Please comment at my new site, if you don't mind.

You know how sometimes we will just get the urgency to write? But really have no direction that we are going in? No intention to anywhere that is relevant?

Well, that is what I am going to attack, or address, whichever word you prefer. This is me with no statistics. Just going to address something that occupies my mind often.

And it is the Jim Rice, Fred Lynn, Dwight Evans debate that sometimes people view illogically.

Once again, I will state, that all three were basically equivalent offensively. All three had roughly the same OPS+. All three sort of cancel each other out in that regard.

But two are corner outfielders, meaning they can only impact the game so much. One being Jim Rice, who had the luxury of playing in a small left field, with a wall that he had an advantage in regards to the "visiting" defender.

So Rice impacted the game little on the defensive side of the ball. By all accounts, he wasn't an atrocious defender, but was average, probably at best. While the other corner outfielder--Evans--had a rocket for an arm, and is known for his defensive prowess.

Then, there was a center fielder in Fred Lynn, that by sheer opportunity, could impact the game more. Last season, fly balls into the outfield, arrived in center field 47% of the time. I use this as a reference often, because it is so relevant I think that I just blew my own mind.

This percentage couldn't have changed all that much going back to the late 70's and through the 80's. Meaning that Lynn simply had much more of a chance to put his "stamp" on the game than Rice or Lynn.

Now, quality of defense matters. It really does. Evans was notoriously known for being a great defender, Rice merely average at best) and Lynn as being, well, I don't really know off the top of my head. But the fact that he could field the position for so long had plenty of value.

So three players, all outfielders, all with basically the same offensive numbers. Counting numbers a little different.

How does one make the Hall of Fame, while the other two get tossed to the side?

How?

Evans did things Rice could never dream of doing, while doing most of the things that Rice *could* do. Yet, Jim Rice is in the Hall.

It isn't so much that I believe all three should be in the Hall. I actually prefer none of the three to be in the Hall, because I don't deem them worthy. Although, nothing personal, for they all had really good careers, and excelled at their profession.

But I think I am growing semi-angry that Jim Rice is in the Hall of Fame, the more I look at the numbers of the Scott Rolen's of the world, and the Chipper Jones' I realize just how worthy Jim Rice is of being outside the Hall.

But again, nothing personal...

Please comment at my new site if you don't mind.

An outside shot?  For injury-prone 3B Scott Rolen?  I'd say so.

His career WARP1 is 82.1.  Granted, that is just a number.  And granted, Jim Rice DID play a corner outfield spot, rather than third.  But already, Rolen has a stronger case than Rice.  According to WARP, it isn't even close.  And since Rolen is one of the greatest defenders to ever play the position, he has a huge leg up over Rice who manned a corner spot of the outfield, and wasn't exactly "prolific" at "manning" it.

There have been statements where people around baseball have referred to Rolen as being as good, if not better than Mike Schmidt with the glove.  A definite compliment.  Schmidt may be the best player the position has ever seen, and probably is.  But on one side of the ball, Rolen is very comparable to the other great Phillies 3B.

The thing that hurts Rolen most is his counting numbers.  Currently, he has 278 home runs.  And even though he is having a very good season right now (.333/.394/.494, 1.6 UZR), he is already 34, and injuries have plagued him for a while now.  So adding to those counting numbers will be difficult, given the circumstances.

His offensive numbers are very good, though, over his career up to date, .284/.371/.501, OPS+125.  So it isn't the rate stats, and it definitely isn't the defense.  It is those pesky counting numbers, the longevity, games played, etc.  Rolen will have 2,000+ hits when his career ends.  And he could end up with about 350 home runs, possibly a few more.  So those numbers---even though, again, the rate numbers are really good--just aren't all that convincing.

Now, I am not one that's going to fret over 3,000 hits, or 500 home runs as marks that need to be met in order to be Hall of Fame worthy.  But Rolen will need to get closer to 2,500 hits and 400 homers to have a chance with the voters.  Dustin Pedroia was an example that the voters--as he won the MVP--are gaining the knowledge that the stat guys have been inducing upon them for most of the decade.  Pedroia was very good defensively (undervalued in recent years).  He wasn't a great home run hitter, etc.

Of course, I could be mistaken.  Although Pedroia was deserving, he could possibly have been voted in because he almost won the batting title, or because he got hot late, etc.  It may not have had much to do with his defense after all.  But I like to think it did.

Anyway, if they have begun to include defense more so in their evaluation of a player, then Rolen might get a second look.  His 203 "Fielding Runs Above Average" is pretty solid if you ask me.

And his reputation with the glove really supersedes any number, as the voters are more of the "feel" type anyway, rather than the "dig deeper and do research" type.  For the same reason Jim Rice's candidacy has shrunk in my eyes each year, Rolen's could grow if the Buster Olney's of the world sit down and spend a few hours researching his case, trying to come up to a conclusion.

Because a great defender, with really good offensive numbers may get a shot after all, assuming he can add some to those counting numbers before his career is all said and done.

• Zack Greinke has been pushed aside: But why?  Why has everything cooled off for Greinke?  His performance is still good.  He had a  3.19 FIP and 4.05 ERA in June.  Still very good, as he had to deal with a .340 BABIP that month.  Granted, it isn't all summed up in FIP.  And it isn't all summed up in BABIP.  But Greinke still deserves to be getting praise, like he did early in the season.  But I guess it's all about the hottest hand.  And fans don't exactly love small market teams either.  But Greinke is still the Cy Young winner up until this point in the season.

• The resurgence of Scott Rolen: One of the greatest defensive third baseman ever, is hitting well AND playing regularly.  .333/.394/.494.  Speaking of solutions if Lowell is hurt worse than expected (except I don't really want him in 2010 for $11 mill  :)...This is a situation where even though the Blue Jays are still somewhat in contention, they should explore a potential trade including Scott Rolen.  Because Rolen can be bitten by the injury bug at any given moment.  And with good offense and solid D, there is no better time to sell on Scott Rolen.

• Pujols is easily one of the greatest ever: If you didn't already know.  I watched him walk twice last night, single twice, and steal a base.  Even when he is not hitting a monster home run, he is incredibly valuable.  Do you know what his Slugging is?  It is .745.  7 freaking 45!  That is remarkable, astonishing, amazing, astronomical, heightened beyond belief, ludicrous, ridiculous.  Get my point?  Is there any doubt that he's the best in the game now?

• ARod's line since he was given rest: .355/.512/.742.  4 HR, 10 BB's.  I guess it was a *particularly good* idea to give him the rest that the Yankees were supposed to give him.

Comment here if you wish, but I prefer it if you click here and do so.

Lastings Milledge is a talent that many are intrigued by.  He can hit, field, and has all the tools to be good at the Major League level.  The problem is that those "tools" haven't translated into success, they haven't "shown up" often enough against opposing Major League players.  But that doesn't mean that we should give up on him.

When I watched the Nationals live in Spring Training this season, I noticed Milledge mis-read a few balls out in center.  And it seemed like he needed to be at a corner, where he was naturally supposed to be.  That was one of the problems the Nationals placed upon him--he was a corner outfielder playing out of position.  So while learning how to hit Major League pitching, he also had to play a position that he wasn't really equipped to handle.

Now, Milledge has "placed" many problems amongst himself, so I won't blame the Nationals for his failures on a whole.  But that was just a poor decision having him play center field in the first place.  And it was because they had so many corner outfielders, they figured they would try and put the most talent out on the field.  However, it didn't work out.

As mentioned--basically mentioned anyway--Lastings has struggled at the highest level, hitting .261/.326/.400.  But after all these "struggles" he is only 24.  Just 24...

And if there is an organization that has the potential to be patient, it is the Pirates org.  The other organization that could have been very patient with Milledge was the Nationals, but they weren't.  And now they have their 28 year-old center fielder to track down balls for Jordan Zimmermann, John Lannen, and eventually Stephen Strasburg.  Which wasn't a bad idea either.

So it isn't that I don't think Nyjer Morgan can help a team.  Even Fangraphs thinks that he can help, and has value.  I think if he shifts to center, his bat will project much better, and his glove will make more of an impact.  But in Pittsburgh, he was a corner outfielder because of the surrounding personnel.  And he wasn't going to shift to center, because Andrew McCutchenis the future of the franchise.

The other thing that makes this trade a little easier to grasp, was that Nyjer Morgan is 28, as previously stated.  Not 22 or 25, but 28.  If Pittsburgh is ever going to seriously compete, it isn't going to be for a while--in any realistic scenario anyway.

Let's say the Pirates get their "stuff" together and put together a formidable squad in 3 or 4 years.  A team that can win 83-90 games for a few straight seasons.  Well, if that were to happen, then Morgan would be either 31 or 32 years old, and his prime would be behind him.

So that was the largest upside of this trade.  The Pirates took a chance on just that--upside (as Keith Law put it)--and they lost a player that really isn't going to help them much anyway, not when they are in contrention anyway.

And just one more thing...Morgan has very little power.  He has a career Slugging percentage of .376, and this season is slugging .356.  He does get on base a decent amount, which is always good.   But is isn't like the Pirates were moving a potential Gold Glover AND a power threat.  He can reach base a little above the league average, play good D, but his power is well below the league-average.  So he is useful, but flawed.

It isn't a bad trade for either side.  The Nationals had a logjam in the outfield, and the Pirates aren't going to compete soon.  Washington could have been more patient, for they have a lot of work to do as well.  But I don't blame them ridding of a questionable character, at a position of "strength."

Please comment at my new blog.

If the A's weren't so miserable to begin the season, then things may be looking quite optimistic if they were say, five games out of first.

The Angels are an above-average team, with a few flaws.  But they are not a great team, and can be caught.

The Mariners are not good.  Decent at best, yet their record suggests even a little better than that.

The Rangers are solid, it seems.  But even they feel like a year away kind of team.  As their farm is deeper than most farms.  But they will probably hang around for a while, if nothing else.

The AL West run differentials:

Angels +21

Rangers +15

Mariners -15

Athletics -35

That -35 is not as bad as one might think.

First, their pythagorean record is 34-41, slightly higher than their actual record of 32-43.

Second, they are a team full of under-achievers.

I know that Billy Beane sometimes allows us the impression that whatever he puts on the field should work.  Whatever "Moneyball" signings he inks should turn out, because they did so at the beginning of his tenure.  But this isn't really about Beane's "genius."  It is about the personnel on the field.  And although this team was a .500, maybe slightly better team on paper, they have simply not performed that way.

A player such as Giambi had an atrociously good season in 2008.  His OPS+ was 128, once again posting a very high OBP (.373), and Slugging .500.  Those numbers are good, even for a defensively inept first baseman.  But looking beyond that--and keep in mind that either way Giambi had at worst a solid year--there were definite flaws in his game.  One being the aforementioned shoddy defense that he displayed at first.  Maybe not the worst defender at the position, but below-average.  But Giambi never seemed to come through when it mattered.  And maybe this isn't a "skill" as much as it is luck, but it counts nonetheless.  His OPS with runners in scoring position was .692.  And his OPS in "late and close" situations was a putrid .596.

Now, maybe that is all luck.  Or most of it luck anyway.  But regardless, his hits didn't come at the most opportune of times.  And that should matter a little, right?

But aside from that, again, Giambi had a solid season with the Yanks in 2008.  So bringing him in, even at age 38, made sense.  Especially, for only $4 million.  And he has to be better than this right?  An OPS+ of 93 for a first baseman that doesn't add anything defensively?  Yea, he is better than that.  I am not sure how much better though.

But the risk was worth it.  And the A's have on their hands either a player that is simply finished, or a player that has simply "under-achieved" thus far.

Orlando Cabrera was brought in to shore up the defense at a premium position.  His bat was suspect at this point, but his glove was still sufficient.  And we all know how much shortstop defense matters in this game.  But this season, Cabrera has posted a UZR of -7.6.  So what?  All of a sudden Cabrera can't field?  Is that a statistical flaw in UZR?  I am not sure, but he shouldn't just become a terrible SS in the blink of an eye.  And his .247/.291/.318 line is miserable, just miserable.  He's below the Mendoza line in OBP, and his power numbers are like an injured Julio Lugo.  Cabrera was brought in on a one year deal.  One year!  Very good move for a team that was in desperate need for a healthy SS in the post-starting-Booby Crosby-era.

Nomar Garciaparra was finished, basically.  Still a solid move bringing him in.  But he's been plagued by injuries, again, and that should have been expected.  His OPS+ of 73 is terrible, and he's spent more time away from the dugout then actually in it.  That is not underachieving, that is simply what Nomar is.  Maybe if he gets back on the field, his numbers will improve, but that "maybe" is as big as anything in Nomar's case.

Matt Holliday has started to hit, but he is not what anyone expected...except me and the naysayers of Colorado production.  But even I understand that Holliday is adjusting to a new league, and a new environment, and really a new life.  So more of a sample will be needed to come to a conclusion about Matt.  However, I felt all along that Holliday would experience a little bit of struggling in his new "home."  And with the A's having little margin for era to begin with, it was just something that couldn't really happen if the A's were expecting to contend.  Holliday is hitting .277/.373/.431, which is solid.  But those power numbers are definitely sub-par for a corner outfielder.

Even "three true outcome" all star Jack Cust has been fairly useless.  His .222/.310/.406 line is everything that he has not been in the past.  High OBP?  Gone.  Power?  Gone.  Average?  Well, that isn't too far off.  But his numbers, and the fact that he's not helpful defensively, well, add up to him being awful.  If he can walk, homer and strikes out along the way, then fine.  But he's not doing the first two.

The Oakland bench has been about as terrible as can be.  The highest OPS+ of anyone residing on the bench is 73.  That is 27 percent below the average hitter.  Bobby Crosby has been less than even the sup-par Crosby we are used to.  Etc, etc, etc.  The bench is horrendous.

Again, little could go wrong for the A's, and yet everything that could go wrong, has.

The pitching has been good.  Well, the FIP part of it anyway.  The Athletics currently have the third best FIP in the American League, behind only the Red Sox and the Royals (?).  And contributions from young starters Dallas Braden, Vin Mazzaro and Josh Outman have been spectacular.  However, yet another setback occurred when Outman was placed on the 60 day DL just a few days back.  Another notch in the "things gone wrong" belt for Billy Beane and the A's.

If the Athletics were only five games out, things would be looking okay.  They could expect Giambi to at least do better.  They could expect Cust to improve.  They could expect to Cabrera to do something right I would imagine.  And they would be within striking distance of teams that may be solid, but are from uncatchable, far from great.  The A's would be a trade away from perhaps taking the division.

But they aren't five games out.  They are double-digit games out.  And they have dug themselves in too big a hole to realistically climb out of.  Sure, I mean, it could happen.  but it probably won't.  So Billy Beane finds himself in a position that he very much knew he might be in.  A position where Matt Holliday needs to be moved.  A position that shouldn't really be explored until Holliday can boost his trade value a little higher.  Another month of an .850 OPS will at least increase the numbers a little, and teams in discussions will believe Holliday is at least a little less a product of Coors Field.

Five games out feels like an eternity from now...

Please comment at my new site.

A few days back I discussed who the three most logical 3B to build a team around were.

Now, I will dive head first into the shortstop position.

Remember though, these are the three Shortstops that I would build around, based on contract, talent, performance--both offensively and defensively--makeup, etc.  They are not the three best SS.  Well, I guess they could be.  But that is not the intention.

The three SS, in order:

• Hanley Ramirez: Is there anyone else?  Sure, he may end up at another position...but even that I am not sure about.  According to UZR, Ramirez has been okay with the glove this season.  That UZR currently stands at 0.5.  And if you take out 2007, his defensive numbers aren't as atrocious as his reputation would lead you to believe.  Over the past two seasons, he's actually been middle of the pack as far as defensive shortstops go.  But offensively is where he is strongest.  Currently, Ramirez is hitting .319/.398/.562, in a pitchers park.  Talk about production.  Over the past two seasons, no shortstop even comes close to Ramirez's offensive production.  Seriously, not even close.  His wOBA of .414 is so far from second place Derek Jeter (.355) it is ridiculous.  His contract is expensive...for the Marlins.  But he actually has a great contract, although somewhat expensive if you are a small market team like Florida is.  The last three years of it he's going ot make $15-$16.5 million per season.  If he stays in a Marlins uniform through that contract, it will be very surprising.  But they DO need to have the face of their franchise there for the fans if they are going to have a new stadium.  But there is no other viable choice over Ramirez, as he is the most logical choice to build a team around at the SS position.

• Jose Reyes: This is tough.  Reyes is one of the most talented players in the game.  But his mentality is in question.  He makes base-running gaffes.  He makes other mental mistakes along with those.  And right now he is hurt.  But he will come back.  And he will play pretty well upon return.  Over the past two seasons, he is still second in WAR among SS's, all this while playing in all of 36 games this season.  Reyes is still only 26 years old, so his prime is just beginning--His supposed prime anyway.  And he brings both sides of the ball to the table, plus the ability to be a force on the base-paths.  Pre-injury, Reyes was batting .279/.355/.395, with a negative UZR.  But that UZR has been strong in the past, and there is no reason someone would ever say Reyes is a poor fielder.  Because he's not.  He is a plus defender at the most coveted position on the pitchers side of the catcher.  Reyes is only under contract one more season--at $9 million.  But in 2011, there is an $11 million club option, which will definitely be exercised.  Reyes is a heck of a player, and I would gladly take him as my SS if Ramirez was off the board.  But...

• Troy Tulowitzki: ...Tulo is hitting again.  And there are no known questions about Tulo's desire.  And there is no reason to believe that Tulowitzki will forget the situation and make a blunder.  So if he and Reyes were available, I would have to think long and hard about which player I would take.  The past three years have Tulo seventh in WAR.  And aside from his "sophomore slump" there has been nothing but stellar play out of Colorado's stud SS.  But just like every other Colorado player that has ever stepped into the batters box, there are questions about the home/road splits.  Tulo is hitting .290/.369/.486 at home, and .257/.326/.403 on the road over his short career.  So there are definite questions there.  However, his defense is his biggest strength.  An astounding UZR of 14.9 in 2007, a sub-par 2008 all -around (injuries), and this season that UZR is back up to 2.5.  Tulo is under contract for a potential of five more seasons after this year.  Which may or may not be great for a given club.

First, please comment at my new site.

Mariano Rivera is the greatest closer in the history of the universe.  In any universe, any galaxy, any planet, any day, Rivera is the best option available.

My timing is impeccable, not unlike Mariano's command.  For Rivera of course just recorded his 500th save, allowing him to stay second on the all time list, however move up one unit.  But had Rivera not recorded that save last night against the Mets.  And had he never recorded another save in his life.  He would still end up better than any reliever we have ever seen.

As mentioned, impeccable control.  The cutter is a great pitch, but not alone.  Mariano could put that cutter anywhere he wanted to, on any given pitch.  So if he couldn't have commanded it like that, it wouldn't be as great-obviously.  For there is more to pitching then simply movement and velocity.  There is also placement.  And Rivera probably could have hit a penny, floating in air, down and away to the greatest left-handed hitter in the game.  And then come back in, hitting that same penny, inside to that same left-handed hitter.

And that is my point.  It could have been Barry Bonds.  Whoever was at the plate, it didn't matter.  Rivera wasn't intimidated.  He knew that he had control of the situation, and "command" of the results.

There is no closer that I have ever seen that is really close to Mariano.  Trevor Hoffman was great, but not quite on the same level.  Others came before, and while they were utilized quite differently, they still don't match up with Mo.

According to ERA+, you know who is at the top?  Rivera, that is who.  And that ERA+ is a remarkable 197.

Best. Ever.

That doesn't mean that he's the best pitcher ever, because he isn't.  But simply being at the top of that list means that greatness is what Rivera was made up of.  Maybe even pixie dust, as his magical ability to do what he wanted with the baseball was pretty unreal.

Speaking of unreal, have you seen his WARP1?

117?

Really?

Yes, really.

Now, I do not personally feel that WARP is good when comparing relievers to starters and position players.  But nevertheless, it displays Rivera's true greatness having a number like that.

What really impresses me are Rivera's non-save numbers anyway.  Not numbers in non-save situations.  but any number outside of the save.  Because the save is a pretty meaningless "metric," sometimes.

Rivera, over 15 seasons so far, has 973 K's, to only 247 walks.  And what is just as impressive is that Rivera has improved throughout his career in the Bases on Balls category.  Back in his first two seasons, 95′ and 96,' Rivera allowed 30 and 34 free passes, respectively.  In 2007, he walked 12 batters in 71 innings.  And in 2008, only 6 walks.

6!  That is something if I have ever known what "something" was.

Those K and BB numbers give Rivera a 4:1 BB ratio, which is clearly a great ratio for anyone.

And all that adds up to a Hall of Fame career.  499 saves would have given the closer the same result.  400 saves would have given the same result.

And no I didn't forget...

Rivera in the postseason.  How could one forget?  Do you know what his ERA was?  0.77.  And with that super-low Earned Run Average, was a 5.81 K to BB ratio.  I guess if clutch exists, then this might be a place where an argument can be made.

Mariano Rivera is a first ballot, no doubt Hall of Famer.  And I would like to see anyone argue otherwise.

And this is coming from a Red Sox fan...

• Fire Brand:  Over at Fire Brand I search through the gamelogs and come to a conclusion about how the Red Sox have done against pitchers they have yet to "see" this season.

• Will Billy Butler be great or what?:  Butler is only 24, but his power really hasn't developed as planned.  With a current line of .286/.340/.443, and a wOBA of .342, he falls in at 13th in the AL in that category.  He's tenth in WAR at the position (AL only), so it doesn't get much better when looking at overall value.  I wish I could find some improvements in the numbers, but there is really not much to go on.  A slight increase in wOBA, a slight decrease in laying off pitches outside the strike zone.  And a UZR that barely makes a difference over the course of a season.  Hopefully he will develop that stroke.

• The legend of Tommy Hanson: How many years did it take Michael Jordan to have a dominating performance while having the flu?  Many, many years.  But Tommy Hanson did it in his rookie season.  Even though Hanson was recovering from it, while Jordan may have been closer to the middle of it.  But Hanson's velocity was down, as he generally has thrown an average of 93 MPH on his fastball this season.  But yesterday, we saw a lot of 91 on the gun.  Yet, he still shut down an above-average lineup.  So far in his young career, his control has been a problem, 17 walks in 29 innings.  He has impressive stuff though, and should be a great pitcher...one day.

First, please comment at my new site.

Sometimes I like to think outside the box.

Being inside the box all the time, well, it can get a tad boring.  Because being "inside the box" doesn't have much creativity, much adventure.  It doesn't always take many chances.  I can sit there and attempt to bring you the information through statistics, but it isn't always fun for me.  Especially when I am writing a blog about Chad Gaudin.

Yes, Chad Gaudin.

Former A, Cub, and current Padre.  I know, it does get that boring for me sometimes.

But here is a suggestion, an exploration.

How about trading Jonathan Papelbon?

Look, I understand the hesitance among many when discussing a subject like this.  Discussing a role that, really, is still valued in a way that many feel uncomfortable with.  But I, on this hand, this hand right here in front of me, do not value the closer highly.  Or at least not as high as many that think a team's success is so dependent upon how great the closer is.

It isn't that I don't think Papelbon is great, and it's not that I believe that he isn't an important piece to the Red Sox success.

I do.

But since I may even undervalue the closer, and feel strongly that some general manager out there will overpay for that dominant "Closer," that sense of late-inning security.  Then this would be the reason that I am exploring the subject to begin with.  That and the fact that Papelbon will eventually want huge dollars that would be considered "overpayment for services rendered."

And remember, this doesn't have to take place right now.  It could be "explored" after the season concludes.  Messing with success isn't always the best way to go about things.

But what could the Red Sox acquire in exchange for Jonathan Papelbon?  Their future catcher plus another good prospect?  A young starter and a position player prospect?  Carlos Santana?

I really don't know.  But I have a feeling that someone can be duped into thinking they need a dominant late inning guy, even if the cost be too much from an outsiders view.

Again, "dominant late inning guy" is  a great piece of the puzzle.  But it isn't worth what I feel Pap could retrieve.

I do however understand that doing anything with this right now could be messing with the perfect formula.  The Red Sox are playing great, the bullpen is a strength (a serious strength), and Papelbon--even though the walks are ridiculous right now (4.36/9)--will eventually get his "stuff" together.

When Papelbon first came up, in 2005, he was decent enough.  But as many young pitchers struggle, so did Papelbon.  And what he did then, results wise, is eerily similar to what he is doing now.

In that 2005 season, Papelbon struck out 9.00 per nine, walked 4.50 per nine, and gave up 1.06 homers per game-frame.  That results in an FIP of 4.31.

Well, get this.  His numbers are scary identical in 2009.  9.00 K's per nine, 4.50 BB's per nine, 1.09 homers, and an FIP of 4.27.

Tell me that isn't strange.

And for some reason, each year starting in 2006, we have seen a decrease in the use of the split-finger fastball.  It is now down to being used 9.3%.  As we are aware, the split has been demoted.  But it really isn't for the slider.  No, the slider is being used roughly the same amount of time.

It is still--as you may have heard--being demoted for the fastball.

Papelbon throws his fastball 80% of the time.  I know, a little too much.  He has good secondary stuff (split, slider), but he chooses not to use it.  Sure, the fastball is easily the best pitch.  But he's not Marinao Rivera.  he doesn't have a devestating, near unhittable cut-fastball.  So the reliance on the fastball, which has been getting harder this season, isn't logical.  It is not logical to rely on one pitch so heavily.  Not when the results aren't there.

And commanding the fastball, controlling it, would help resolve this situation some, help ease the numbers back to where they should be.

But don't take this the wrong way.  This isn't written in subjective fury.  I am not simply suggesting a trade for the sake of doing it, or for the sake of giving into my frustrations.

I am suggesting this because losing Papelbon would avoid having to go through contract negotatiations with a player that will probably be so far away from reality that the deal will probably never get done.  And I am suggesting it because it could very much "better" the team down the road, addressing possibly two positions of need.

Jonathan Papelbon is a great closer.  And his struggles will go away assuming he's in good health.  But if you live by the theory that "no one is untradeable."

Then, how about exploring a trade of Papelbon?

Please comment at my new blog.

Mark Derosa is not a great player.  But he is a solid piece to the puzzle.  And the Cardinals needed that "piece" to improve their postseason chances.

Currently, Derosa is hitting .270/.342/.457.  More than solid for a middle infielder, decent enough for a 3B, and less than spectacular for a corner outfielder.  His ability to simply field multiple positions however, increases his overall value.  Derosa is basically a below-average fielder all around the infield.  But a positive contributor, defensively, out in the outfield.  But still, he is very flexible, and will play anywhere the team asks him to play. And will do that unselfishly.  Plus, his fielding skills may be below-average, but he isn't so horrendous that he shouldn't be out there at all.

So if the Cardinals do in fact play Derosa in the infield the majority of the time--which seems likely.  Then his bat projects well enough to deem him worthy.  Meaning that, since the Cardinals needed an infielder, that maybe the Indians could have asked for a little more.

On the other side of the trade...

Chris Perez is a very good strikeout pitcher.  A reliever with a K/9 of 11.41.  However, Perez walks a ton of batters.  5.70 per nine this season.  And at least 4.26 everywhere he's been (Majors and Minors).  So this must be corrected.

Perez has been somewhat homer prone as well, giving up over a home run per nine.  Something which will drive a manager--and the fans--crazy.  Relievers tend to have their home runs magnified, since they occur in the later innings.

He does throw hard, with an average velocity of 94 MPH this season, 95 last season.  And with a slider, thrown roughly 33% of the time, he is known as a two pitch pitcher.  Two pitches are sufficient for a reliever, assuming the pitches are effective of course.  And he does have a curve too.  But he rarely throws that curve, leading me to believe that it isn't any good.

There seems to be some potential with Perez, especially with that ability to sit batters down.  But the walks must be fixed.

I still wonder though if the "player to be named later" will be enough to make this trade worthwhile for the Indians.  Because a reliever that needs to be corrected, seems to be less than they could have received had they held out a little longer.

Shapiro corrected a flaw in the team.  But personally, I feel like he could have gotten more.  Although that unknown player included will give us more of an understanding once he is named.