Fiddling with the Lineup

[Newman]

Agree, Gerry and Jackass.

When Josh Fogg suddenly becomes your #3 starter, where's the hope?

Other teams manage to scuffle and come up with moves like Barrett or Bradley. Why can't we? Because people left with bad feelings or is it just that the owners don't want to spend the money. MLB on the cheap. It's so much harder to play the game that way. Sell the team!

[John Cocktoston]

Let's not get too carried away here.

Michael Barrett is currently on the DL. More importantly, he's got an OPS of .437 since the All-Star break. That's not a misprint. He has an OBP of .200 and a SLG of .237. On the season, his OBP is .286. Let's not mistake this guy for anything resembling the answer to our prayers at the backup catcher position. To acquire him, the Rockies would have had to trade a young player or two and pay about $2.1 million in salary. He's not even replacement level, so explain to me how that makes sense? If you offer to punch me in the face if I give you $50 and I turn you down, does that mean that I'm a cheapskate?

As for Milton Bradley, acquiring him to provide outfield depth is an oxymoron. The only reason someone with his talent is available (apart from the fact that he's a headcase) is that he can't stay healthy long enough to step on the field. I think it's fair to look at what he's done in SD since Kevin Towers made what you seem to think was a shrewd move in picking him up. He had a total of 17 AB's between April 30 and July 1 due to injuries. He's got 9 AB's so far in August, largely because he hasn't played in almost a week due to a recurring hamstring strain that is likely to earn him another trip to the DL. You're talking about a guy with 140 AB's this year and exactly 1 full season under his belt in the course of an 8 year big league career. That's remarkable.

And that's better than $4 million invested in two months of a sub replacement level backup catcher and a talented outfield bat who would be more of an injury risk than the guys he was brought in to play behind. Not to mention the opportunity cost, which is that Bradley would have had to outperform Spilly over the last month, since that's who he would have been stealing AB's from.

[Newman]

You make good points, JC. Still, I'm glad I'm not in your shoes as the official apologist for the Monfort Administration here on this site. I'd almost rather be Tony Snow. Hold it. I take that back.

I'd still rather have Barrett than Geronimo Gil.

I wonder if Stewart is going to face the third lefty in today's lineup or has his confidence already been dampened by getting hit in the head. Why not start Carroll at 3B, have an all righty lineup, and use STewart as a lefty pinch hitter off the bench in later innings to face Marmol and Howry and Wood?

So Tim Harrikula gets the nod today rather than take the chance on Morales. It's so easy to question Hurdle and O'Dowd and their history of failure.

[Roxpert]

JC does make good points about THOSE two Padres acquisitions. Still, it doesn't absolve O'Dowd for NOT executing a plan to bring in a spare pitcher (like a Shawn Chacon?) who could be ready to come up from CO Springs, or out from the bullpen, at a moment's notice if Lopez and Hirsh are out at the same time. And DOD should have known that would be a real risk, given Lopez was DL'd earlier in the year and Hirsh was coming off an ankle sprain.

Good teams have depth in case of pitching injuries such as what we've experienced. Harikkala is NOT "depth", he's a body to throw out there today. Who knows, it could work out if we score 15 runs again today. But I don't like the odds.

BTW, I also blame Hurdle for his usage of Stewart against lefties right off the bat, his failure to play Hawpe at 1st base with Spilly in RF, which cost us at least one game this year due to Baker's putrid defense, and his putting Buchholz into his long-relief "doghouse". Clearly, Buchholz was showing promise the last time he was in the rotation when Fogg was DL'd, so why not use him in that role again? Oh, I see. We'd rather have the likes of Jimenez and Harikkala making starts.

It's tough to stay in contention when you have a GM and manager that do nothing to help keep the team winning.

[John Cocktoston]

When you say "take a chance on Morales", what you're really saying is "take a chance with Morales and his future for the sake of 1 game."

He just threw 106 pitches three days ago. You want to bring him back, on three days rest, to make his MLB debut today? Think maybe, just maybe, it makes more sense to call him up and put him into the rotation on Tuesday night to make a start on normal rest?

This is what really bothers me about some of the dialogue on this site: you're quick to call me a "Monfort apologist" but all I'm doing is pointing out that what you're saying makes no sense. The choices DOD and Hurdle make don't exist in a vaccum and saying that Morales should start today is as realistic as saying that the Rockies should start Johan Santana today.

If anything, I'm an apologist for common sense...

[Newman]

Bah.

I don't have the timeline in front of me. That would help. But when did Rodrigo go down for the year? And when did Hirsh pitch 5 innings with a broken leg? Why have Morales throw at all this week at AA? Where is the contingency plan ? Why is Harrikula plan B?

JC you are defending the O'Dowd/Hurdle decisions. Common sense says that if you're number 3 starter goes down with an elbow tendon that you look to the Farm System as well as Korea and everywhere else.

I agree with you that pitching Morales on 3 days rest isn't smart just like throwing Stewart against a tough lefty like Rich Hill wasn't smart. I think we're all for common sense, for what works, FOR WINNING!

[John Cocktoston]

What you just hit upon without saying it is that the injury that really hurt was Greg Reynolds. That was the contingency plan. He was the insurance for the starting rotation, so when he went down it was as big a blow to the ML roster depth as losing Rodrigo or Hirsh.

I'm all for depth and making moves that make you better, Newman. I just don't think it's helpful to criticize in the abstract when there is nothing abstract about roster moves and deadline trades.

If you want to criticize DOD or anyone else for not adding a quality starter at the deadline, that's absoutely your prerogative. But be fair about it. Rather than referring to some amorphous "veteran arm" or "#3 starter type" tell us exactly who you would have brought in. Which veteran starter that was available at this year's deadline would you have liked to see in Rockies' pinstripes? And beyond that, let's see you make the case that acquiring him would have been worth the price in terms of the talent that we would have had to surrender to get him.

If you're unwilling, or unable, to do that then the whole conversation is kind of moot. I know you're going to slam me for being a Monfort apologist or defender of DOD, but that's really and truly not what I'm trying to do here. I'm just expressing my earnestly held opinion, which happens to differ from yours. That's it...

[Newman]

You have every right to defend DOD. But don't try to spin it that you are not doing that!

I am a mailman. I'm not a scout or a GM. I don't have lists of people who are available or nobody is calling me with possible deals. I see other GMs making moves, like Towers in SD. If other GMs can do it, why can't we?! I hate that argument that unless I have exact info on what I would do then I should stifle myself. I think that's crap. That's just a way to muzzle the public, crush dissent, IMHO.

Harrikula has a 2-0 lead in the 4th. Maybe we'll get lucky.

My move would have been Morales. When people on the big league squad go down you have to have contingency plans.

Barmes in CF seems interesting. More righty bats in the lineup. But why isn't Carroll's bat at 2B?

I wonder how Ian's head is this afternoon. Was he taken out after he was beaned? Never saw anything about it in the Post. 2-2 now in the 4th.

And as for Reynolds being our fall back position, well, he's had a sore arm for a long time now. There was plenty of time to turn the page on him and make Morales the new Plan B.

They are really starting to batter Plan B Harikkula now. Will he be able to get out of the 4th inning?? Who constructed this plan? Rumsfeld?? Losing now...3-2...heart of the Cubs order coming up... Harikkula gets yanked and the bullpen will get overused. Fortunately there's a day off tomorrow. Still...another failure of the Monfort - ODowd - Hurdle administration. Who can defend it?

Harikkula goes 3 1/3 and gives up 9 hits. This isn't Korea.

[Newman]

Why not experiment with next year's lineup?

I propose leading off Helton. Why not? Didn't Wade Boggs lead off most of his career? Todd is a similar singles hitter, no speed, lefty, similar to Boggs and Mark Grace. I don't want to see him in the cleanup spot next year, do you?

If we have to trade Atkins, BECAUSE OF MONEY, then what to do? Showcase him? Or see what we have in Stewart in September? I guess it's too late to trade him now, to the Angels, for Erwin Santana?

What will next year's lineup look like? We are stuck with Helton and his contract. May as well face it and do the best we can with it. There is no moving Atkins to first and Stewart to 3B which is what I would prefer, and trading of Helton.

1. Helton 1B
2. Tulo SS
3. Holliday LF (the last year before he gets moved)
4. Hawpe RF
5. Spilly CF
6. Stewart 3B
7. Ianetta C
8. Caroll 2B

This lineup should safely ensure us of 4th or 5th place in the NL West, where we are most comfortable, and get us our normal 76 wins.

[rockieprogress]

Originally Posted by Newman

We are stuck with Helton and his contract

It was interesting to read that the only Rockie to clear waivers was Helton.
You're right General, it looks like we're stuck with Helton unless the FO assumes a lot of his contract.
With his production this year, that means about 65% his contract.

[Newman]

What owner is crazy enough to want a single's hitter at 1B, a power position still in MLB?

I suppose we could get rid of Todd if we assumed 65% of his contract. Does that even make sense? Why not just keep him?

That's the decision. We would get more power with Atkins at 1B and Stewart at 3B, if we could trade Helton. That is...if Stewart lives up to his potential. Some rookies never do. Roberto Mejia anyone?

[BigRapidsJackass]

Newman, I like your idea. I'd still like to see Helton bat 2nd, but I think the fear of the doubleplay would stop anyone from doing that. You're right. He is Wade Boggs now. And there is absolutely nothing bad about having Wade Boggs in your lineup. Just stop pretending he's Stan Musial at this stage of his career and make the best use possible of his skills. He'll be at best a 16 HR guy this year, playing half his games at Coors ...

... and you're right about another thing. This franchise is so damn comfortable about playing one game over .500 that they'll never climb out of 4th place.

The September call-ups don't offer anything that could help us win games. No late-season veteran acquisitions. No Brett Tomkos or Joe Kennedys or even Jay Witasicks. Just the 5th coming of Omar Quintanilla and the 2nd taste of the majors for Juan Morillo so everyone can go "ooh, look at the power arms we'll have next year."

For everyone who says I've given up on 2007, my response is this: I've given up because, quite obviously, the Rockies have given up.

[Newman]

Originally Posted by BigRapidsJackass

Newman, I like your idea. I'd still like to see Helton bat 2nd, but I think the fear of the doubleplay would stop anyone from doing that. You're right. He is Wade Boggs now. And there is absolutely nothing bad about having Wade Boggs in your lineup. Just stop pretending he's Stan Musial at this stage of his career and make the best use possible of his skills. He'll be at best a 16 HR guy this year, playing half his games at Coors ...

... and you're right about another thing. This franchise is so damn comfortable about playing one game over .500 that they'll never climb out of 4th place.

The September call-ups don't offer anything that could help us win games. No late-season veteran acquisitions. No Brett Tomkos or Joe Kennedys or even Jay Witasicks. Just the 5th coming of Omar Quintanilla and the 2nd taste of the majors for Juan Morillo so everyone can go "ooh, look at the power arms we'll have next year."

For everyone who says I've given up on 2007, my response is this: I've given up because, quite obviously, the Rockies have given up.

Looks like Clint is putting Helton in the number two hole. I still don't see how that helps us, if it keeps Taveras leading off. I wish Hurdle had the guts to copy LaRussa's tactics:

1. Helton 1B
2. Barmes 2B
3. Matt LF
4. Hawpe RF
5. Atkins 3B
6. Tulo SS
7. Ianetta C
8. Pitcher
9. Spilly or Posednik or Willy CF

Helton has the best on base percentage, right? Why not lead him off?

The problem with Taveras leading off, and then stealing 2B, is that it ignores the main problem - you can't steal first base!

[GerryInCS]

Originally Posted by Newman

Helton has the best on base percentage, right? Why not lead him off?

Why not? Because your lineup has Barmes behind him, which is next to no protection. This means that pitchers can actually go after Helton rather being cautious because Holliady/Atkins are not directly behind him in your batting order.

[Newman]

So they go after Helton and he homers. Is that a bad thing? Not that he homers very often anymore. So he doubles. It's all good.

Barmes is batting .305 currently. That's protection. I've never heard of protecting the leadoff hitter before. Is this a new concept?