News from here.
All I can say is, I’m glad the Giants nabbed their World Title when they did.
14 comments
I think the Phillies will have a couple of decent years - though I believe the loss of Werth will hurt them much more than their stats will show. No insult to Domonic Brown, but Werth was the one Philly hitter who really could hit in the clutch. Another World Series is of course always possible, but with their payroll so heavily loaded on 32+ year old pitchers, I think there's a 50% chance that there will be significant DL time for one or more of the 'aces' in the next 2 years, rising to guaranteed in the 3rd and 4th years. If Philly doesn't win another World Series in the next 2 years, heads are going to roll. Equally so the Nationals with Werth, the Red Sox with Crawford, and the White Sox with Dunn. Werth is better than his stats indicate, but equally he isn't a Bonds type hitter that can carry a team. Crawford is also a fine contributor from a Sabermetric standpoint, but what little I've seen of him indicates a Juan Pierre type contribution - nice but itself isn't going to raise the bar. And Dunn - fine strikeout/homer guy, but again not going to carry any team. Mark my words, this year will be the pinnacle of Sabermetric General Management. It will be all downhill from here.
Hi, folks... The Phillies had a great rotation already. They've added a bit to it with the signing of Lee. But they added to it with a guy we beat twice in the World Series. So they beefed up a bit with a guy we've proven we can get to, even when the games mean the most. While a concern, to be sure, it ain't the end of the world. Go Giants.
Hi, welcome! >> But they added to it with a guy we beat twice in the World Series. So they beefed up a bit with a guy we’ve proven we can get to, even when the games mean the most. Beating Cliff Lee in the World Series twice means next to nothing. He's a top five pitcher in baseball right now. The World Series was great, but lets not let it go to our heads -- it's the smallest of samples.
I wouldn't worry about Halladay breaking down, but the rest of their team faces serious injury risk, whether it's Utley's history, or Rollins'. Maybe it's just because of my personal struggles with my back, but no ball player with back issues seems to ever entirely kick it, which makes me wonder about Lee. You may recall Kevin Brown falling apart as a pitcher as a result of nagging back pain. Eric Chavez essentially fell out of baseball for years because of his back, and Joe Crede continues to have issues. I'm not claiming that I know about the complexities of Lee's back, but I would be concerned especially given the 5 year deal. I agree with the notion that this is an intimidating team, but more significantly we'll have to see how injuries impact the team. It's an older group. Setting that aside, as a fan of good pitching rather than throwing, it will be an interesting team to watch. I don't know why anyone would be fearful. I look forward to good pitching match-ups, and seeing how the Giants did this post season, I don't think Timmy and Cain will be intimidated.
Courtesy of Blake Rhodes: Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, Roy Oswalt and Cole Hamels combined for a 2-5 WL record with a 4.18 ERA in 8 post-season appearances vs the Giants. Cody Ross in 25 at bats against those 4, hit .329. 8H, 5R, 3 2B, 3HR, 6RBIs Our starters are as great if not better still, but the pen is the difference maker and ours is still far superior.
Why so gloom and doom? The Giants beat Halladay, Oswalt, Hamels and then Lee, plus they did all this with what was described as the worst offense to ever win a world series. This sounds painful now, and yes the Phils are pretty much punched in for a playoff spot, but they are just names in the playoffs. Unless they all group together to form a huge Voltron pitching machine, I think the baseball world will survive.
I don't think anyone is doom and gloom -- but it's a very impressive rotation. It's better than what the Giants have, which isn't to knock the Giants, but to praise the Phils rotation.
Absolutely it is an impressive rotation, but I think we will agree to disagree on which team has the better rotation. I don't value Cliff Lee nearly as high as most, or perhaps you do, which may be why I see the Giants as a bit better.
Absolutely we would be questioning Lincecum but the difference is that Lincecum is 6 years younger (6!) than Lee which is roughly 1250 innings of work less. Lee has to be questioned because of what is in front of him-father time. Lincecum has so much time in front of him before he gets to where Lee is, so the argument against him would have to be tempered. You have two pitchers approaching their prime with a really good body of work behind them (Lincecum/Cain) vs. two pitchers past their prime with an excellent body of work behind them (Halladay/Lee). It just seems we are constantly caught in the moment and powered by numbers as an absolute measurement of future potential. Lee and Hamels are as big of question marks to me as Sanchez and Bumgarner. Again, the difference being that I value ability/potential much more than ability/history. I am much more inclined to say that Halladay & Oswalt are the backbone of that rotation than to include Lee as one of the top two. I saw Lee and Hamels as extremely shaky and that is how I view Sanchez (especially) and Bumgarner in 2011. To me it is a horse race as I said, but the edge goes to the Giants based on age and an increased amount of potential. I know Otis wants to make this a Giants fan vs. Phillies fan argument but its not. This is a baseball argument, at least from me.
I really don't see any reason to think that Lee is going to fall off a cliff in his age 32 season. Even if you use an aging adjustment for WAR -- say, knocking off .5 wins per year -- he's still probably a 6 win pitcher next year. Again, the WS was awesome, but beating Lee twice (twice!) really doesn't tell us anything. It's a trap to try and read too much into 2 WS losses. Would we be saying the same thing about Lincecum if the Rangers beat him twice?
I agree with you and the numbers over the past 3 seasons show he has been a really good pitcher. Do I think that he will (at age 32) move past his peak years (28-31) and see the same level of performance, absolutely not. The numbers that you pulled reflect history and history also tells me that the Phillies will see Lee's diminishing returns over the next 2-3 years while paying for his prime. It may be good enough to get them to a WS but I don't think he will be a top 5 pitcher anymore. I think what we saw in the world series was a pitcher who was exposed after a long postseason at age 31. You say it is a small sample, but compared to the previous years WS he wasn't even close to the same pitcher and against a worse offense.
From 2008-2010, WAR leaderboard for starters at FanGraphs Roy Halladay, 21.3 wins Cliff Lee, 20.9 wins Tim Lincecum, 20.8 wins I'm wondering: How do much do you value Lee? He's been one of the best pitchers in baseball for the past 3 years.
Have to be impressed with the Phillies management and owners to ante up for Lee, which looks like a direct response to the Giants impressive pitching rotation shown in the NLCS. What a rotation they will have now, question is whether the Giants, or anyone else in the NL can respond.