becomes an even more valuable piece to the Reds franchise.

Also, i don't know if you guys heard of the injury nexus or not. BP and other progressive statistical websites have done studies using the entire data pool of major league baseball. These studies showed a very high flame out rate for major league pitching prospects.

Pitching is a very unnatural motion on the human body and arm. Regardless of how much talent a player has, getting past the injury nexus, and being able to take the mound every 5th day; for 180+ innings a season, is a massive skill in its own right. This is a barrier all pitching prospects have to overcome.

Cueto, Bailey, (add any big name pitching prospect here) comes with a large risk that they never get past that injury nexus.

Many teams (depending on the direction of the organization) are willing to cash in on their potential (their prospects) to eliminate risk associated with babying/growing those prospects. (Blanton/A's provide that market)

Votto, Cueto, Bailey are all very talented prospects, but risk needs to be considered into the equation.

The A's want upside at the expense of risk (given the direction of the organization: rebuild)

The Reds might be looking to take advantage of one last season of Griffey & Dunn and try to make a run at the NL Central while there's limited competition in the division this season. Blanton provides the Reds a more certain opportunity of competing.


Your logic (and stats) have no place here Sir! If he is a RED, he will get measurably better, if he is NOT, he will succomb to the fury that is GABP and be forever a #4 SP at best. There is no upside to entering your peak years, DUH!!!

PEACE

-BLEEDS

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 01:49 PM
If you want another take on it check out the A's scout board: http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?S=304#s=304&f=2062 there's more on going discussion.

dunner13
02-12-2008, 01:52 PM
From Neyer's chat on ESPN.com:

dave (erie, pa): Do you think joe blanton will get traded? And do you think bailey and votto is to much to give up for him?

Rob Neyer: (12:26 PM ET ) I think Joe Blanton will get traded, and I think Bailey and Votto is too much to give up for him. Especially as it's the Reds who would be doing the giving.

Thats me, had to ask the question a couple of different ways before he finally answered it. I would give up Cueto ( who it seems like the A's like) and a one or two lesser prospects for Blanton. I think blanton would be a great addition to the rotation and would be very solid. The people who are saying that blaton = belisle are ridiculous. Belisle is all potential, which he has done nothing to show that he can reach and blanton has gotten it done.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 01:53 PM
Your logic (and stats) have no place here Sir! If he is a RED, he will get measurably better, if he is NOT, he will succomb to the fury that is GABP and be forever a #4 SP at best. There is no upside to entering your peak years, DUH!!!

PEACE

-BLEEDS

lol that seems to be the general vibe.

AmarilloRed
02-12-2008, 02:06 PM
If you want another take on it check out the A's scout board: http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?S=304#s=304&f=2062 there's more on going discussion.

An interesting take. I see you participated in the discussion and put forth Keppinger in the debate. They seemed to approve of him, as I believe they are looking for middle infielders. One thing I noted was that if the A's don't receive 2 of the Big 4(Bruce, Bailey, Votto, and Cueto) they are looking to receive 4 prospects instead of 3.

757690
02-12-2008, 02:08 PM
"Here's some important numbers to look at from last season:

Player | Age | xFIP | VORP |ERA+ |Contract
Harang | 29 | 3.81 | 53.8 | 125 | 4/$36
Arroyo | 30 | 4.76 | 30.7 | 110 | 3/$29
Blanton | 26 | 4.13 | 46.3 | 106 | 3/$18"


If you take Arroyo's and Blanton's numbers from 06, Arroyo is a much better pitcher. That is the problem with stats, even progressive stats, anyone can take select stats to make them say virtually anything about a player.

Look at Blanton's career numbers. They all point to him being 4.50 ERA guy, which means he is not worth any of the big 4. He might improve and have a breakout year, but based on what he has done, is is a #3 or 4 pitcher.

Stephenk29
02-12-2008, 02:20 PM
based on what he has done, is is a #3 or 4 pitcher.

Which we need. Someone said earlier if we didn't include the big guys than it would take 4 prospects. I would jump all over that deal. That's a lot of guys, but none of our top 5 guys.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 02:23 PM
these numbers are a consolidation of an entire body of work. there's no cherry picking going on. If I wanted to cherry pick numbers I would've only showed "VORP". I used 3 different systems so we'd get angles from a variety of sources and studies.

We are using their past performance data to come to assumptions about their future. Age plays a significant factor.

BLEEDS
02-12-2008, 02:44 PM
if the A's don't receive 2 of the Big 4(Bruce, Bailey, Votto, and Cueto) they are looking to receive 4 prospects instead of 3.

Maloney, Roenicke, Stubbs, Fransicso/Rosales/whateva...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 02:58 PM
I didn't say his away splits were a product of bad luck. I said your logic using H/9 is highly susceptible to luck.

I have, however, given park and league neutralized metrics (from 3 different sources) VORP = BP, ERA+ = BR, xFIP = THT/Tango

I explained what each metric tries to accomplish. Again, these metrics are ballpark and league neutralized and Blanton out produced Arroyo last season. Thats not to take anything away from Arroyo, he's a valuable asset, but it does highlight how good Blanton has been under the hood.

So once again explain to me how someone can be so unlucky on the road and so lucky at home? If his h/9 is highly susceptible to luck then how is his home/road splits not? He clearly gains bunch from the park in oakland, why would I think hes going to be the same pitcher when he doesnt get to pitch in it for half his games? Stats are fine, I like sabrmetrics but there is nothing to explain why hes been the way he has when it comes to his splits.

Also you are comparing Arroyos career worst with what Blantons career best. If you would have done 06 stats you would get completely different results.

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 02:59 PM
Maloney, Roenicke, Stubbs, Fransicso/Rosales/whateva...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Id probably do that

RSNtransplant
02-12-2008, 03:03 PM
So once again explain to me how someone can be so unlucky on the road and so lucky at home? If his h/9 is highly susceptible to luck then how is his home/road splits not? He clearly gains bunch from the park in oakland, why would I think hes going to be the same pitcher when he doesnt get to pitch in it for half his games? Stats are fine, I like sabrmetrics but there is nothing to explain why hes been the way he has when it comes to his splits.

Maybe he's a bad flyer? I remember talk of Alexander Molgilny back in the 90s was such a bad flyer they had to sedate him to get on a plane or he would have to travel on the ground, both were said to effect his performance.

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 03:05 PM
Which we need. Someone said earlier if we didn't include the big guys than it would take 4 prospects. I would jump all over that deal. That's a lot of guys, but none of our top 5 guys.

We might need him but not at what people are saying we must give up.

Younger guys who are a little bit away from the majors yea ill probably do a lot of deals but nothing thats MLB ready.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 03:06 PM
"sabermetrics" isn't something you like or dislike, its not a beauty contest or a car show.

You either understand the statistics (which I tried really hard to make in plain english) or you don't. I'd challenge you to do some leg work, and google these stats i've mentioned and try to get a fundamental knowledge of what they're trying to represent.

Here's a good search engine to use: http://www.baseboogle.com

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 03:10 PM
"sabermetrics" isn't something you like or dislike, its not a beauty contest or a car show.

You either understand the statistics (which I tried really hard to make in plain english) or you don't. I'd challenge you to do some leg work, and google these stats i've mentioned and try to get a fundamental knowledge of what they're trying to represent.

Here's a good search engine to use: http://www.baseboogle.com

I think you are toeing the line of trying to insult me over my choice of the word like. I merely meant I didnt think they were worthless.

gedred69
02-12-2008, 03:12 PM
I just don't like the idea of giving up pitching prospects, it's been so long since the Reds brought any along, either a draft choice or a guy they trade for who spent time in the Reds system. However I like the 4 prospect scenario. Does anyone think BB would go for either 2 OF and 1 IF prospects, or vice versa + 1 pitching prospect not named Bailey, Volquez, Cueto, Maloney?

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 03:16 PM
I'm not being insulting. Sorry if it came off that way.

You say you don't think the statistics are worthless, but then you proceed with questions that contradict that sentiment.

Maybe a good place to start would be understanding what ballpark and league neutralized mean, and how they are applicable in context of this discussion.

jmac
02-12-2008, 03:17 PM
So once again explain to me how someone can be so unlucky on the road and so lucky at home? If his h/9 is highly susceptible to luck then how is his home/road splits not? He clearly gains bunch from the park in oakland
I just today looked at his game by game log from last year and I didnt realize he got tattoo'ed so many games on the road.
I certainly am not that much in favor of trading the blue- chippers for him now and I wasnt a big fan of trading Votto or Cueto anyway.

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 03:27 PM
I'm not being insulting. Sorry if it came off that way.

You say you don't think the statistics are worthless, but then you proceed with questions that contradict that sentiment.

Maybe a good place to start would be understanding what ballpark and league neutralized mean.

I think all stats have flaws. I dont think Blanton is terrible I think he would put up a 4.50 era for us but I think the chance he puts up a higher ERA is much greater than he puts up one lower.

I have never said that Blanton is awful, I've been saying since the beginning hes not worth the talent being proposed and I dont think his pitching style is the greatest for throwing half his starts in GABP with even more being tossed in Wrigley.

Just because I dont take every stat for it being 100% doesnt me I dont respect them. No matter what stat you throw at me I still will never get over him being a Cy young winner at home and a back of the rotation guy on the road. If you find me a good explanation for it besides just that his h/9 on the road is highly susceptible to luck you might be able to convince me hes a #2.

OUReds
02-12-2008, 03:27 PM
So comparing ERA+ shows that Arroyo was slightly better then Blanton last year right? Two years ago Arroyo was much better. Obviously the age factor works to Blanton's advantage, but Arroyo has a better track record, Blanton is young enough that he might improve some. It's about a push either way.

The problem is, both pitchers are, ideally, league average number three pitchers in a good rotation (200 IP, 4.50 ERA). Blanton might (MIGHT) be the Red's #2 starting pitcher, but that's a meaningless statement if he doesn't produce league average #2 starter numbers (200 IP, ~4.00 ERA).

So what is the value of a league average #3 pitcher under your control for the next 3 years? Quite a bit obviously. However, the value of near MLB ready pitching prospects with top of the rotation potential is high also. Given that young pre-free agent aces are the single most valuable commodity in baseball right now, I would say that the value of premium pitching prospects has never been higher.


As far as the injury nexus, of course there is increased risk with young prospects. However, Bailey will be 22 next year, the final year of (slightly) increased risk, while Volquez is past the injury nexus. Only Cueto as a 21 year old is still at a significantly elevated injury risk due to age. it's a factor, but one that is more then balanced by the cost control associated with young players if they do make it.

Looking at specific deals in general, I suspect that Bruce and Votto are off the table. We take the offense for granted a lot here, but last year we were 7th out of 16 teams in runs scored. Considering park effects that's barely above average. We're simply not in a position to be trading away young offensive prospects. That means any trade will have to include one of the pitching prospects.

Thus, if a deal can be made, I suspect it is one of Cueto/Bailey/Volquez plus two lower level prospects, maybe Keppinger and one of the corner infield prospects (Fransisco?).

Edit: here is a link from the ORG

http://www.daytondailynews.com/s/content/oh/story/sports/pro/reds/2008/02/11/ddn021208audible.html

If Hal is right and the asking price is one of the top pitchers and Votto, then there's no way I do the deal. The difference between Bailey and Blanton in the rotation this year just wouldn't be enough to get us over the top IMO, and long term I'll take Bailey thanks.

757690
02-12-2008, 03:42 PM
these numbers are a consolidation of an entire body of work. there's no cherry picking going on. If I wanted to cherry pick numbers I would've only showed "VORP". I used 3 different systems so we'd get angles from a variety of sources and studies.

We are using their past performance data to come to assumptions about their future. Age plays a significant factor.

You cherry picked they year. past performance should include career #'s not just the players best or worst year, which is what you did with Arroyo and Blanton.
Career #'s and Blanton and Aroyyo are pretty much even.

I do appreciate the work you have put into this, you have given us all a lot of info to discuss and think about. Thanks!

Revering4Blue
02-12-2008, 04:04 PM
put me in the boat with the guys who think we could throw quantity at Beane and keep the Fab 5 (Bailey/Cueto/Volquez/Votto/Bruce) out of the discussion. Maloney and/or Roenicke, Stubbs, others could get it done. I believe the reports that he doesn't necessarily need near-MLB ready prospects. Beane isn't trying to win in 2009 either, he's REALLY cleaning house and going for the future.

Bingo.

Even if Beane is asking for a package of Ethier and LaRoche and a prospect for Blanton, the operative word here is asking.

Any decent GM should begin trade negotiations/talks by first asking for what you want, rather than for whom you think you'll receive. So it stands to reason that Beane can be expected to initially ask for at least one of the Red's "Fab 5."

In the end, given that stocking the farm system and not necessarily trying to win now seems to be Beane's M.O, I also believe that a package much like Bleeds suggested--quantity of
non-MLB ready prospects, though by no means scrubs--could well net Blanton.

Plus, by stockpiling more prospects and adding more depth to the farm system, much as he did while dealing Swisher and Haren , it puts Beane in a position to actually be a buyer --assuming the A's are in contention-- at the trading deadline without totally mortgaging the future.

BLEEDS
02-12-2008, 04:06 PM
Id probably do that

:yikes:

WOW, we actually agree on something. I'll mark THAT one down... :p:

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 04:09 PM
:yikes:

WOW, we actually agree on something. I'll mark THAT one down... :p:

PEACE

-BLEEDS

We have agreed on some things just we have different philosophies more than anything.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 04:14 PM
So comparing ERA+ shows that Arroyo was slightly better then Blanton last year right? Two years ago Arroyo was much better. Obviously the age factor works to Blanton's advantage, but Arroyo has a better track record, Blanton is young enough that he might improve some. It's about a push either way.

I disagree. Three years ago Blanton was much better while Arroyo was likely at his peak and Blanton was still on the upward swing of the age curve. You mention age and say you appreciate its significance but then you discount it.


Blanton might (MIGHT) be the Red's #2 starting pitcher, but that's a meaningless statement if he doesn't produce league average #2 starter numbers (200 IP, ~4.00 ERA).

It seems the general consensus around here is that Blanton would be #3 "at best" on the Reds rotation. I simply was making an argument in defense of Blanton and his projected performance going forward. A good argument can be made that Blanton is a better bet to out produce Arroyo this season.


So what is the value of a league average #3 pitcher under your control for the next 3 years? Quite a bit obviously. However, the value of near MLB ready pitching prospects with top of the rotation potential is high also.

I disagree that Blanton would be a league average #3 pitcher. If we use VORP & FIP to determine his value an argument can be made that Blanton's performance level has been equivalent to a league average #2 pitcher. Arroyo would've been a staff ace in '06 in that same context. Blanton has a three year 38.9 VORP average. He was very lucky in '05 but as equally unlucky in '06. His '07 seems to be a good indicator of what his performance level will be from here on out. His peripherals (k/bb, hr/9, & FIP) have all gradually increased from his rookie season to now.


Given that young pre-free agent aces are the single most valuable commodity in baseball right now, I would say that the value of premium pitching prospects has never been higher.

Bailey projects as an ace, and Cueto isn't too far behind. I personally like Cueto's track record better but there's still a significant amount to prove. A lot can happen to a pitching prospect before the age of 24...which brings me to your next comment:


As far as the injury nexus, of course there is increased risk with young prospects. However, Bailey will be 22 next year, the final year of (slightly) increased risk

The injury nexus is a large factor, there's nothing slight about it. It's a factor until the age of 24. It does become less and less of risk the closer the pitcher gets to that benchmark, though. Cueto's body type also raises questions about long term sustained health as a SP.

Here's a snippet from Will Carrol & Nate Silvers article about the injury nexus:

We have already discussed how the first of the three physiological elements of injury risk--the intrinsic strain that the pitching motion requires--is of greatest concern for very young pitchers. Indeed, based on a limited sample of MLB injury data reviewed by Under the Knife, pitchers under the age of 24 are especially likely to experience injuries to their elbows and shoulders, those body parts that are put under the greatest stress by the pitching motion. Source (https://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1658)


Looking at specific deals in general, I suspect that Bruce and Votto are off the table. We take the offense for granted a lot here, but last year we were 7th out of 16 teams in runs scored. Considering park effects that's barely above average. We're simply not in a position to be trading away young offensive prospects. That means any trade will have to include one of the pitching prospects.

I agree with this 100%. Plus the A's are stocked with 1b/dh type anyway.


Thus, if a deal can be made, I suspect it is one of Cueto/Bailey/Volquez plus two lower level prospects, maybe Keppinger and one of the corner infield prospects (Fransisco?).

I think the A's could fairly require: 1 A level (Cueto/Bailey/Cueto) and 2 B levels (Maroney, Frazier(Frazie can be traded as a PTBNL), Stubbs) and maybe a UTIL middle infielder as well like: Keppinger.

RSNtransplant
02-12-2008, 04:14 PM
I just today looked at his game by game log from last year and I didnt realize he got tattoo'ed so many games on the road.
I certainly am not that much in favor of trading the blue- chippers for him now and I wasnt a big fan of trading Votto or Cueto anyway.

I had to look for myself after reading this, looking a little deeper I noticed a few things. His Pre AS, Post AS H/9 have the similar increase. Pre AS he gave up 10 or more hits twice, both times Adam Melhuse caught on the Road, every other game Jason Kendall caught. Pre AS > 4 ER only once, in the second Melhuse game. Post AS Kendall catches one game, Blanton gives up 12H/6R(5ER), he's ejected for shoving Jason Ellison, this is Home game. Kurt Suzuki catches the remainder of his games, including the next 4 games, giving up 10H/game and 5R/game, 2 Home 2 road games with rookie catcher to close July. From August 4th to Sept 15th he makes 9 starts, Suzuki cathes, gives up 8 or less hits per game, 4 or less R in all but one game(road start versus Detroit). His last two starts are awful @ Clev and Bos, two playoff teams the games meant something to, while Oak was out.

This is only 2007, so doesn't explain a career of bad Road starts, but with a little more detail I think circumstance of who was catching could be a contributing factor along with the Post AS road games where he was shelled versus Det, Clev and Bos(2nd, 8th and 4th in Runs Scored in 2008).

His GO/AO ratio is not that different Home /Away 1.33/1.44, I would have exected it to be much different since Oakland is spacious in the OF and notorious for expanse foul territory which should drive the number of AO up(obviously it has .11 difference, but any idea on how significant that is?). Any recommendations for stats website more sortable/downloadable than mlb.com. I'd be interested to see any patterns for 2005,2006.

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 04:20 PM
Most people feel the parks foul ground helps pitchers more than anything.

RSNtransplant
02-12-2008, 04:36 PM
Most people feel the parks foul ground helps pitchers more than anything.

I know, but for 2007 the difference was only .11 for Blanton. Don't know how significant that is, I'll have to keep looking.

Anyone know when was the last time they modified the stands in Oakland, I am pretty sure they were moved at least once in the last 10 years.

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 04:59 PM
You cherry picked they year. past performance should include career #'s not just the players best or worst year, which is what you did with Arroyo and Blanton.
Career #'s and Blanton and Aroyyo are pretty much even.

I do appreciate the work you have put into this, you have given us all a lot of info to discuss and think about. Thanks!

I picked the year that should be weighted the heaviest (last season) collecting all 3 seasons would've been superfluous in context. I'm not taking anything away from 2006 where Arroyo was far better than Blanton. But Blanton in his first full season in the major leagues out produced Arroyo while Arroyo was likely at his peak.

We are trying to figure out what their value would be going forward. Since their track records are similar and Blanton is just entering his peak, its a good bet that Blanton will continue his current level of production while Arroyo would have a harder time sustaining his production. And last season might be good evidence we are already seeing some of that.

Thank you for looking past where we disagree and appreciating the conversation. I love the new angles and ideas you guys have brought to the table as well. Thanks.

OUReds
02-12-2008, 05:06 PM
I disagree. Three years ago Blanton was much better while Arroyo was likely at his peak and Blanton was still on the upward swing of the age curve. You mention age and say you appreciate its significance but then you discount it.

I think you are overplaying the age difference here. Arroyo is not so old as to expect a major decline in his numbers, and Blanton is not so young as to expect a major leap forward.




It seems the general consensus around here is that Blanton would be #3 "at best" on the Reds rotation. I simply was making an argument in defense of Blanton and his projected performance going forward. A good argument can be made that Blanton is a better bet to out produce Arroyo this season.

I think it more likely that they are about the same pitcher the next couple of years given the same stats. I guess neither of us are unbiased.




I disagree that Blanton would be a league average #3 pitcher. If we use VORP & FIP to determine his value an argument can be made that Blanton's performance level has been equivalent to a league average #2 pitcher. Arroyo would've been a staff ace in '06 in that same context. Blanton has a three year 38.9 VORP average. He was very lucky in '05 but as equally unlucky in '06. His '07 seems to be a good indicator of what his performance level will be from here on out. His peripherals (k/bb, hr/9, & FIP) have all gradually increased from his rookie season to now.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. Surely you understand our concern about the road splits. It is not just a one year phenomena, something that can be explained away by just luck. He would be switching from a very generous pitcher's park to a top ten hitters park. Certainly a lot of stats you presented are park adjusted, but some pitchers benefit from a home park more then average, and those splits make me think Blanton is just such a pitcher. I like Joe quite a bit, but in GAB I think he's #3 starter.



The injury nexus is a large factor, there's nothing slight about it. It's a factor until the age of 24. It does become less and less of risk the closer the pitcher gets to that benchmark, though. Cueto's body type also raises questions about long term sustained health as a SP.

That's the article I was referencing of course, and the key portion of the quote you cited is "of greatest concern for very young pitchers". a 22 year old pitcher is only about 5% more of an injury risk (Bailey) then average, while at 23 the increased risk is gone. Volquez is actually LESS of an injury risk. As I mentioned, Cueto is the only pitcher up for discussion that has is a significantly increased injury risk.



I think the A's could fairly require: 1 A level (Cueto/Bailey/Cueto) and 2 B levels (Maroney, Frazier(Frazie can be traded as a PTBNL), Stubbs) and maybe a UTIL middle infielder as well like: Keppinger.


I agree. However, if the price is 2 A prospects like some of the media sources are implying, I just don't see a deal getting done. Always hard to tell how much of those reports are posturing though. As a private opinion, I hope Stubbs isn't on the table. I like the idea of a plus plus defensive CFer being ready to step in for Bruce in a couple years time (moving him to RF of course).

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 05:12 PM
Here's some other interesting facts about Blanton:

There are just 6 AL pitchers who have thrown more IP with a better ERA+ than Blanton over the last 3 years:

Haren, Santana, Lackey, Sabathia, Buehrle, and Garland.

Blanton has averaged 36.8 VORP over the past 3 seasons. Prospectus has him projected for 19.0 VORP in 2008 (185 IP, 4.40 ERA). I think that's a bit low, but BP values that at about $8.5 million. That's quite a bargain at his current price.

He was very lucky his rookie year, but his peripherals have actually improved each season.

2005: 1.73 K:BB, 1.0 HR/9, 4.61 FIP
2006: 1.84 K:BB, 0.8 HR/9, 4.21 FIP (17th in AL)
2007: 3.50 K:BB, 0.6 HR/9, 3.46 FIP (6th in AL)

Blanton's never had any injury issues, he has a "durable frame," and he just threw 230 IP. He's as good a bet to be healthy and durable over the next few years as anyone, and he's a good bet to be better than average.

With a cheap salary this year, and with 2 cheap optional years remaining, Blanton should return a good deal more than just Votto or Cueto.

Credit goes to posters at Scouts.com (i linked to on going discussion in earlier part of this thread)

idriveabucket
02-12-2008, 05:23 PM
I think you are overplaying the age difference here. Arroyo is not so old as to expect a major decline in his numbers, and Blanton is not so young as to expect a major leap forward.





I think it more likely that they are about the same pitcher the next couple of years given the same stats. I guess neither of us are unbiased.





We'll have to agree to disagree here. Surely you understand our concern about the road splits. It is not just a one year phenomena, something that can be explained away by just luck. He would be switching from a very generous pitcher's park to a top ten hitters park. Certainly a lot of stats you presented are park adjusted, but some pitchers benefit from a home park more then average, and those splits make me think Blanton is just such a pitcher. I like Joe quite a bit, but in GAB I think he's #3 starter.




That's the article I was referencing of course, and the key portion of the quote you cited is "of greatest concern for very young pitchers". a 22 year old pitcher is only about 5% more of an injury risk (Bailey) then average, while at 23 the increased risk is gone. Volquez is actually LESS of an injury risk. As I mentioned, Cueto is the only pitcher up for discussion that has is a significantly increased injury risk.





I agree. However, if the price is 2 A prospects like some of the media sources are implying, I just don't see a deal getting done. Always hard to tell how much of those reports are posturing though. As a private opinion, I hope Stubbs isn't on the table. I like the idea of a plus plus defensive CFer being ready to step in for Bruce in a couple years time (moving him to RF of course).

I agree with a lot of this and can see your side as well. As they say: thats why they play the games :thumbup:

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 05:25 PM
What I think Blanton would give us at best is a 4.40 era with about 210 innings. The amount I want Blanton is greatly depending on the price.

wlf WV
02-12-2008, 06:03 PM
I would welcome Blanton,but not at a price above that given for Haren,the packages suggested by MLB ARE RIDICULOUS compared to the package recieved for Haren.It borders on extortion.

AmarilloRed
02-12-2008, 07:11 PM
What I think Blanton would give us at best is a 4.40 era with about 210 innings. The amount I want Blanton is greatly depending on the price.

He had a 3.95 ERA last year in Oakland, and we don't have the DH here. AL pitchers usually see their ERA go down when they move to the NL. I expect a rise, but not half a run.

AmarilloRed
02-12-2008, 07:28 PM
Daugherty said tonight that he hears it would only take Bailey, Roenicke , and a third prospect. On the other hand ,Buster Olney says the A's are only looking for low-A ballplayers. If the Yankees and Red Sox would only have to surrender low-A ballplayers, why should the Reds be any different?

fewfirstchoice
02-12-2008, 07:32 PM
Bailey, Roenicke, and a 3rd prospect why isnt the trdae already complete?

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 07:37 PM
Bailey, Roenicke, and a 3rd prospect why isnt the trdae already complete?

Because Bailey alone is way too much to give up.

757690
02-12-2008, 09:10 PM
Because Bailey alone is way too much to give up.

Agreed. In 08, I think Bailey will be just as good on the Reds staff as Blanton on the Reds staff, and very likely will be better in future years.

fewfirstchoice
02-12-2008, 10:13 PM
You guys that say Bailey is way to much to give up for Blanton are way off base on this.Bailey is a prospect that has done nothing in the big leagues so far.Does this mean he wont put up good numbers,NO.But Blanton has pitched over 200 innings twice in the bigs, he has a career ERA under 4.00, and he has won double digit games every year except his rookie year in the bigs.So you guys that say Blanton is worth Bailey by his self are just not understanding the game of baseball.You always 8 days a week would trade a unknown(Bailey) for a proven quality(Blanton).Now do I trade 2 of the big 4 for Blanton,No.But you trade one of Bailey, Cueto, or Votto for him and a couple prospects everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.If you can get a proven quality that gives you 4.00 era(or under), great control, and a ground ball pitcher to boot you have to pull the trigger.So a deal of Bailey, Roenicke, and someone else would work for both sides.Understand the game and wont your team to get better.

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 10:23 PM
Bruce hasnt done anything in the majors either :dunno:

fewfirstchoice
02-12-2008, 10:45 PM
Bruce and Bailey are just 2 totally different beast.Bruce is a player that has all the tools who probably has as high of a chance to be a star in the bigs as anyone ever has.Bailey is a guy like many many before him.He can throw his arm out and be done tomorrow.So why not trade him now and get something that has already been proven instead of waiting on something that may never happen.Also its not like the Reds havent got 3 or 4 other pitching prospects with just as a high ceiling as Bailey has.But the Reds have nothing even close to the talent as Bruce has.So tradeing Bailey can be hiddin with Cueto, Volquez, and Maloney.Theres no body to hide a Bruce trade.

fewfirstchoice
02-12-2008, 10:49 PM
BP I can tell your a fiesty one arent you. You always come back with a answer that is really trying to put the prior poster down in a way. Do you ever post anything nice to anyone here that doesnt agree with you.

But Im still for a Blanton trade.Trade one of Bailey,Cueto, or Votto and a prospect or 2 for him.Now what do ya say?

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 10:53 PM
3 or 4 with just as high of a ceiling as Bailey?

Bip Roberts
02-12-2008, 10:59 PM
BP I can tell your a fiesty one arent you. You always come back with a answer that is really trying to put the prior poster down in a way. Do you ever post anything nice to anyone here that doesnt agree with you.

But Im still for a Blanton trade.Trade one of Bailey,Cueto, or Votto and a prospect or 2 for him.Now what do ya say?
I have no idea what you are talking about with your 1st part.

The 2nd part I say absolutely not because I'm not that high on Blanton but id explore a trade for prospects who arent major league ready. Blanton isnt something I would enjoy trading for if the asking price is guys we have invested a lot of time into developing.

757690
02-12-2008, 11:06 PM
You guys that say Bailey is way to much to give up for Blanton are way off base on this.Bailey is a prospect that has done nothing in the big leagues so far.Does this mean he wont put up good numbers,NO.But Blanton has pitched over 200 innings twice in the bigs, he has a career ERA under 4.00, and he has won double digit games every year except his rookie year in the bigs.So you guys that say Blanton is worth Bailey by his self are just not understanding the game of baseball.You always 8 days a week would trade a unknown(Bailey) for a proven quality(Blanton).Now do I trade 2 of the big 4 for Blanton,No.But you trade one of Bailey, Cueto, or Votto for him and a couple prospects everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.If you can get a proven quality that gives you 4.00 era(or under), great control, and a ground ball pitcher to boot you have to pull the trigger.So a deal of Bailey, Roenicke, and someone else would work for both sides.Understand the game and wont your team to get better.

Would you trade Bailey for Jeff Weaver? He is a proven quality.

How about Jeff Weaver circa 2002. He had three years of 11, 13, and 11 wins, he had pitched 200 innings (199.6 in 2002) in those three years, and had ERA's of 4.32, 4.08 and 3.52. He also had pitched in a pitchers park (Detroit) and he was around the same age as Blanton. I think we all know what happened to his career, especially the year he was traded.

I know Weaver is a flyball pitcher but Blanton is not a groundball pitcher! He averages 45% of his balls in play as groundballs, and has a GB/FB rate of 1.03. Those numbers do not make him a gourndball pitcher.

He does have a low HR/9, but that can easily be explained by the park and division he pitches in. He also has a very high 23/9 which figures out how many doubles and triples he gives up. It is fair to assume that those doubles and triples he gives up in Oakland will turn into homers in GABP.

Basically, you can look at what he did in Oakland and say he will continue that production in Oakland, but all the stats say that he will not be nearly as good in GABP.
If you could convince me that Blanton will put up the same numbers he did in GABP that he did in Oakland, than definitely, trade Bailey and extras for him. Otherwise, I'll pass.

Stephenk29
02-12-2008, 11:16 PM
Interesting comparison with Weaver. Honestly if we were in this situation back then, I probably would have traded for him. That's kind of hindsight though, and its always possible that Blanton maintains where he is at. Of course he could fall off the map as well.

AmarilloRed
02-12-2008, 11:25 PM
Let's look at what both Blanton and Bailey would both give for us: Homer Bailey could reasonably be expected to give us 120-150 IP next year, 7-12 wins, and an ERA between 4.50 and 5.00. However, Bailey is young, be cheap for 3 years, and we have full control of him. Blanton is a #2 or 3 that can be expected to contribute right away. I fully expect 15 wins, a 4.25 ERA, and 200 IP from him if we were to trade for him. He is inexpensive right now, but I can see him getting big raises in arbitration the next 2 years. I think Blanton would help us more next year, but Bailey would help the Reds more down the road. Most of the A's forums are insisting on getting some combination of Bailey, Cueto, or Votto in return for Blanton. I like Blanton, but I think we could probably do better signing a free agent next year if that is the price.

OUReds
02-13-2008, 12:10 AM
Well if I knew he was going to turn out like Jeff Weaver, of course I wouldn't make the trade. But is that likely? No.

In another thread, I argued that just because Matt Belisle has had a season similar to Aaron Harang while developing, it doesn't mean it is LIKELY that Matt Belisle will turn out to be Aaron Harang. The same thing applies here. Just because Jeff Weaver may have a superficialy similar season to Blanton at around the same age, it doesn't mean it is likely that Blanton ends up like Weaver. The improvement that Harang showed in his development is as atypical as Weaver showed in his regression. Such comparisons are futile.

Is there a risk that Blanton has a severe injury or implodes? As with any pitcher, there absolutely is that risk. I can also say with certainty that there is a higher chance that Blanton will post solid middle of the rotation numbers then Homer Bailey will next year, and that Homer Bailey is a higher injury risk then Joe Blanton short term (see the references to the injury nexus article earlier in the post).

A couple other points while I am on a roll. You say that his low HR/9 stats can be explained by the Colliseum and his Division. Blanton's HR/9 rate at home over the past three years is .77, an excellent rate. However, his Away rate over the past three years is .84, also excellent. It looks to me as if Blanton is able to keep the ball in the park regardless of where he is pitching. If that is the case, he might be EXACTLY the type of pitcher we need at GAB, since its large park factor is due almost entirely on its inflated HR tendencies (GAB actually supresses hits overall, ranking 20/30 parks last year).

As far as his Division, the Angels, Mariners, and Rangers all outscored the Red's last year and were at or above the league average in runs scored. In the NL Central, the Cubs, Cardinals, Astros, and Pirates were all below league average in runs scored. Blanton would get a HUGE boost by getting out of the AL West and into our sad sack of a division.

The more I look at it, the more I think Blanton could post a 4.20-4.30 200 IP season in GAB, and if he could do that for the next three years..... we would certainly be onto something.

Joe Blanton is right now what what Homer Bailey is likely to be eventually, an above average middle of the rotation starter. I understand there is a risk that Bailey turns into an ace and that we "lose" the deal, but it's equally likely that he doesn't develop at all or gets hurt. If Bailey and extras can get this deal done, I do it every day of the week.

idriveabucket
02-13-2008, 12:24 AM
Great post.

757690
02-13-2008, 12:31 AM
Well if I knew he was going to turn out like Jeff Weaver, of course I wouldn't make the trade. But is that likely? No.

In another thread, I argued that just because Matt Belisle has had a season similar to Aaron Harang while developing, it doesn't mean it is LIKELY that Matt Belisle will turn out to be Aaron Harang. The same thing applies here. Just because Jeff Weaver may have a superficialy similar season to Blanton at around the same age, it doesn't mean it is likely that Blanton ends up like Weaver. The improvement that Harang showed in his development is as atypical as Weaver showed in his regression. Such comparisons are futile.

Is there a risk that Blanton has a severe injury or implodes? As with any pitcher, there absolutely is that risk. I can also say with certainty that there is a higher chance that Blanton will post solid middle of the rotation numbers then Homer Bailey will next year, and that Homer Bailey is a higher injury risk then Joe Blanton short term (see the references to the injury nexus article earlier in the post).

A couple other points while I am on a roll. You say that his low HR/9 stats can be explained by the Colliseum and his Division. Blanton's HR/9 rate at home over the past three years is .77, an excellent rate. However, his Away rate over the past three years is .84, also excellent. It looks to me as if Blanton is able to keep the ball in the park regardless of where he is pitching. If that is the case, he might be EXACTLY the type of pitcher we need at GAB, since it's inflated park factor is due almost entirely on its inflated HR tendencies (GAB actually supresses hits overall, ranking 20/30 parks last year).

As far as his Division, the Angels, Mariners, and Rangers all outscored the Red's last year and were at or above the league average in runs scored. In the NL Central, the Cubs, Cardinals, Astros, and Pirates were all below league average in runs scored. Blanton would get a HUGE boost by getting out of the AL West and into our sad sack of a division.

The more I look at it, the more I think Blanton could post a 4.20-4.30 200 IP season in GAB, and if he could do that for the next three years..... we would certainly be onto something.

Joe Blanton is right now what what Homer Bailey is likely to be eventually, an above average middle of the rotation starter. I understand there is a risk that that Bailey turns into an ace and that we "lose" the deal, but it's equally likely that he doesn't develop at all or gets hurt. If Bailey and extras can get this deal done, I do it every day of the week.

First I compared the first three years of Weaver and Blanton, not just one year. Big difference. Now I am not saying that Blanton will turn out like Weaver, there are a lot of other differences between them, specifically he stuff between their ears, but I am just pointing out how difficult it is to predict the future, especially with pitchers.

Also, his home vs. away stats only tell part of the story. Outside of pitching in parks within his division, he had a 1.04 HR/9in ratio and in "hitter's parks" he had a 1.33. If I am not mistaken, GABP is not just a hitter's park, it is one of the most, if not the most, hitter friendly parks in the majors.

I think AmarilloRed summed it best with his last post. That is the decision. Will Blanton in 08 justify giving up a potential ace will be cheap for three more years? His numbers to me say probably not.

757690
02-13-2008, 12:36 AM
Great post.

Well OUReds, you won over the A's fan. Good job! ;)

idriveabucket
02-13-2008, 12:39 AM
I'm admittedly partial, but I try to be as objective as possible. It's part of my nature, especially as a passionate student of the game.

757690
02-13-2008, 12:42 AM
I'm admittedly partial, but I try to be as objective as possible. It's part of my nature, especially as a passionate student of the game.

I think it is great you are here, makes things interesting, brings new perspectives. I was just joshing OUReds, hope I didn't offend you.

OUReds
02-13-2008, 12:52 AM
If your point is that Blanton will give up more home runs at GAB then in Oakland, then you are undoubtably correct.

If your point is that he will go from well above average in keeping the ball in the park to below average adjusting for park factors, then I disagree.

if your criterea for obtaining pitchers is that they post "the same numbers... in GABP that he did in Oakland", then we'll never aquire another pitcher. :)

fewfirstchoice
02-13-2008, 01:07 AM
Didnt mean to offend you BP just the way I have taken your posts.

Secondly Jeff Weaver is hardly a proven commoity.Blanton is 100 times the pitcher Weaver is or excuse me ever were.Weaver has never threw 200 innings in a year.He has never had the control Blanton has.ANd he most defently is not a ground ball pitcher like JB is.JW is a terrible example to put beside JB.

BLEEDS
02-13-2008, 01:20 AM
Anybody who thinks Bailey or Cueto would post "similar numbers to Blanton" or anywhere NEAR a 5.0x ERA or under, in 2008, is REALLY drinking the Kool-Aid...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

757690
02-13-2008, 01:26 AM
Didnt mean to offend you BP just the way I have taken your posts.

Secondly Jeff Weaver is hardly a proven commoity.Blanton is 100 times the pitcher Weaver is or excuse me ever were.Weaver has never threw 200 innings in a year.He has never had the control Blanton has.ANd he most defently is not a ground ball pitcher like JB is.JW is a terrible example to put beside JB.


1) Jeff Weaver has thrown 200+ innings four times in his career, 2000, 2001, 2004 and 2005. He threw 199.6 in 2002.

2) At the same point in their careers after their first three full seasons), Jeff Weaver was very similar to Joe Blanton. I might even say Weaver was better, due to his K's. Just look at the stats.

3) Joe Blanton is not a groundball pitcher. Just look at the stats in my post. Clear as day.

4) I was only comparing them to show that even pitchers as "established" as Joe Blanton are not guarantees.

757690
02-13-2008, 01:31 AM
Anybody who thinks Bailey or Cueto would post "similar numbers to Blanton" or anywhere NEAR a 5.0x ERA or under, in 2008, is REALLY drinking the Kool-Aid...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Wanna bet? Either Bailey or Cueto or both will have an ERA below 5 in 08 if they are in the bigs for most of the season. I'll bet that all day.

Also the comparison between Bailey/Cueto and Blanton is if Blanton is pitching in GABP.

OUReds
02-13-2008, 01:31 AM
In fairness, the league average for GB is about 42%, so Blanton is a slight groundball pitcher, just not an extreme one.

Now I'm curious about Blanton's HR rates in different situations. I'll edit the information into this post in a bit...

Edit 1: I'd take you up on that bet all day also. I doubt Homer for the season is below a 5 ERA. On average, a sub 5 ERA is pushing into middle of the rotation catagory, and I just don't see Bailey ready to make that leap his rookie year.

Edit 2:

Assume an average pitcher gives up about 1 HR/9 innings.
HR PF = Home Run Park Factor

At Home
-3 year HR PF .843 (.786 .852 .890)
-3 year HR/9 .771 (27 HR in 315.3 IP)

VS AL East/Central
-2007 HR PF 1.049
-2007 HR/9 1.04 (per above post)

I don't know your source for what is a "hitter's ballpark", so I can't check those numbers' exactly. The only HR positive park that has anything resembling an adequate sample size over the past 3 years is Ameriquest Field in Arlington.

Ameriquest Field
-3 year HR PF 1.110 (1.000 1.066 1.263)
-3 year HR/9 .872 (4 HR 41.3 IP)

Blanton is above average in every one of these comparisons. Obviously he is going to give up more HRs at GAB then elsewhere (GAB's HR PF averaged over the last 3 years is a frightening 1.296), but I don't see any evidence that he will give up an above average number of home runs just from moving to GAB.

Bip Roberts
02-13-2008, 01:33 AM
Someone needs to find out how many foul ball outs Blanton records. Im sure the stat is out there some where or just needs some multiplication of a couple stats.

BLEEDS
02-13-2008, 10:42 AM
Wanna bet? Either Bailey or Cueto or both will have an ERA below 5 in 08 if they are in the bigs for most of the season. I'll bet that all day.

Also the comparison between Bailey/Cueto and Blanton is if Blanton is pitching in GABP.

That's the rub. I doubt Cueto even plays ONE game in the Majors in 2008.

Bailey won't post a MLB ERA under 5.0 in 2008, in all his starts - no disclaimers for "most of the season". ANY and ALL games he plays in the bigs in 2008. I'll take that bet, and believe me I'll be more than glad to be wrong, I just don't think I will be.

We'll go double or nothing if Blanton is traded to the Reds, I'll say he posts an ERA under 4.4.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
02-13-2008, 11:02 AM
3) Joe Blanton is not a groundball pitcher. Just look at the stats in my post. Clear as day.

Not sure where you get your stats from, but G/F is the stat that most people in baseball use.

Miscellaneous Pitching
SEASON TEAM 2B 3B RBI SH SF IBB HB WP BK SB CS IR IS GDP GB FB G/F
2004 Oak 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 9 9 1.00
2005 Oak 42 4 80 2 7 3 5 4 2 8 1 0 0 15 288 251 1.15
2006 Oak 50 4 96 3 9 4 5 3 0 13 5 0 0 20 294 254 1.16
2007 Oak 42 4 90 5 8 4 4 3 1 19 4 0 0 22 361 229 1.58
Total -- 136 12 270 10 24 11 14 10 3 40 11 2 0 57 952 743 1.28

His 2007 totals, would have put him in the top 25 of ALL Major League pitchers with over 120 innings pitched (assumed that would make them primarily starters).

PEACE

-BLEEDS

wlf WV
02-13-2008, 12:16 PM
I feel like its Chistmas eve and the only Cabbage Patch left is priced 3 times MSRP.

AmarilloRed
02-13-2008, 12:51 PM
Anybody who thinks Bailey or Cueto would post "similar numbers to Blanton" or anywhere NEAR a 5.0x ERA or under, in 2008, is REALLY drinking the Kool-Aid...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I happen to like Kool-Aid, and I will take that bet. I see him putting up an ERA between 4.50 and 4.75 in 2008.:KoolAid:

BLEEDS
02-13-2008, 12:57 PM
I feel like its Chistmas eve and the only Cabbage Patch left is priced 3 times MSRP.

Well, when all you have is Garbage Pail Kids, you might actually think it was worth the asking price...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

757690
02-13-2008, 02:38 PM
Not sure where you get your stats from, but G/F is the stat that most people in baseball use.

Miscellaneous Pitching
SEASON TEAM 2B 3B RBI SH SF IBB HB WP BK SB CS IR IS GDP GB FB G/F
2004 Oak 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 9 9 1.00
2005 Oak 42 4 80 2 7 3 5 4 2 8 1 0 0 15 288 251 1.15
2006 Oak 50 4 96 3 9 4 5 3 0 13 5 0 0 20 294 254 1.16
2007 Oak 42 4 90 5 8 4 4 3 1 19 4 0 0 22 361 229 1.58
Total -- 136 12 270 10 24 11 14 10 3 40 11 2 0 57 952 743 1.28

His 2007 totals, would have put him in the top 25 of ALL Major League pitchers with over 120 innings pitched (assumed that would make them primarily starters).

PEACE

-BLEEDS

A true groundball pitcher is generally one that has around a 2.00 GB/FB ratio. Brandon Webb and Derek Lowe have ones closer to 4.00 which gives you an idea of what a real groundball pitchers is.
Blanton's 2007 totals look like an anomaly compared to the rest of his career. The 1.28 career total is a little better than league average, and the 1.15 and 1.16 he had in his first two years is a little below league average.

Anyway, I use the percentage of all balls put into play, since there are pop ups, and line drives to consider. It just seems more accurate. His career percentage is 45%, which is just a tad better than the league average. A true ground ball pitcher is around 55%.

Blanton is not a true groundball pitcher. He seems to be right around league average in that category.

OUReds
02-13-2008, 03:12 PM
Well, no, he isn't Lowe or Webb, but last year he would have posted the best G/F ratio of anyone on the projected staff by a large margin.

Arroyo .83
Harang 1.00
Volquez 1.00
Matt Belisle 1.11
Bailey 1.32
Blanton 1.58

Caveman Techie
02-13-2008, 03:20 PM
A true groundball pitcher is generally one that has around a 2.00 GB/FB ratio. Brandon Webb and Derek Lowe have ones closer to 4.00 which gives you an idea of what a real groundball pitchers is.
Blanton's 2007 totals look like an anomaly compared to the rest of his career. The 1.28 career total is a little better than league average, and the 1.15 and 1.16 he had in his first two years is a little below league average.

Anyway, I use the percentage of all balls put into play, since there are pop ups, and line drives to consider. It just seems more accurate. His career percentage is 45%, which is just a tad better than the league average. A true ground ball pitcher is around 55%.

Blanton is not a true groundball pitcher. He seems to be right around league average in that category.

I think your definition of a ground ball pitcher is a little too strict. Your taking some of the best ground ball pitchers to compare him to.

I look at it more along the lines a breakdown when he does give up a hit what are the odds that it will be a ground ball vs. a Flyball? If the stats say that more often than 50% of the time it is a groundball then I categorize that pitcher as a ground ball pitcher. Maybe it's a little simplistic but it works for me. :)

BLEEDS
02-13-2008, 03:25 PM
A true groundball pitcher is generally one that has around a 2.00 GB/FB ratio. Brandon Webb and Derek Lowe have ones closer to 4.00 which gives you an idea of what a real groundball pitchers is.
Blanton's 2007 totals look like an anomaly compared to the rest of his career. The 1.28 career total is a little better than league average, and the 1.15 and 1.16 he had in his first two years is a little below league average.

Anyway, I use the percentage of all balls put into play, since there are pop ups, and line drives to consider. It just seems more accurate. His career percentage is 45%, which is just a tad better than the league average. A true ground ball pitcher is around 55%.

Blanton is not a true groundball pitcher. He seems to be right around league average in that category.

You really need to do your homework there, you are using some CRAZY numbers. According to you, only 13 pitchers (with over 120 IP) in 2007 in ALL OF BASEBALL are ground ball pitchers.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

757690
02-13-2008, 03:34 PM
Well, no, he isn't Lowe or Webb, but last year he would have posted the best G/F ratio of anyone on the projected staff by a large margin.

Arroyo .83
Harang 1.00
Volquez 1.00
Matt Belisle 1.11
Bailey 1.32
Blanton 1.58

That's like saying he is one of the best model citizens on the Bengals. :D

757690
02-13-2008, 03:41 PM
You really need to do your homework there, you are using some CRAZY numbers. According to you, only 13 pitchers (with over 120 IP) in 2007 in ALL OF BASEBALL are ground ball pitchers.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I'd say that is about right, that there are only around 15 true groundball pitchers in the majors. I am defining a true groundball pitcher as one who batters can't seem to get on top of and continually pound the ball into the ground. Remember, most teams love strike out pitchers, so very few groundball pitchers make it. I think Hardball Times or some place like that said that there were 18 groundball pitchers in the majors.

I agree that if a guy throws more groundballs than anything else, he is a groundball pitcher of some sort, but Blanton isn't even one of those. 45% GB career.

OUReds
02-13-2008, 03:43 PM
Umm, top 25% of all starters last year? More Groundballs then Flyballs?

I can only assume that Blanton stole your girlfriend at this point ;)

Bip Roberts
02-13-2008, 03:48 PM
Am I wrong or something but GB/FB doesnt include foul balls right?

RSNtransplant
02-13-2008, 09:32 PM
Am I wrong or something but GB/FB doesnt include foul balls right?

fair or foul a fly is a fly, Ratio doesn't count line drives(as a fly) or bunts(as a grounder).

Bip Roberts
02-13-2008, 09:57 PM
fair or foul a fly is a fly, Ratio doesn't count line drives(as a fly) or bunts(as a grounder).

Alright then