Oddly enough, this might be a better short-term move than long-term. Casey Kotchman's mysterious ailment (that's not the first time nor is it the last time you'll be hearing that phrase over the course of Kotchman's career) could keep him out for only a couple of days, but it could possibly knock him out for the rest of the year. For a contender, Morales isn't a terrible roll of the dice. Next year, I still don't see where he's going to play. Juan Rivera should be back in 2008, and I don't see any of Kotchman, Vlad Guerrero, Garret Anderson or Gary Matthews Jr. going anywhere. As far as Morales' numbers go, he seems to have sacrificed a little power for a little average at Salt Lake. I'm not sure this is what I'd want from my first baseman; the idea of Hal Morris v.2008 in my lineup doesn't do it for me. Morales doesn't walk much, but no one in the Angels organization does; it seems to be against their value system.
Jack Hannahan $5.
Hannahan is the Oakland A's kind of player. He walks a lot and strikes out a lot, he's a grizzled minor leaguer, and he hasn't gotten a real chance to succeed yet. He's a short-term pick-up only - Eric Chavez isn't going anywhere - but Hannahan could provide some value down the stretch this year for a Roto contender. He didn't flash a lot of power in the minors (13 HR in 336 AB), but he already has two dingers so far so the A's.
J.R. House $4
It is a completely open question as to how much playing time J.R. House will steal from Ramon Hernandez down the stretch. The Orioles should be thinking back-up here, and House would certainly be an upgrade over Paul Bako in 2008. He could be a marginal upgrade for a contender in the last month, but that's about it.
Radhames Liz $3
Liz put up absolutely dominant numbers for Double-A Bowie. However, the high walk rate and the borderline HR rate tells me that he'd have a hard time if the Orioles let him go out there every fifth day down the stretch. I like Liz a lot long-term, but by that I mean 2010 or 2011. Still, Liz is someone to watch if he does get trotted out there for the Orioles every fifth day, as he has the raw stuff to prove me very, very wrong. Come September 1, the Orioles should probably toss Liz out there every fifth day, as opposed to throwing out the carcass of...
Steve Trachsel $2
Alex Patton once remarked that Steve Trachsel's last name sounds like "a strange throat disease." If you play in a 12-team A.L. only league, you probably know the pain of Trachsel. No one should own him, regardless of the match-up or his history against right-handed heavy line-ups or what he does on the third Tuesday in September since 1998. But own him someone will, and it will most likely be a contender. Worse yet, if you aren't paying attention, you might think that Trachsel has actually been serviceable this year, and that his OPS against is a sign of a pitcher who is pitching above his ERA/WHIP. However, his 2.81 K/IP ratio is a sign that he's finished, and that the stats haven't caught up to this reality yet. Do not pick up Steve Trachsel, even if you're 0.5 up in ERA and 0.30 up in WHIP and are "untouchable" in those categories. With Trachsel, you can smell the blood on the water, and can feel the possibility of a 1/3 IP 10 ER outing in the marrow of your bones. As Woody Allen did in Love and Death, pursue a course of "active fleeing".
UPDATE: Toz asked me to add the following: In his last 5 starts (Boston twice, Minnesota, Toronto, and Seattle), he is: 1-1, 32 IP, 35 H, 9 ER, 2 HR, 13 BB, 8 K, 57 GB/38 FB (1.5 G/F), 2.53 ERA, 1.500 WHIP.
UPDATE #2: Actually, Trachsel is up against the Devil Rays. The same Devil Rays that pounded Baltimore for 15 runs on Tuesday night. Good luck with that.
Ryan Bowen $1. Other bid $1.
Bowen looks like a career back-up catcher. He's hardly played for the A's, even though they shouldn't be riding young Kurt Suzuki they way they rode grizzled veteran Jason Kendall. Do not bid.
Kevin Cash $1.
Cash's offensive output makes Ryan Bowen look like Victor Martinez. He will keep getting cups of coffee because of his defensive prowess. If he's lucky, he'll fall ass backwards into a back-up gig and float around for 4-5 years. Again, do not bid.
Jhonny Peralta. Claimed by 12th, 6th, 2nd and 1st place teams.
Funny story. The owner who waived Peralta was caught in a salary cap squeeze and needed to clear up $10 of salary so that he could activate Phil Hughes. If it were me, I would have waived Scot Shields, but this owner nuked Peralta instead. Peralta is a Roto free agent at the end of the year, so the guy in 12th really has no business claiming him; he can't even say that claiming Peralta would increase his chances at a better draft pick he's so far behind. This is one of the rare rules that has always needed fixing that has never been fixed: how do you stop a team that's out of it from picking up players who clearly have no value for them for next year?
Alan Embree. Claimed by 11th place team.
Embree's value is pretty limited by the fact that Huston Street has been lights out since returning to the closer role and the fact that the A's don't seem to generate many vulture opportunities. As the guy who benefited from Embree's successful run at closer, I can't complain. Kudos to the A's for ignoring the stupidity of conventional wisdom and putting a guy in the role who critics would have said didn't have a "9th inning mentality." Check out Embree's numbers from 2002-2007. Except for 2005, he's been a pretty solid option for his major league teams, and we all probably should have seen his success coming. Unfortunately, we all fall prey to "conventional wisdom", and tend to be afraid of guys like Embree instead of embracing them. I, too, fell into this trap, as I was afraid of Embree as my closer and not happy with him. Every save was nail-biting, but it needn't have been.
Joey Gathright. Claimed by 8th, 6th and 5th place teams.
Another funny story. The owner in first traded a draft pick for a $25 Joey Gathright, knowing that he might not be able to add Gathright to his squad due to salary cap issues. Sure enough, Gathright had to be waived last week. Who should pick him up but the owner who traded him?
Now Gathright won't be worth $25 next year. But, if the Royals do decide to start him, he'll be an interesting call on Auction Day. He needs to walk more; his batting eye at Omaha was much better than it has been in Kansas City, and Gathright's batting average won't hold up if he keeps walking as infrequently as he has been. Still, if Gathright can hit even .280 or so in the majors, his jackrabbit speed will give him tons of value. If I had to throw out a bid for next year, I'd think $17. High risk, high reward.
Joaquin Benoit. Claimed by 2nd place and 1st place teams.
Benoit has managed to do the impossible: not only survive, but thrive as a fly ball reliever in Texas. Benoit is a great example of how ERAs fluctuate but interior pitching numbers stay virtually the same, especially for relievers. The final piece of his game was keeping the walks down, and he's done that this year. Somehow, he's vultured seven wins on a very bad team. Of course, that's because the starters don't go very deep into their games, so Benoit always has a chance at a win if he enters into a close game.
4 comments:
HAHAHA - if Mike were only a casual, disinterested observer when it comes to Trachsel. I have watched the pained expressions on Mike's face in both the AL and the NL, and, somehow, until a couple of years ago, he always seemed to own him for part or all of a year.
Seriously, though, Trachsel is not a good play for the rest of the season. For one start against the Royals, however, given his ability to keep the ball in the yard lately, I figured I would take a shot. Given I also have Santana, Haren, Jered Weaver, Bonderman and Bedard, and I'm locked in a wins battle, what the hell.
I'll let you know last week how lunch felt coming back up.
As for my claim on Jhonny Peralta this week (yes, I’m the idiot in last place in Mike and Toz’ AL league), I was just sick of Zobrist's dead spot at SS. Josh Barfield (S2 $25) and Joey Gathright (FA $25) were also available on waivers this week. At those prices, Barfield and Gathright have the same probability of being on my roster next year as anyone with an expiring contract -- would claiming either of them have been reason to suggest a rule change? As I replied to Toz after he emailed me to complain about my claim on Peralta, “Peralta as an O is a better option for next year than Josh Barfield.”
Joking aside, consider a rule like this:
Only teams that meet one of the following criteria may claim players with expiring contracts after DATE M:
(1) teams in fourth place or better can claim any players with O contracts
(2) teams within X points of fourth place can claim any players with O contracts
(3) teams within A in HR of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind them in HR, within B in RBI of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind them in RBI, C in SB of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind them in SB, or within D points of AVG of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind them in AVG, that are also within Y points of the team immediately ahead or behind them in the overall standings may claim non-pitchers with O contracts
(4) teams within E in W of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind of them in W, within F in SV of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind of them in SV, G in ERA of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind of them in ERA, or within H points of WHIP of the team(s) immediately ahead or behind of them in WHIP, that are also within Z points of the team immediately ahead or behind of them in the overall standings may claim pitchers with O contracts
Of course, the above rules don’t cover all of the possible scenarios – teams can trade draft picks, so the effect of moving up or down in the standings might not have any impact on a team’s draft position. A team could also want another team to move up or down in the standings after acquiring draft picks from them, and therefore have an incentive to affect a team other than their own with waiver claims. A team could also simply be afraid of the draft acumen of another team, and want that team to draft as low as possible regardless of the direct impact on their own picks. Teams might also want to move down in the standings, if they decide that having the first overall draft pick is preferable to finishing in fourth place, or if they perceive some value in improving their waiver position.
I realize that the last place team in our league (which, yes, belongs to me, because I’m the worst roto player ever, obviously) couldn’t possibly move anywhere in the standings with the waiver acquisition of Jhonny Peralta in late August, but prohibiting such a move would require a massive amount of rules changes to account for all of the possible, and legitimate, motivations a team might have for making a waiver claim. The values of A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, X, Y, and Z would also have to be determined. DATE M would also be a point of contention, and a tiered system (i.e., within ten points of the money in the overall standings from August 1 thorough August 31 or five points of the money in the overall standings after August 31) would be even more complicated. As most experienced roto players know, one team’s definition of, “in contention,” or, “out of it,” can vary wildly from another team’s definition, with neither definition being wrong – this could lead to some knock-down, drag-out brawls over limits and definitions before the rule is implemented, and even more strife the first time a team misses one of the cutoffs by 1 RBI or 0.002 points of WHIP.
My point is this: a team with no chance of moving either way in the standings, whether they’re going for this year, next year, or beyond, should be able to claim anyone they want on waivers. It’s not some Inalienable Roto Right or anything, it’s just that legislating against such moves would be unfeasible, creating more problems than it would solve. There will always be cases where Team X makes a move that would have no effect in its own fortunes but has a significant impact on the fortunes of Team Y, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. It’s just part of roto, like getting lucky with a $1 auction endgame pitcher, having half of your Auction Day roster on the reserve list by the end of April, or having your offer of 500 cents on the dollar rebuffed by an owner who has a man-crush on one of the players he would have to move.
Since I see my name, I'll throw in my $.02 for what it is worth.
The issue as I see it is whether a 12th place team (or, frankly, an 11th or 10th or 9th place team) has the right to claim an expiring contract on waivers after the trading deadline.
The obvious answer is: sure, why not? But is the analysis really that simple. Let's play this out for a moment.
Peralta goes unclaimed by anyone in the bottom 6 of the league. At $10, he is an attractive waiver claim for any of the top 6 teams, as he fits under the salary cap with minimal fuss. In the current standings, assume that the 5th place team picks up Peralta. It also happens that the 5th place team is a mere 10 RBI behind the 2nd place team in RBI. Team 5th place catches Team 2nd place in RBI, giving Team 1st place a one point advantage in the overall standings.
Every move made during the year has some impact, and it is not a bunch of existential crap as some may suggest. There is no reason, dead spot or not, for a last place team with no hope of improving draft standing, to claim an "O" under any circumstances. Look at it from the perspective of Team 5th place...he just lost a point in the standings trying to catch Team 4th place and holding off Team 6th place for the 1st pick in the draft.
Matt makes some interesting ideas as to how to cure/solve/address this issue. More discussion on that later.
But in the end, I think you want every team trying to do well, even if that team is no longer in contention. It makes for a more lively and competitive race at the top of the standings if the teams at the bottom are still fighting, however hopelessly. (Why should a good player on waivers be free to the top teams late in the year when that same player would have drawn lots of bids early on?)
When I have a contending team, what I find FAR more frustrating is when a team at the bottom has completely stopped paying attention and THAT has an impact on the race. (Say, they're not even bothering to replace a bunch of DL'd players, which leads them to lose ground to a contending team in counting-stats categories.)
The best way to avoid collusion issues is for the teams at the bottom to 1) make strategic moves for next year. 2) continue to compete for this year, so long as it doesn't interfere with #1.
Post a Comment