AJC > Sports > Braves > Blog > Archives > 2006 > September > 05 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USChuck James, the improbable new ace?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
At this time a year ago, odds look pretty good that the Braves’ next homegrown ace, their next kid phenom pitcher signed and developed by the organization, would be an Atlanta-area native.
The odds still look good, but it’s at least a split on who the kid will be. Or is their someone out there who still firmly convinced Kyle Davies has a brighter future than Chuck James?
Maybe he does. Maybe Davies, who will only turn 23 on Saturday, is merely having the same type of early career struggles than Maddux and Glavine and Smoltz had, coupled with injury. Plenty, even most, stud pitchers struggle in their first couple of seasons.
But the point here isn’t to question Davies’ potential; it’s way too early to make any judgments on that. The point is that it’s time to recognize that little Chuck James, generously listed as 6 feet at 190 points in the media guide, is a damn impressive young pitcher with a bright future.
He’s two years older (will be 25 in November) than Davies, doesn’t throw as hard, doesn’t have the variety of pitches, and might not be as, uh, well, cerebral as the right-hander from Stockbridge.
But the lefty from Mableton, the one with the shaved head, heavy Southern drawl, slightly devious smile and Knothole Gang demeanor, the one who looks like he might’ve stole your bike in grade school and left it at your front door a couple days later … that dude can flat-out pitch.
Last night’s eight innings of one-hit, scoreless ball against the NL’s most potent lineup _ even without Carlos Beltran, it’s probably still the best _ was about as convincing a statement as could be made.
Pencil him into the rotation along with veterans John Smoltz, Mike Hampton and Tim Hudson for next season, and go from there. And at this stage of the game, Smoltz is probably the only one of those three whose chances of winning 15 next season I’d feel better about than James. Seriously.
James leads major league rookies in wins (eight) since June 25, when the Braves brought him back from Richmond after getting his arm stretched out to move from relief back to his forte, starting. He’s been in their rotation since then.
He’s 8-3 with a 3.65 ERA in 20 games this season, including a 3.84 ERA in 13 starts. And he’s getting better and better with experience.
He’s 4-0 with a 1.85 ERA and .213 opponents’ average in his past six starts, allowing two earned runs or fewer in each and working six innings or more in five of those six games.
And the way that he’s performed on the road is even more impressive, especially in places like the cauldron that Shea Stadium was last night. The Flushing faithful were geeked up to welcome their first-place team back from the road, and James quieted them as the night wore on.
He’s 5-1 with a 2.75 ERA in six road starts, and his 2.25 road ERA for the season would lead the NL by a quarter of a run if he had enough innings to qualify.
In his past three road starts, the kid is 3-0 with a 1.29 ERA, with only one homer allowed in 21 innings. The homers were what gave him trouble earlier in the season, but he’s keeping the ball down enoughto keep it in the park, while also keeping hitters off-balance better and getting ahead in counts.
He only throws about 87-88 mph with his fastball most of the time, but he can get a bit more on it when he needs to. He doesn’t need to often, because of a deceptive delivery and the change-up that keeps hitters guessing.
His changeup makes him more effective against righty hitters than against lefties, which is unusual, but the same as Glavine for most of his career. James’ .215 opponents’ average against right-handers is the ninth-best in the NL, just ahead of another former Brave, Jason Schmidt.
Anyway, he’s been one of the few real bright spots for the Braves, and watching James in the second half has provided some hope for a return to something approaching the Braves’ great pitching standards of the past.
If Davies develops into the pitcher they project, the Braves could have two homegrown aces atop their roation in a couple or three years. But for now, one of them is ahead of projections and helping to ease some worries about next year’s rotation. That one is James.
The Braves are stuck with Hampton because of his enormous contract, and fortunately for them, he’s working his butt off in an effort to get back to being the elite pitcher he once was. People forget, he was the Braves’ best pitcher for quite a stretch before his string of assorted injuries leading up to the elbow and knee surgeries of last winter.
As for Hudson, the Braves have to keep believing _ praying? _ he’ll get back to being the ace they thought they were getting when they traded for him from Oakland and then gave him a four-year, $47 million contract extension at spring training 2005, before he’d thrown his first pitch for them.
As I stated late in the chain of posts on the last blog, sometimes we all look for places to put blame when someone or something fails to meet our expectations. In Hudson’s case, the guy has simply underperformed for most of two seasons. It’s not the Braves’ fault. Not Leo Mazzone’s fault last year or Roger McDowell’s this season.
And while his last season in Oakland was one of his worst, and his strikeouts-to-walks ratio had declined before the trade, NO ONE in baseball circles had anything but high marks and congrats for the Braves when they made that trade. No one. I was at the winter meetings at Anaheim when the deal was being put together, and I heard all the buzz from all the other teams trying to get him.
Hudson, who would’ve been a free agent after his first season with the Braves in 2005, set a deadline of signing an extension by March 1 that season, and said he wouldn’t negotiate during the season if it didn’t get done.
So if he’d had one of his typical Oakland seasons, the Braves wouldn’t have stood much chance of signing him when the Yankees or another team offered the going rate of more than $15 mill per. The Braves had to sign him by March 1, 2005 or hope he didn’t have a great season and other teams would back off.
They signed him, then he didn’t have a great season.
And he’s not having a great one this season, again.
If you remember the reaction when he signed the extension with the Braves, many national media members questioned Hudson’s decision, some expressing disbelief, as if he were crazy or irresponsible to take so much BELOW market value and leave so much potential money on the table by signing with the Braves for under $12 mill per season in average value.
I didn’t buy that point at all, because to me he was still setting himself up for life and getting long-term security of a four-year deal _ when Braves were way reluctant to go more than three _ and he was getting chance to move back to what is home for him and his wife, where they could build a home in Auburn and raise their kids there, and not watch dad go off to another city during the season. That’s worth a lot.
But again, there was NO ONE out there, fans or media members or fellow Braves, who criticized the team for giving him that extension until last season, when many of you, and me, rightfully pointed out that Braves were really going to look bad if Hudson continued to pitch like he was pitching last year when he was at his worst, before going on DL.
He’s pitched pretty poorly a lot of nights again this year. So it looks bad now. And will for several years, if he doesn’t snap out of it and they keep him.
But the Braves and other teams don’t have that luxury of hindsight when making moves. And only the Yankees and a couple others are willing to swallow huge chunks of contracts and move a guy after one or two bad seasons (see Boston, re: Edgar Renteria).
Braves thought they were getting a staff ace in Hudson for below-market value, a guy who’d led AL in wins over a five-year span.
Hey, but at least they’ve got Chuck James, and he’s really cheap for a couple more years.
OK, real quick MUSIC NOTE (just move on to the blog-posting portion if you don’t like good music): Someone asked about the Flatlanders. They put out their long-awaited second album (only 14 years between discs!) in 2004, “Wheels of Fortune,” which is very strong.
And if you like them or the song you heard somewhere, you should also try the latest from Jimmie Dale Gilmore and John Prine, both released in the past year. And though he’s not a Flatlander, check into that Todd Snider CD I recommended a couple weeks ago, that just came out. What a great songwriter.
Oh, and I lost some respect for my may Peter Moylan when I asked the Aussie reliever if he liked Nick Cave, his countryman and one of my favorite brooding, intelligent rockers. Moylan can’t stand him. Now, I can’t stand Moylan (kidding, of course; Moylan’s a great dude, just doesn’t have great taste in music).
Comments
By David
September 5, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
I don’t understand why people thought James would be anything other than an ace. His numbers were better than Liriano’s last year and frankly should have been in the rotation all along (albeit that’s 20/20 hindsight). He’s an assassin on the mound, fearless and brimming with confidence.
By Georgetown Kid
September 5, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this
Mr. O’Brien,
I too am a huge fan of Chuck James. The kid simply gets people out. How he escaped notice while he was in the minors is unfathomable to me. In over 60 minor league starts, he had an ERA under 2.2. So he is doing to major league hitters what he did to minor leaguers, getting them out.
That being said, wouldn’t James command a king’s ransom in a trade? With Hampton and Hudson being un-movable, and with HoRam having limited trade value due to injuries, and with Davies being so mediocre, James has become our most liquid commodity.
With the big spenders (Yankees, Mets, Sox, et al) in desperate need of starting pitching, James would be worth his weight in gold to them. For not only is he very good, but as you mentioned in your blog, he is very cheap.
If a team was willing to sell the farm to us in exchange for James, shouldn’t we consider it?
James could give us our leadoff hitter plus some middle relief help.
So while I would love to have Chucky in a Braves uniform for a long time, I do hope that JS does some shopping.
Just a thought.
By hk
September 5, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
… here’s the hitter’s ‘MVP’ through last night, including Betemit’s numbers (starting most of the time) … comparison, Braves vs LA performance, .281/.279 avg, .344/.331 obp …
Year End..Runs..Homers..RBI’s..MVP..Last
Andruw…..99…..38…..127…264…265
Frenchy….88…..28…..110…226…229
LaRoche….90…..33…..101…223…215
Chipper….93…..27……93…214…210
Renteria..106…..14……69…189…188
Giles……92…..11……60…163…171
McCann…..57…..19……80…156…161
Betemit….52…..20……54…127…121
Langy……46……8……32….86….87
Team Average……………….178…179
click here for chart
By David O'Brien
September 5, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
Sorry, I don’t get that reasoning at all. You’ve got a kid who could be a dirt-cheap ace for the next few years, and affordable for five years, and you want to trade him to fill other needs. Then you open a huge need in the rotation, especially after Smoltz is done or becomes unaffordable (possibly) after next season.
Unless you’re the Yankees, teams almost never trade promsing young starters who are already producing in the majors. You hang on to that most valuable commodity. You trade Giles if you must, you listen to offers for Andruw if you can’t re-sign him, but you don’t trade a guy who could win 15-18 games at under $400,000. No way.
By Georgetown Kid
September 5, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
Mr. O’Brien,
Another quick question:
I saw that Lerew was sent back to Richmond. What are people saying about that kid?
I saw him pitch in Richomd recently, and he was a man amongst boys. Does the organization have high hopes for him as a future starting pitcher, or does he not really figure into their future plans?
He certainly looked pretty lousy in Philadelphia.
By David O'Brien
September 5, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
Or at least under $500,000. He’ll make somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000 next season.
By David O'Brien
September 5, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this
Lerew is a man among boys _ at Triple-A, a league that contains a lot of aging former prospects, a few current prospects, and a lot of roster filler.
He’s got to work on the mental approach, big time. has the stuff, but means little at the big league level if you don’t have the mentality. He’s got a lot of work to do.
have no idea where or if he fits into their future, but they’re not counting on him anytime soon, that’s for sure. wouldn’t surprise me if he were traded, but wouldn’t surprise me if he were at spring training competing for a spot, either.
By Dark Helmet
September 5, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
DOB,
As a native Atlantan living in Boston, just wanted to let you know how much I love the blog. Don’t get to see many games up here (although all the “Sex and the City” reruns are really special). Don’t get much sweet tea either. But the winters are wonderful.
Anyways, I was wondering why Bobby didn’t let Chucky finish the game out last night. I know we tacked on a run by pinch hitting for him, but it seems like a 4-run cushion was big enough. And a complete game 1-hitter against the Mets would’ve been nice for Mr. James.
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
DOB: Nice post. This thing loads so fast now. Brilliant. I don’t think trading James would be a good move. I’d demand a lot in return to get him, but I like having a young quality ace. Sending him away and then trying to rely on Hudson again sounds scary. Besides, you couldn’t trade James and get someone back as good as James and be major league ready, which is what we need. I say keep him. He’s kicking @ss and takin’ names.
GO BRAVES
By Georgetown Kid
September 5, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
Mr O’Brien,
Thanks for responding so quickly.
And I wasn’t advocating a trade of James. But I was simply wondering if James could be flipped into an all-star leadoff hitter.
With a bonafide leadoff man who can steal bases at the top of the Braves lineup, our offensive potential would improve considerably.
And if Davies and Lerew were to improve, and if they were ready to start next year, starting pitching would be a position of considerable depth.
I don’t think James should be aggressively shopped, but if a team were willing to give us an all-star leadoff man in exchange for James, with some middle relievers thrown in, that would be a hard deal to pass up.
But again, I am just thinking out loud. James looks like a stud, and I completely agree with your post.
By David
September 5, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
David, I have a more arcane question for you. Let’s say that the Red Sox had made the Andruw trade with Lester as one of the pieces. If the cancer had been discovered this long after he got here, would the Braves have had the right to ask for different compensation? To have the deal rescinded?
I realize that this is a trivial issue in a very depressing situation. I can’t recall a similar series of events ever happening before, however, so it left me wondering what the MLB rule would be in such an event.
By flbravesgirl
September 5, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
It is kind of strange that there was so much fanfare about Davies but no one seemed to pay attention to Chucky even though he had excellent minor league numbers. Maybe it’s a Francouer/McCann situation where the more “flashy” player ( and I don’t mean that in a derogatory way) gets all the build-up. Most Braves fans hadn’t even heard of Mac before his call-up last June but we’d heard plenty about Frenchy. I think Francouer will be a great player and Davies may well turn out to be a really good pitcher but Mac and Chucky are really good now.
By David O'Brien
September 5, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
Dark Helmet, thanks. Dropkick Murphys rock.
As for why he took James out, probably because he’d only thrown more than seven innings once all season, and never more than eight, and because he’d already thrown 108 pitches and hadn’t thrown more than 111. But most importantly, he noticed a lot of balls getting hit hard and deep, and figured it was a good time to get him out and have him feel really good about a great performance. Also, switch-hitting Reyes was the second guy up in ninth, and lefty hitters have given Chuck some trouble.
McBride did strike out the side in the ninth, so it’s kinda hard to question the move a day later, isn’t it?
By 22oz
September 5, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
How can you not like Chuck? Its so fun to yell Chuck! when he comes up, just like its fun to yell Pete! when Pete Orr comes up. Chuck’s a pitcher for the blue collar man, he gets its done with what he’s got.
I do, however,agree with what Joe Simpson said last night, he will need a breaking ball to keep it up.
By Georgetown Kid
September 5, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
By the way, it sure sucks that we picked up Ward in exchange for an injured relief pitcher who struggled in A-ball.
It sure sucks to have a top-notch pinch hitter who come through in clutch situations.
It sure killed our future to give up on a pitcher with a 4.50 ERA in A-ball.
I wish Dave O’Brien had the guts to stand up to the Braves spin-masters when they announced that trade.
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
KC and Tennessee Paul,
To continue our discussion, a good ERA doesn’t necessarily mean a good pitcher. True Maddux posting a 1.63 ERA was impressive. Yeah, it’s virtually impossible for a bad pitcher to post a very low ERA but it’s possible at least in theory. Usually ERA fools you when your talking a pitcher that posts a good ERA not a great one.
If a pitcher posts an ERA around 3.00 over 230 innings, he may be a good pitcher or a bad pitcher. It depends on context.
If there’s one thing to learn about stats it’s that you must pay attention to context. I think that’s why a lot of people choose to ignore stats and criticize people who study stats: they are too lazy to understand context and they don’t understand that most intelligent people who study stats also study context and which stats are important and why.
ERA is not necessarily unreliable. It’s an okay indicator of pitcher performance but it’s not great. Unreliable is probably too strong a word.
By Carolina Lady
September 5, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
DOB, love your sense of humor! Good post, good job. Are we taking odds on whether the game will be broadcast or not?? :-))
Has anybody seen NLChamps in the last 24 hours?? Hmmmm.
That game last night tickled me pink! Hope Smoltz can show ‘em again tonight! :-))
(ungrateful heatherns, indeed!) :-)))))
By Ken
September 5, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this
I love the Braves and realize this is a Braves blog, but last week when DOB mentioned best Monday songs, did anyone mention “Come Monday” by Buffet? Good tune. 4 lonely days in a brown LA haze would have to suck.
By flbravesgirl
September 5, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
CL, I’m still trying to figure out the broadcast for tonight. TBS, AJC and my on-screen guide all say TBS so I’ll try that first.
DOB, loved the description of Chuck. “Devious smile”, lol. He does have that impish, “I know something you don’t” look.
By KC
September 5, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
DOB, I agree with you that it’s very unlikely that James will be moved back to the bullpen. But if Davies seriously impresses the rest of the month… I think there might be a very slight possibility of that happening temporarily. If James were to pitch out of the pen again (which again, I agree is unlikely) it would not be as a situational lefty, but as a 7th inning guy of something like that.
It is far more likely that Davies will start the year at AAA. I just sincerely hope that we will not consider trading HoRam over the winter. If we consider trading him at all (and I’m not convinced that we should)… it should only be after he’s had a chance to get a healthy start on the season and bring his trade value up considerably. Personally, I think we ought to hang on to HoRam.
By Head Coach
September 5, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this
Yep , with Chuck James , Kyle Davies , Horacio Ramirez in Atlanta and with Anthony Lerew , Matt Harrison and Jo Jo Reyes in the pipeline the Braves pitching future looks bright.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
FlBG-You may be right about the fanfare thing. I remember Brad Komminsk “THe Next Dale Murphy”, among otheres who never lived up to the hype. Francoeur will live up to it, if in fact, he hasn’t already, but being in the background certainly has it’s advantages for some. Chuck’s pitching last night was one of the brightest points in an otherwise dismal season, but don’t count Davies out yet. That was a nasty injry he sustained and AAA rehab starts aren’t a real good indication-especially long-term.
By KC
September 5, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this
Shaun… please name a bad pitcher to post an ERA of 3.00 or lower over 230 innings or more.
By Ron Roberts
September 5, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
I’m gonna answer KC about some things that sorta irritate me….
Dude, if somebody isn’t blowing sunshine up your butt about the Braves, you just have to challenge them, don’t you? Yes, I did have concerns about the braves picking up Hudson after his injury-riddled season in Oakland. Believe it or mock it if you will, but I did. I also (in the same offseason) had concerns about corner outfielders on the opening day roster named Raul Mondesi and Brian Jordan. Does that make me smarter than John Schuerholz? I never claimed to be smarter, but I certainly had a damn good gut feeling that those two weren’t worthy of a starting spot on a team trying to return to playoff form. Everybody in the world had a gut feeling that Chris Reitsma and the ‘06 opening day bullpen roster wasn’t gonna cut it, except for Schuerholz. Does that make EVERYBODY ELSE smarter than him?
You slay me, dude…. I, too, like to be optimistic about this team, but I’m also able to pull myself outta my spot as a fan and say when and where this team has done things wrongly, so yeah, I was probably in the vast minority when it comes to the Hudson acquisition back then, but to hell with it… i was sayin’ it.
If you wanna “discuss” stuff with me, that’s fine… but cut the smarmy ‘tude, okay?
FYI… I’d seen a promo about the Braves & Mets being on TBS early this morning, but I reckon they pulled it… tbs.com isn’t showing that the Braves were on their schedule tonight. That sucks. Somebody’s gotta convince LOUISIANA cable providers that Turner SOUTH means the ENTIRE southern U.S. I miss toooo many games and I’m just flat-out refusing to pay top-dollar to watch MLB games when I gotta do the same for NFL coming up. Can’t wait til you can cherry-pick which teams you wanna watch and pay less, rather than pay more to watch ALLLLL of ‘em.
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
ShaUn Payne: True. One certainly shouldn’t rely completely on one stat and one frame of reference. To that note: In 2003 Tom Tippett concluded that the differences between pitchers in preventing hits on balls in play were at least partially the result of skill. It isn’t entirely luck and fielding. I again point to Maddux. There was one game in particular (I don’t recall which, just remember reading about it after the game), when Maddux was in a jam with no outs. He had runners on and either Leo or Cox went out to talk to him and asked him if he was gased and needed to come out. Maddux said something to the likes of: “No. I’ve got them were I want them. I’m going to get this guy to pop out to Chipper in foul territory and then the next guy is going to hit a grounder to Short for the double play.” And sure enough, that’s what happened. The ERA is a pretty good bench mark to build from. Obviously, if one is to build a team, and pick the correct players, it’s a combination of everything. All the Scouts and all the Numbers. But taking ERA into account isn’t going to lead you totally off base in the quality of pitching you are recieving. Maddux and his 1.63 ERA and Reitsma and his 9.11 ERA. When looking at an ERA, it’s also recommended you look at the number of innings pitched. And in both those cases you can see Maddux was good and Reitsma was bad. You can go deeper and see just how good and bad each were, but as a quick synopsis, ERA is a good gauge.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
KC-I don’t know about the innings, but how about Jorge Sosa? For the most part, though, you are right. Head Coach makes a good point. There are more children working their way up. We have tended to lose sight of that fact this year-Probably because we brought damn near everyone vaguely readyy for the bigs last season. It skewed our view of the front end of the pipeline for this season.
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
Lew,
Francouer could become the next Dale Murphy but he definetly hasn’t already lived up to the hype. He’s costing the Braves way too many outs to be a productive player, much less the next Dale Murphy.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this
Shaun P-You and I have gone on and on about this one all season. He has much room for improvement, but his 162 games totals are way more than acceptable for a rookie ballplayer. He needs to learn plate discipline and if he does, his average will climb. He doesn’t try to hit every ball into the bleachers. He WILL come around. However, only Ryan Howard has had a better 162 game start than Jeff, in my not so humble opinion. Nothing you can say will negate what I and many others consider a great start.
By Head Coach
September 5, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this
I dunno , I watched Francoeur take a four pitch walk last night and I almost fell off my couch.
By Ron Roberts
September 5, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
Wasn’t Francoeur technically a rookie last season? Just curious.
By KC
September 5, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
Lew… again, that’s why I said 230 innings. Sosa didn’t start for a full season.
Also, I would argue that Sosa wasn’t a bad pitcher last year. On the contrary, he was quite good. He wasn’t as good as his numbers last year would lead you to believe, but regardless of how many runners he put on… he did pitch out of it almost every time, and that’s not easy. You have to give him credit for what he accomplished last year, regardless of how ugly it was at times.
Jorge Sosa was a different pitcher last year from what we saw of him this year. That’s all there is to it.
By David O'Brien
September 5, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
Ken, yes they did, and I acknowledged that was better than either song I had up. Come Monday just slipped my mind at the time. An incredible tune, my favorite Buffet by far (not a huge Buffet fan, but that’s just a great song, no novelty tune)
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
TennesseePaul,
My argument is people say and seem to think ERA is the best or most important stat in evaluating pitchers. ERA is okay, but just RA is better and DIPS is even better.
There is really very little or no consistency in pitchers who lead the league in lowest batting average allowed on balls in play, which seems to indicate that getting hitters to make outs on balls in play is very largely defense and luck. But there is consistency in pitchers who lead the league in fewest BB and HR allowed and strikeouts. Those are the most important stats for pitchers, but there are stats that take all of those into account to form one, DIPS is probably the best that I know of.
The reason Maddux was/is great was because his strikeout rate is pretty good and his walk rate is out of this world. He did get a lot of ground balls, too, which shows up in homeruns allowed. ERA can fluctuate due to defense and luck, but K/BB ratio are going to pretty much stay consistent for most pitchers.
Maddux and Reitsma are extreme examples. It would be difficult to post extreme ERA’s like that (under 2.00 or over 5.00) and still put up good K/BB and HR allowed numbers.
By KC
September 5, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
If Davies can settle down in his next start and truly impress for the rest of the month… It could mean a one way ticket for Tim Hudson on a Westbound (or northbound) train. I’m not a Hudson hater, and I’m not anxious to see him go. Personally, I think it’s highly unlikely that he will repeat this abysmal season… but if our rotation is such that we don’t need him, and can clear significant payroll space for the next few seasons… I would certainly be open to it. That would certainly give us plenty of money to spend on the bullpen next season, and beyond that, plenty of room to re-sign Andruw. But I would only consider it if I were quite confident in what Kyle Davies will give us next year.
Smoltz, Hampton, Ramirez, James, Davies.
If Davies starts to come into his own… that could be a very good rotation. I don’t think the three-lefties in the rotation means anything at all. There’s no such thing as a successful left-handed starter who can’t get right-handed hitters out… so what’s the issue??? However, there are some right-handed starters who are able to enjoy a certain degree of success while getting tagged by left-handed hitters. If anything, having 3-5 right-handed starters strikes me as more of a potential problem than having 3 lefties.
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
Lew: I think Pujols had a better 162 game start than Francoeur, Mauer as well. I like Francoeur. I think he’ll be great. And hopefully he will learn pitch recognition and plate discipline. If he does, he’ll be one of the best in the majors for a long long time. Until then, he’ll have to rely on great defense and some power numbers to get the praise and recognition. He’ll be in the Andruw Jones catagory. Love both of them, but neither is really a fantastic hitter. Great sluggers, incredible fielders but not hitting machines. Francoeur can change that if he learns the pitches and the zone better.
Good point on the Sosa call. But I think Sosa’s innings will fall far short of 230. He only lasted 5 innings a game, if that. Just long enough to qualify for the win.
By Brad
September 5, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
Trading James? A lot of people has said that James reminds them of a young Tom Glavine. Imagine how the Braves would have been with out Tom Glavine all those years. The Braves build their team around pitching. That is why the Braves have struggled this year, it was pitching. With Smoltz, Hudson, Hampton, James in the rotation next year, it looks to be good. We also have Davies and Rameriez(sp?) I think the Braves should keep James, I think he will be the Braves ace for years like Tommy was.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this
TenPaul-I’m not talking about all starts, ever, just used Howard as a more contemporary example. I know he hasn’t had the greatest of all starts. I’m just concerned that people don’t understand what productivity is. Based on tjis years stats, Howard compared to Francoeur. Using the runs=rbi-hr stat, or Runs produced, Howard has accounted for 170 runs in 130 games. Francouer has produced 141 runs in 132 games. This works out to 1.3 runs per game for Howard, who is having what may well be an MVP season (he would get my vote), compared to just shy of 1.1 runs per game for Francoeur. This IS productivity. It can get better, yes, but that is productive. If the Braves were closer to the front of the division, everyone would be raving about Francoeur’s performance. I think it’s a lot of frustration showing in his detractors.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
That’s runs plus RBI minus HR. For some reason that didn’t come out the way I typed it.
By David O'Brien
September 5, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
Francoeur no longer a rookie. Last season he went over the thresholds for rookie status.
He basically has about the same experience as … Ryan Howard. Yikes.
Shaun, I’m going to have to side squarely with those who say ERA is about as good a single indicator as there is for a STARTING pitcher over a full season. It rarely, rarely lies. That and WHIP (walks and hits per innings pitched, as you know) are great indicators. You lose people when you try to get too esoteric with all the other new-generation stats that aren’t ever going to catch on with mainstream, like passer rating in football. That’s way too complicated.
ERA doesn’t lie. Not over 200 innings. Good defense will help you, but won’t give you a great ERA if you weren’t really good to begin with.
Put it this way: AL ERA leaders currently: 1. Johan Santana, 2.95 (65/198.1 inng), 2. Scott Kazmir, 3.24 (52/144.2), 3. Justin Verlander, 3.27 (60/165.0), 4. Roy Halladay, 3.29 (73/200), 5. C.C. Sabathia, 3.31 (60/163.1).
NL ERA leaders: 1. Chris Carpenter, 2.87 (59/185.1), 2. Josh Johnson, 2.99 (49/147.1), 3. Roy Oswalt, 3.12 (64/184.2), 4. Brandon Webb, 3.14 (69/198.0), 5. Jason Schmidt, 3.39 (71/188.2).
What’s misleading? For the most part, they’re also the Cy Young award candidate favorites.
On the other extreme, high ERA for guys like Josh Beckett, Jason Marquis and Steve Trachsel is much better indicator of their performance than wins, which are in so many ways out of pitcher’s hands. Wins and losses is the stat that can we wildly misleading, not ERA.
By KC
September 5, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
I can’t remember who the writer was that supposedly named C.James as the most likely candidate to be traded… but we can put that notion to rest. It ain’t happnin’… period. Hudson is the only Braves starter that might be traded this winter, and even there I think the chances are pretty slim.
By Head Coach
September 5, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
Playoff teams are built around pitching and defense. That said , Hudson is going nowhere. They are going to need all the pitching and depth in the rotation they can get their hands on for next season. They have already used more than 10 starters this season and with all the injury history of 2005, 2006 do you really think the Braves are going to be in the mood to trade starting pitching ? are you crazy ?
By Ron Roberts
September 5, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
Shuffle off Hudson before James, I say… for monetary reasons and because James has plenty more years ahead of him, and we’re essentially building a solid young core that a rotation needs to grow up with.
With Smoltz, James, Ramirez, Lance Cormier, Oscar Villareal, Hampton and Davies, we have plenty of options for a starting rotation, and I’d gues that, outside of the White Sox and Tigers, we’re the envy of Major League Baseball when it comes to having so many promisng young rotation-bound guys. Looks like another run of excellence is upon us, to me.
The good thing about that is, this time, we’re developing a young bullpen as well, and there’s a lot in the stable there, too, with McBride, Yates, Boyer, Devine, Startup all showing signs of success in the near future. Couple that with Francoeur (take a few more pitches, kid…), McCann, LaRoche (that’s right, all you early-season smugs…he’s here, deal with it)… and the foundation’s there for some superior play for years to come.
By KC
September 5, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Good news… the Braves will see Oliver Perez tomorrow. What in the WORLD was the deal with this kid???? Look at his career stats. 2004 looks like a typo… but it wasn’t. Very strange.
By Ron Roberts
September 5, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Beckett, Marquis and Trachsel all play on teams capable of lighting up a scoreboard, too…
By David O'Brien
September 5, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Dude, are you serious about DIPS and RA? The conversation is irrelevent for the most part, because you’re never, ever going to hear even relatively serious baseball fans, much less casual ones, say, “Hey, Maddux’s DIPS and RA are off the charts, bro.”
Come on. This isn’t rocket science. Stats have to be accessible to matter to 99 percent of the public (not even us in the baseball media, broadcasters and writers, sit around talking to each other or to scouts, managers and GMs about DIPS and RA. Never.)
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
RonRoberts-Thanks for mentioning Cormier. What we tend to lose sight of with Cormier and Villarreal is that they are both not that far from their surgeries. I think they both will only get better with time. Last night on the TBS broadcast, they talked about the possibility of moving McBride into the rotation if necessary. Anyone have any thoughts on this? It’s a new concept to me.
By KC
September 5, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
I know this is a random thought… but if guys like Dale Murphy and Jim Rice aren’t good enough to make the Hall of Fame… maybe MLB should reexamine the number of players allowed in each year. Hell, even Charles Barkley went on a tirade on Inside the NBA one night as to what a travesty of justice it was for Murphy not to be in the Hall of Fame.
By KC
September 5, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Why in the world would we move McBride to the rotation???????????????????
We have 6 guys who can start right now with the return of Davies and the serviceable performances of Villareal and Cormier. We certainly wouldn’t need anyone else for the rotation next year. Why would that notion even come up???
By Tony Almeida
September 5, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
So DOB, does Chuckie have any chance of rookie of the year honors?
And you missed a good Tim McGraw show in Vegas Sunday night, it kicked a$$$$$$$$.
By Ron Roberts
September 5, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
Oliver Perez was 1-0 with a 2.57 against the Braves last year… …these are just the kinda guys we struggle against, for some reason.
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
You and I have gone on and on about this one all season. He has much room for improvement, but his 162 games totals are way more than acceptable for a rookie ballplayer. He needs to learn plate discipline and if he does, his average will climb. He doesn’t try to hit every ball into the bleachers. He WILL come around. However, only Ryan Howard has had a better 162 game start than Jeff, in my not so humble opinion. Nothing you can say will negate what I and many others consider a great start.
Francouer is not ready and what I say may not negate what you consider a great start, but the facts should. The fact is he costs his team way too many outs to be considered an above average offensive player. I wouldn’t consider .275 average/.307 on-base/.482 slugging in 207 games a great start. That .307 on-base means he’s costing the Braves outs in 69.3 percent of his plate appearances.
Francouer is probably going to be a productive player, but he’s shown he hasn’t been ready offensively the past two seasons.
I wish it weren’t true, but I can’t ignore the facts.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
KC-That’s what happens when you let Sportswriters decide and the AJC won’t let anyone of their people vote (can’t blame DOB, here). Blyleven, Tommy John, Murphy, Rice, Santo and a few others definitely deserve enshrinement. I think players like Murphy and Dawson, to name a couple, suffered because their carrers were followed by an outrageously huge offensive explosion. Murphy led the NL in Hr for the 1980’s. He even hit more than Schmidt during that decade. That combined with 2 MVP’s should have locked it up for him. I doubt he will everget in. That’s not even counting that if they can keep Rose out for bad behaviour, Murphy should get extra credit.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
KC-Just telling what I heard from Chip and whomever last night. Didn’t say it made sense.
By geauxbraves2000
September 5, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
My cable guide also shows the game on TBS tonight. I guess we’ll see.
Did anyone notice Francoeur took 8 pitches before he swung? To me that was one of the best parts of the game. Learn to recognize pitches instead of just hacking at them not having a clue. I hope he keeps this patience up. Now, if he recognizes a fast ball down the middle on the first pitch, of course whack the crap out of it, but no more swinging at the low and away 4 foot off of the plate 1st pitch curves.
Come on js, mow ‘em down, come on offense, light ‘em up.
Geaux Braves!!
By KC
September 5, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
Lew, yeah I understand that it wasn’t your idea… just wondering why any Braves announcer would even bring that up.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
ShaunP-You and I are probably just going to have to agree to disagree. I think for a 22 year old kid with half a year in AA, Francoeur has been way more productive than anyone had a right to expect. If you think that producing 1.1 runs per game after only 200 ML games is unproductive, we will never come to terms on this one, dude. I acknowledge he will get better. He already has. His average has risen steadily since that Godawful start, especially recently. He is up to .262 and his career OBP is up to .300 from the low twos earlier this season. Have some patience yourself. This kid has probably been under pressure to perform that we will never experience. He’s still a baby in big league terms, not even supposed to have played until this year at the earliest. What more do you really expect. He will be one of the greats.
By Bob Horner
September 5, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
I deserve consideration before that CHUMP Murphy.
By Ron Roberts
September 5, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
Re: McBride to the rotation…I heard that, too, and think it’s not all that bad an idea - once we get other dependable arms in the ‘pen. He has good stuff, four pitches he can use at any given time, and his confidence is up.
By Matt Yoder
September 5, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
I do not believe there is a need for offensive help of any kind for this ball club anymore! This team would have well over 100 wins right now if we would’ve had a rotation like back in the good ole days and had Bob Wickman at the start of the season….But I feel that “barring injuries” we got a exciting young team that in the next few years is gonna display the same special talents that we enjoyed in the early 90’s !!! Just a heck of a lot better offence! As far as the need of a lead off hitter? We have got one in Pete Oor,this guy is fun and exciting to watch and MAN can he run !!!! Go BRAVES! PS. I still haven’t given up on this year ;)
By Dog the Bounty Hunter
September 5, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
LEWIE!! Long time no chat. Francouer would improve if someone would teach him patience, that person should remain nameless (TERRY PENDLETON). He’s having a great year, but with some patience, I’m thinking MVP type year.
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
geauxbraves2000,
Good point. I have noticed that Francouer seems to be making the effort to not get himself out by swinging at bad pitches lately. Maybe that’s a sign of things to come next year. If he can get his walk total up to around 40-60 and his batting average up to above .300 (by swinging at better pitches) he will be a star.
By Head Coach
September 5, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
Murph has my vote , hell they let Puckett in so why isnt Murphy in the Hall of Fame ? and Dawson , Rice among others. Blyleven wont ever get in , he lost to many games and didnt get to 300 wins. He won 287 lost 250 and pitched for a lot of bad baseball teams in Minnesota , Cleveland , Texas , California and Pittsburgh.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
Dog-You and I agree on something. There is nothing but upside to Francoeur. Maybe we all nedd patience in our lives. I, too have wondered about Pendleton’s role this year. People on this blog were discusiing Andruw’s falling down swing for quite some time before he and TP adressed the fact. Speculation can only remain rampant.
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
Lew,
I have patience with Francouer. And I agree that he’s likely to become a star, as I’ve said many many times. I’m just saying he has not helped the Braves create runs this season as much as Matt Diaz or Ryan Langerhans would in his place if they got the shot to play everyday.
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
Francoeur is not ready? Ready for what, going back to the minors? He’s here to stay.
Lew: I see your point. I’ll try not to compare everyone to Pujols. It just isn’t fair to the other guys.
I wasn’t saying Francoeur isn’t good, or at least I didn’t mean to. I like the guy. When he came up, I was expecting something like Chipper. Probably, well, entirely because he was dubbed the new golden boy. The guy to take the charge from Chipper. Maybe in terms of “face of the orginization” but as far as at the plate, he’s way closer to Andruw than Chipper. He swings at the low and away, strikes out a lot, streaky, and keeps his average around .265. I hope he can turn it all around and pull that average up, but until then I just have to keep reminding myself that he is more like Andruw than Chipper.
By Georgetown Kid
September 5, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
I was the writer who broached the subject of shopping James.
The Braves payroll limitations will prevent them from achieving everything on the wish list (re-signing Wickman, retaining Giles, retaining Ramirez, signing a proven leadoff hitter).
The unfortunate truth is that the Braves will have to sacrafice something if they are to re-sign Wickman and sign a proven leadoff hitter.
Another unfortunate truth is that Hudson is unmovable. What GM would trade anything of value for a mediocre pitcher with a $10 million price tag?
The trade value of Ramirez is also quite dimished due to his injuries. Giles is in a similar situation.
So if the Braves are to keep Wickman and find a leadoff man, something will have to go. This inevitable reality is compounded by the fact that both Giles and Ramirez are due significant raises this offseason and are both likely to be kept due to their low marketablility.
James could fetch us a fortune, and should a team offer us an allstar leadoff man plus cash or a middle reliever, would it be smart of us to turn it down?
In an ideal world, we keep Wickman, Giles, Ramirez, and sign a top-notch leadoff hitter. We would also trade Hudson for some young talent.
The Braves payroll limitations and Hudson’s mediocrity make our world slightly less than ideal, however.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
Head Coach-If nothing else, they should enshrine Blyleven’s curve ball. Possibly the nastiest ever. Shaun-Patience will never be learned if Francoeur doesn’t play. Are you really serious about Langerhans having a better season? He had a chance to play full time and didn’t come close to Francoeurs play ( except defensively, of course). I was a big supporter ofLangy in the offseason, but never in a million years expected a Francoeur like performance out of him. Time to go rock. Later all. Bye Dog.
By Dog the Bounty Hunter
September 5, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
Shaun?? Did you say Ryan Langerhans could create more runs then Franceour?? King Strikeout?? King of popping up a bunt??
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Lew,
And please don’t misunderstand me…I believe Francouer is going to be a much better player than Diaz or Langerhans ever will be. I’m just saying Langerhans or Diaz would have helped the Braves more this year than Francouer has.
By Lew
September 5, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
One last thing-Georgetown Kid. At the end of the season, Thomson @$.45 mil, Sosa, 2.5, Reitsma, 2.5, Jordan $1 mil, Remlinger 1 mil, will be gone, never to return (unless Jordan signs for nothing). That works out to $11.5 million. Re-signing Wickman will probably cost $5mil. That leaves $6.5 million left for raises and leadoff hitter (which we could readily do without) and KEEP Marcus. I don’t know why you think our needs require getting rid of our best, youngest pitcher. BYe.
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Dog the Bounty Hunter,
Yes. Langerhans would not have cost the Braves as many outs as Francouer. He doesn’t get himself out. Look at the AVG/OBP/SLG and compare Langerhans, Diaz and Francouer.
And please don’t misunderstand me…I believe Francouer is going to be a much better player than Diaz or Langerhans ever will be. I’m just saying Langerhans or Diaz would have helped the Braves more this year than Francouer has.
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
Payne: You’re killing me. Langerhans has been on the team the whole year and he certainly hasn’t helped more than Francoeur. What is the close and late stats on Francoeur compared to Langerhans? You like the obscure stats… I’d imagine Francoeur has Langerhans on that one. He’s, what, 2nd in the majors in late RBIs? I don’t recall the stat, but I do recall it was Francoeur and not Langerhans.
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
Georgetown: Trading a guy making league minimum isn’t going to improve the finances of the team. Who ever they’d get back in return is going to make the same as or more than James. Secondly, Giles is not untradeable. The health reports were false. He just needed to burp. I’m glad that guy is back and ready to go. He has really turned it up as of late. If anything other teams can learn from this year that Giles is better hitting second than first. So, if JS is to trade him, he shouldn’t market him as a viable leadoff hitter. JS should highlight his strengths, great defender, excellent doubles man, solid power, and great hitter in the 2 hole.
By Adam Worth
September 5, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
Dob, the handwriting was in Hudson’s weight. He’s undersized. If someone weighs 165 at age 30, he’s not gonna get any bigger or better. Hudson peaked a long time ago and you didn’t know it. Don’t blame it on the fact that nobody else said boo. Face it. You were fooled. And so was JS. And so is anybody else that thinks that JS and Dob are still on top of their respective games.
By Dog the Bounty Hunter
September 5, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
So you think, given the chance to play everyday, that Langerhans would have more HR’s and RBI’s? He was definately on pace to lead the team in SO’s.
By AZBravoFan
September 5, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
Someone mentioned Francoeur’s 4 pitch walk last night. Startling to be sure. But no one has said anything about his 3 pitch K where he never got the bat off his shoulder. That has to be a first. What happened there?
By donald troutman
September 5, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
I would like you answer this question trade andruw an get gary sheffield an put fancour in centerfrild cody in left in keep chuck in the srarting rotaion we could be in the world series next year
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
TennesseePaul,
I like the stats that matter most with concern to run production. I’m going to post this link for the millionth time that will give you an idea where I’m coming from:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2562
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
I gained 15 pounds at the age of 30. I think Hudson could do it as well. But I don’t think that would improve his location any.
By KC
September 5, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
Batting average is also a meaningless statistic.
Studies have proven that pitches seen per plate appearance is actually the most important factor (next to on-base percentage of course) on all winning teams. And the number of base advancements as compared to the number of times on base is a more reliable stat than runs scored. It’s been proven!
By Matt Yoder
September 5, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
Mr’Obrien,what do you thing the chances are of Pete Oor getting a chance to lead off and play 2nd base next year? He’s got great speed and seems to do a great job everytime he gets a chance to play…
By KC
September 5, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
Sorry Shaun, I couldn’t resist. I’m poking fun, but it’s good natured… I promise. :o)
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
So you think, given the chance to play everyday, that Langerhans would have more HR’s and RBI’s? He was definately on pace to lead the team in SO’s.
Dog the Bounty Hunter,
Homeruns and RBI really aren’t very telling when your talking creating runs. This article is the best one I’ve found to explain what I mean. I pull it out whenever I want to defend my views on Francouer:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2562
By Adam Worth
September 5, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
TennesseePaul, do you make 8 figures per year?
By Daybed Wagmoe
September 5, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
hey DOB,
during sunday’s games on the radio, they had a trivia question: Name the 4 starting pitchers to have recorded a win against every active (ie: including the devil rays)baseball team. you probably know them, but i’ll leave the answer for those that would like to think about it…
my question: i’d like to know how many pitchers have recorded a LOSS against every active baseball team. do you know this answer DOB? can you direct me to a website or other resource that would help me find that information?
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
Yes. Actually I do.
By KC
September 5, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Batting average is also a meaningless statistic.
Studies have proven that pitches seen per plate appearance is actually the most important factor (next to on-base percentage of course) on all winning teams. And the number of base advancements as compared to the number of times on base is a more reliable stat than runs scored. It’s been proven!
This link will prove it:
[http://www.barney.com/usa/index.html]
By ncscoots
September 5, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
TPaul, interesting that your comparison is you hoped Francoeur would be more like Chipper than Andruw. Chipper’s first year in 95? .265/23/86 and 99K. Admittedly, he had an OBP of .353, but that’s the only significant difference between his first year and Jeff’s. And I’d say that Chipper turned into a pretty good (and selective) hitter, no?
By Adam Worth
September 5, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this
I think you are a great human being, TennesseePaul. Could I borrow $400,000 to pay off my mortgage? Really, I like you.
By Shaun Payne
September 5, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
KC,
I understand. Some stuff from the world of statistical analysis seems insane but if you dig deep, you’ll see it makes much more sense than anything that you hear from a lot of the “experts” you hear on TV or read on the sports pages.
By TennesseePaul
September 5, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
ncscoots: Chipper turned into a pretty good (and selective) hitter, no?
Yes. Or No I guess I should say. Whatever, I agree. There is plenty of time for Francoeur. But right now, he looks more like Andruw than Chipper. He’ll mash the ball. Strike out a lot and play great baseball. I certainly hope he can turn up the pitch recognition. He seems to have in the past few weeks. That sixth inning at bat from a week or so ago… just beautiful. If he can do more of that, he’ll be huge. Huge I tell you.
Payne: I read Moneyball. I watched the trading DePodesta build the Dodgers entirely on these statistical figures, and I watch the Dodgers record the worst, or second worst season in Franchise history. There is more to it than just the numbers. If it is a choice of playing Francoeur every day or Langerhans, I, along with most nearly ever manager, would pick Francoeur.
By KC
September 5, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
Shaun, I’m just pickin on ya man. It’s always good to have thoughtful people around. Lord knows we get too many of the other variety in here from time to time.