![]() |
|
|
| |
« Odds and Ends: Lowe, Arroyo, Chacon | Main | On The Failed Brian Roberts Talks »
Here's a look at Jon Heyman's latest column.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e200e5536a40838833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Heyman's Latest: Garcia, Ricciardi, Sabathia:
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


|
|
Rangers, Astros and Mariners ... how does that make any sense?
Posted by: bjsguess | June 23, 2008 at 12:59 PM
okay the site is a little slower. maybe that can be worked on a bit.
in other news, the Jays have a boatload of overvalued relievers right now. Why don't they sell on some of them? 4 of them are lefties adn there ERAs are 2.52, 1.78, 1.31, and 2.17.
Trade one for a bat? Oh yeah, JP doesn't make any moves cause he's a crappy GM.
Posted by: Guitar Hero | June 23, 2008 at 01:18 PM
Gotta say the best change you made with the site design is the fact that I can see who made the post at the top rather than the bottom of the post.
Posted by: morandjp | June 23, 2008 at 04:55 PM
I think we can pretty much rule out the Mariners being involved in anything involving Freddy Garcia. It does not make sense for so many reasons, most notably the fact that the M's gave up on Garcia mainly because of non-baseball related issues. Now that he has health issues to go with the other issues that the M's were originally concerned about it does not make any sense at all.
Oh wait... I almost forgot that we are talking about the Mariners...
Posted by: Fishstickflipper | June 23, 2008 at 05:25 PM
bjsguess- I don't know why the Mariners would go after him, but the Rangers are still in it (don't think they will be for too much longer). The Astros need pitching to go along with that offense. I don't think he will do instant wonders for any team that gets him, but both the Rangers and Astros need pitching bad to stay, or in the Astros case get back in, the races
Posted by: H-Town-Baller | June 23, 2008 at 07:31 PM
Did I mention how much more difficult this page is to read with the blinging white background? I swear it's like I'm staring into the face of the sun. Can't handle it and won't be back here (except to check if the editors wised up and reverted to the old easy-to-read version).
Posted by: lurkingdodger | June 23, 2008 at 08:47 PM
OK final, final comment... what upsets me the very most about the editors choosing to chase me away is the fact I very recently opened an account to start commenting. Now they decided they don't want me here. Thanks guys.
Posted by: lurkingdodger | June 23, 2008 at 08:48 PM
I think that the mods chased me away too, because most of my posts are not showing up.
Posted by: Adam | June 23, 2008 at 09:02 PM
Hopefully other teams learn from the Mets that this is a horrible, horrible idea. I do believe Sabtahia is much more worthy of that type of deal though. Just watching Santana, I dont get it. His ERA is good and all, but I dont know why. He throws too many pitches, tops out at 92, mostly sits at 89-91, constantly falls behind hitters, and is a two pitch pitcher. Maybe he will really turn it around in the second half, but when does it get to a point where I get to tell all the Mets fans..... I TOLD YOU SO. From the beginning I thought this was a very bad idea, he was not going to fix all their problems, just take up most of their payroll and stop them from making any move of any significant impact during the season, and the guy is already on the decline and he is here for 6 more years. I have a feeling that by the end of his contract here, he will be one of the most hated Mets I have ever watched. God knows what will happen when his fastball loses more velocity, because teams already are just laying off his changeup. Somehow he keeps them in the game almost everytime, but it feels like he is walking a tightrope and he is going to fall off soon. Not impressed at all by watching Santana on my team for the first half of this season.
And the worst part of it is, if things really get bad, the Mets are just screwed, nobody would take this guys contract. Even today, June 23, 2008, I dont think the Mets could even give Santana away. Literally. I think besides Hank, no other team would be interested in touching Santana and that contract, even if it didn't cost them a single player. I have always heard he looks very human in the first half, but up until now he has been a downright disapointment.
Posted by: nrmax88 | June 23, 2008 at 09:31 PM
I really don't get it. C.C. has four seasons of league-average pitching, Johan has pitched at ace level since becoming a starter. Exactly how does C.C. expect a comparable deal?
Posted by: scatterbrian | June 24, 2008 at 01:15 AM
Has Johan Santana enjoyed more success in the last 5 years then CC Sabathia? Absolutely. But if you put a gun to my head right now, and ask me who is the better pitcher, or who would I take on my team today for the next 5 years, I'm going Sabathia. For the last 5 years (minus the last year and a half), CC has been a power pitcher with great stuff and somewhat questionable control, not necesarrily walking people, but without the ability to paint and throw darts to spots. That isn't the case anymore. This guy is a big, strong, over powering pitcher that now sports some really sick command. He has a better repetoire then Santana, and now with just as good location. Another knock on CC earlier in his career was that he would tire late in games. Not anymore. He is a true horse.
CC has the size and power over Santana, he is a very intimidating presence and this does count for something. He can now change speeds and locate with the best of them. Santana is almost constantly fastball/changeup, though he does change speeds well on the changeup. He still rarely uses his slider, which he must do to just keep guys off balance.
Don't get me wrong, Santana is a great pitcher, but so far this year, although he has constantly been solid, he has not been the dominating presence on the mound everybody expected. He was paid to be great, not just pretty good most of the time. CC just has the ability to truely dominate a team, that Santana has not shown since entering the NL. Santana has easily the better career, but that does not mean that he is still better right now.
Perhaps Santana is better, and he just has not shown it so far because he is a second half guy, or adjusting to a different league, or whatever, but CC has better stuff and in the last couple of years learned how to dominate people with it. While Santana has been good this year, he has been nothing resembling dominant outside of one start in Philly. If I am paying 6 years/140 million (which I never would give a pitcher anyway), I want dominant.
Posted by: nrmax88 | June 24, 2008 at 02:59 AM
John Heyman, this is your wake up call! Let me ask you, what pitcher WOULDN'T be interested in a Johan Santana type of deal? DUH! Instead of stating the obvious, report something that I don't know, okay?
Posted by: destiny_driven | June 24, 2008 at 06:59 AM
I think people should lay off Santana a little bit. Give him a break, he's in a new league with a new team in a new park. He's just started playing under the pressure of his new contract in the largest market in the sport. All this after coming from one of the most laid back places to play where there was pressure but not nearly the scale of what he's under now.
It may generally be easier to pitch in the NL than the AL but there is still an adjustment period. Shea may be a better place to pitch than the Metrodome, but again, adjustment period. Johan is one of the greats, he'll figure it out and all the short bus whiners who have no patience and panic because they can't see past the end of their noses will have to eat crow. 20 years from now when we look back on Santana's career his next five years are so are going to look pretty good. Panic and go all drama queen if you must but saying that no one else would take Santana right now is foolish.
Posted by: pageian | June 24, 2008 at 08:54 AM
@ nrmax88.
You need a gun to your head but not for what pitcher to take. Your honestly saying that CC HAS been better than Johan over the last 5 years? Think Johan would get the nod in my book for "a true horse" and i'm just taking a stab that your from Ohio. Just sayin......
Posted by: AstrosCoverage.blogspot.com | June 24, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Ya know, with each rising sun it seems we are presented with a new poster doing his best to show us that reading comprehension has been completely abandoned in school...
Our latest example; (from TheTEEJ)
“You need a gun to your head but not for what pitcher to take. Your honestly saying that CC HAS been better than Johan over the last 5 years? Think Johan would get the nod in my book for "a true horse" and i'm just taking a stab that your from Ohio. Just sayin......”
He didn’t say Sabathia has been better the last 5 years. Infact, he said the exact opposite:
“Has Johan Santana enjoyed more success in the last 5 years then CC Sabathia? Absolutely.”
Also, Nrmax also isnt from Ohio ~ he’s a Mets fan. If he was from Ohio he would have had a better understanding of what to expect from Johan; we Indians fans only watched the guy 5-7 times a year…
Posted by: darkstar1661 | June 24, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Nrmax,
Yeah, CC has put it all together as of late and really hit that other level. But I think its much easier to explain than you think. CC is basically the same pitcher he has ever been with one real difference ~ consistency. He would go three or four games and be beyond amazing, then the next two he would be all over the place…
But so many people seem to forget that all those “seasons of league-average pitching” came when he was age 20, 21, 23 and 24 (in 2003 at 22 he gave everyone a glimpse of what was to come). That was the one thing CC was never able to do, stay consistent; and as he aged, everyone knew this would change. When you become one of the best pitchers in the game at the age of 25, you know you have a special pitcher on your hand… Many people agree with you that CC stands a better chance over the next 5 years than Santana.
Oh, and the team sometimes wanting him to cut weight also added to some of the early inconsistency, but it was mainly just the age in most peoples minds…
Posted by: darkstar1661 | June 24, 2008 at 11:58 AM
Pretty interesting article from Joel Sherman. It's what I been trying or attempting to explain to some of the regulars that post on this site in regards to the Santana trade. Cut and paste and read. This is what Cashman stated on WFAN. He stated it on 2 occasions and like I said it was stated on the radio and not written in paper. Here it is on paper from a NY sports writer. I hope this helps Darkstar.
http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/st/archives/2008/06/3_down_santana_4.html#more
Posted by: BillyBalla | June 24, 2008 at 11:33 PM
pageain. Its not that I am second guessing the move. I hated it from the first rumors I heard about it. I said at the time, if it were up to me, I wouldn't have even gave up Carlos Gomez alone for Santana, not because Santana isn't good, but because I wouldn't want Santana at his current price even if he came for free, let alone at the expense of the only value left in the Met system. I am panicking? I was one of about 6 Met fans in the world who wwas against this move from the start, and now I am among the remaining 4 Met fans who still have any sort of faith in this team for 2008. So no, I am not panicking at all, I just dont like being stuck with a pitcher probably going past his prime at over 20 million a season through his mid 30's.
"20 years from now when we look back on Santana's career his next five years are so are going to look pretty good."
I don't want pretty good. In order for Johan to live up to his contract, and be worth it, he has to put up CY young caliber numbers every year. Not just be... pretty good. I think you are right, he will be pretty good over the course of his contract life, but again that is not good enough. Its like the Brandon Webb talks, people just see a big name pitcher and say things like "When you can get a guy like Johan Santana YOU HAVE TO DO IT!!"
My question is just, why? There are other good pitchers, and Johan's value is just average now. You have a good pitcher, but you aren't really getting any value out of him because even if he dominates he is being payed market value for a top 5 pitcher in the game. See my point?
Also, call me foolish or shortsighted or a drama queen or any other awesome insults you can think of, but I am right and you are wrong? Besides the Yankees, and possibly the Redsox, what team would want anything to do with Johan at 6 years 140 million? As good as he is, I would say 90 percent of the league wouldn't touch him.
Its like Arodsucksatlife said the other day about Brandon Webb, and the same holds true with Minn. They got the best years out of Johan for cheap, and then they let him go somewhere else to make the big bucks once they got all the value they could get out of him.
Theteej.... Sure Johan logs a lot of innings, but he is not a horse. He is just really efficient. He almost never throws more then 100 pitches in a game, and he is a very small man. CC and Roy Halladay are horses. Joe Blanton and Brandon Webb are horses. I guess Johan Santana is an innings eater, but he is not a guy that will go out there and throw a ton of pitches and finish a game (which is not really a knock on him, more just praise for CC, although I could be wrong about CC too, but it seems him and Halladay are constantly pitching 8 innings or complete games. I believe Johan has only worked into the 8th innings a time or two this year), he just gives you his 110 and gets outa there, although this is usually good for 7 solid innings.
I hope telling me to put a gun to my head felt good to you, you know what feels good to me? Reading comprehension. You should look into it. This way you don't look like a big weenie when you try to insult me next time.
Posted by: nrmax88 | June 25, 2008 at 08:22 AM
"Its like the Brandon Webb talks"
Should elaborate here...
Brandon Webb talks from a week ago, where the extension was put on hold, and everybody seemed all confused because of how sick Webb is. But that doesn't mean you sign him now for what he has done in his past and overpay for his future. Thought got cut off up there.. sorry about that.
Posted by: nrmax88 | June 25, 2008 at 08:24 AM