Add new comment

I love most of Shandler's stuff - and for the most part he's on target with tons of stuff.  But, I gotta note that I am annoyed every time I see him cite BABIP% followed immediately by strand%.  It makes it "sound" like there are two different things being measured, and both agree with each other.  IMO, they are largely measuring the same thing.  In all honesty, I cannot recall an instance where Shandler noted the two NOT agreeing.
If you're allowing a 33% BABIP **OF COURSE** your strand percentage is going to be bad, (unless you're fanning 18/9).  I would be interested to see cases where the two diverge, as that 'might' reveal something, (though I have no idea what).
That said, Shandler also assumes league average defense behind every pitcher.  He cites the .270 BABIP for Aardsma - with the implication that he was egregiously lucky, and that couldn't possibly continue.  Well, the BABIP for the entire Seattle staff was .274.  So, it's not a reach to say Aardsma's .270 BABIP was driven, not by luck, but by having the best defense in all of baseball behind him every day. 
==========
Overall, however, I agree that the trade for League was a brilliant hedge bet on Aardsma.  And while I have little doubt that Z is listening for feelers on double-A, I see no reason to believe his stock as a tradeable commodity is even remotely close to that of Putz.  The upside on Putz was based on a drastically better previous performance that had lasted for more than one season.  With Putz, because of the health issues, he was an "elite" closer for a couple of seasons - and offered up during a "buy low" cycle for a team desperate for bullpen help.
Aardsma is a guy with known control problems coming off a career year.  He's a "sell high" candidate, certainly -- but everyone in baseball understands he's major risk territory.  (The fact that Eddie and Putz both tanked badly after leaving Safeco likely ain't helping his sale price, either).
Certainly, look for someone willing to overpay.  But, for the life of me, I don't understand why the Seattle fan base is under the delusion that the bullpen was really good in 2009.  It wasn't.  Like the rotation, it was meh with a great defense behind it.  The relief K/BB was 10th in the AL, and the 1.03 HR/9 was sad (considering the park).  My opinion - the club actually needs BOTH Aardsma and League.  The club at this "hopes" that one or more of the failed Z starters actually develops into a legit bullpen force.  But, at the moment, that is just hope.