Add new comment

Putz was a genuinely dominant closer for awhile.  He isn't anymore.  But I don't buy AT ALL the concept that a 1-pitch pitcher cannot be a dominant closer for MANY years.  Rivera has a cutter.  Hoffman has a change.  NEITHER has a 2nd pitch that would be described as plus.  In truth, the general profile of every long-term closer I know of is that they have ONE exceptional pitch, which they throw a huge percentage of the time, and still, nobody can hit it "cleanly" on a regular basis.
As to how "real" Aardsma's 2009 performance is?
He's posted 10K/9 and 4.7BB/9 before.  Those numbers are NOT abberations.  However, his HR/9 and hit/9 numbers this year ARE very abnormal. 
The HR/9 is the one that is most interesting.  Here are Aarsma's HR/9 numbers for his career:
1.5 - 2006
1.1 - 2007
0.7 - 2008
0.4 - 2009
The above is complicated by the reality that these were generated for 4 different teams. In truth, VERY few pitchers can maintain a HR/9 of 0.4.  Aardsma IS likely to regress in this arena.  But, given the park and his previous track record, a 0.7 HR/9 rate doesn't seem unreasonable. 
After his 0.3 HR/9 in 2006, Putz regressed to 0.8, but was still dominant.  (Of course, he had vastly superior control).
But, the REALLY unsustainable number is the H/9.  Even with the #1 defense, a 6.3 H/9 rate is not likely to be repeated.  So, what is reasonable to expect from Aardsma?  Something like:  7.0 H/9; 0.7-HR/9; 4.7-BB/9; 10.5-K/9;  Yes, he should regress a bit, and probably blow a couple more saves.  The question then is ... can you do better?
If this was 3 years ago, and the club still had guys like Soriano and Sherrill waiting in the wings, sure, make a move.  But that isn't what the club has today.  The bullpen was WEAK in 2009.  The typical "best" development pattern for closers is keep a solid closer, and develop a COUPLE of closers-in-waiting behind him as 7th and 8th inning guys and THEN trade the guy with the 2-3 year track record of success. 
Sure, Aardsma has "some" value on the market today.  But, anyone wanting to gamble prospects is going to want more than a single season out of a guy that has a number of questionable seasons prior to 2009.  To get REAL value for Aardsma, the club almost certainly has to get a 2nd 'good' season out of him.  For me, the larger question is who are the 7 guys in the pen next season.  Batista is gone for sure.  Jaku would've already been gone if not for the lack of organizational depth.
Kelley, Lowe, White ... (and frankly, I think White is expendable)
I'm kind of hoping Silva replaces Batista in the pen, (preferable to him starting, IMO).  And I expect some number of the lefty starter spaghetti that didn't stick will morph into lefty reliever spaghetti in 2010.  But, bullpen went from an organizational strength to weakness VERY fast.  In truth, given the park and defense, the HR allowance for Seattle in 2009 has been off-the-charts bad. 
If you have Aardsma AND Morrow in the pen, then you can afford for one to fail.  If you have ONLY Morrow in the pen, then the club has zero fallback for someone with even potential to be a dominant closer.  In short, too many of the bullpen possibilites for 2010 have HR/9 rates above 1.0 and K/9 rates below 7. 
The 2009 bullpen didn't fall apart as severely as I expected.  But they were certainly NOT a strength for the team.  Aardsma lands somewhere between Brad Lidge and Roberto Hernandez in terms of closer quality.  Putz was traded from a team that nobody was expecting to compete.  You don't NEED a shut-down closer if you're expecting to lose 90 games.  But, if you just won 85 games, then dumping your closer is a sign of surrender, (unless you ALREADY have a clear replacement that said closer was blocking). 
I don't think Z can afford to trade Aardsma, unless he gets an incredible haul.  And I don't think 1 year is enough for Aardsma to erase the doubts raised by his previous results to warrant such a haul. 
My opinion, you can't 'appear' to be giving away 2010 ... but the club is better served by concentrating on getting ducks in a row for 2011.  Like 2007, too much of the 2009 performance is abberant, (29-16 1-run game performance), so you shouldn't pretend you're only 1 bat or 1 pitcher from the playoffs if you win 85.