So, we learn that pitching HAS won championships. Thass’ the fact.
:: zaps Igor with a quick 10,000 ::
:: taps chin, tousles own hair ::
WHY would that be the case?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
You feel me? It’s fine to say that human beings ARE conscious. A 3-year-old can get that. He really can. It’s just that it's harder to explain WHY humans are conscious. So here we are: pitching HAS won. But the cause-and-effect? Do tell.
I mean, why? Why should good pitching beat good hitting?
.
One possibility: In the postseason, you can concentrate your pitching into the top 50%, 60% of the staff. This we knew. The Yankees manufactured a lot of retch-inducing glory by using just Pettite, Wells, and Rivera. Your best two relievers can go long if you’re just doing it for a couple weeks.
You can’t do that with your hitters. There is no way to put a Pete Carroll “compression tackle” onto your lineup, folding it like an accordion.
So, that would make SOME sense – in the playoffs. It becomes everybody’s whole offense against everybody’s top-half pitching.
Don’t explain all of it, though. All them 114-ERA+ champions weren’t identical in having Stars & Scrubs pitching staffs.
.
Another possibility: When the games get super tough, it is simply a more reproducible process to throttle the other guys out via rear naked choke. In other words, Felix Hernandez’ changeup is more reproducible than Robinson Cano’s line shots down the 1B line. Maybe the Toronto Blue Jays of each baseball season are simply destined to have the dice 'crap out' on them at some point.
.
:: shrug :: I dunno. But here are a few Seattle-related implications, er, questions for yer:
.
Q. Does this apply to the NFL? Do you bet defense there? The more so in the postseason? Pro Football Focus says winning is 5 parts offense, 4 parts defense, and 1 part special teams. Maybe Pro Football Focus is off their rocker, or didn't see Super Bowl IIL, or maybe Dr. D needs to cut back on his Turkey Tail Mushrooms.
.
Q. Why, in the name of all that is Edgar, are the Mariners chiseling Hisashi Iwakuma over the 3rd year on his deal?
And word is, that’s exactly what they’re doing. Iwakuma wants “at least three” years, as every blinkin’ free agent pitcher up to and including John Lackey will get, but the M’s want to hold the line at two.
Explain, using the 1-syllable words that poor addled Dr. D so craves in these situations. ... in the Fangraphs interview we just linked, Jerry DiPoto affectionately ticked off his starting rotation: Felix, Karns, Taijuan, Paxton, and Elias. If pitching is da name of da game, why aren't we shedding Trumbo and, um, Mather to bid on Cueto or Zimmerman?
.
Q. In the big picture, isn't it enough that DiPoto is "On It"?
I spose it is.
.
Bah humbug,
Jeff
The one about shedding Trumbo (or/and Smith) to get the cash for the extra arms we want. Zimmerman and Cueto, of course, will cost you going WAY down theline...but you could essentially pay for this year by shedding two guys and going with cheap youth at 1B/LF.
Heck, you likely pay for 1/2 of Iwakuma's third year by letting Smith go this year. I can live with that. Bet DiPoto could too.
The slope of the average MLB payroll goes from about $110M (?) now to a projected $220M in ten years, so, about double ... beginning years 3-4 I would hope the M's could spend accordingly...
:: shrug :: we've been through this before, though :- )
If Jerry is convinced that Kuma won't be good for a third year, unless his first two season's performance would make the third year "free", then fine, let Kuma get his three year contract elsewhere. But don't say it's about the money and needing to trade off Trumbo/Smith. Fans in their seats at the Safe and TV revenue from a winner more than pays the price. Trade or keep Trumbo/Smith on their own merits. We might as well start talking about how we can't afford a winning team when Cano gets old.
nm
in 1995?
In the logical days when the last year of a contract would project to be worth the money?
In order to deny Kuma's value the next two yerars would mean replacing him at an equivalent price in that period.
Which given current economics...is impossible?
Or maybe this is all just negotiation?
Which is exactly what you would be doing. If you felt that Trumbo or Smith was less valuable to the team (present and future) than the guy you might get with their dough, then you move them. That IS trading/keeping them on their own merits.
So he projects to what, $9-10M? Kind of bizarre to me that he would be pricier than Smith, but I guess that's the platoon for you. In my mind Seth Smith (5.6 RC/gm and decent OF defense) is ten times the player Trumbo (4.5 RC/gm and shocking OF defense) is.
My point was that I don't consider the money an issue. If you want a FA pitcher, pay him, whether you keep Trumbo/Smith or not. The real question for Trumbo/Smith is whether they are more valuable in your lineup than Montero/Jones.