Master Index of Archived Threads


Bradford

DocTee Nov 28 2006 10:12 AM

ESPN says the O's have an agreement in principle..

sharpie Nov 28 2006 10:22 AM

That's a shame. Heilman looks like he'll stay put.

metirish Nov 28 2006 10:33 AM

Well that sucks.....

HahnSolo Nov 28 2006 11:40 AM

I liked Chad. Thought he filled a nice role in the pen, and I'm disappointed if he's gone. The O's are really trying to bolster their bullpen, wtih Baez and now Bradford.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2006 11:52 AM

He's a good guy for him, as power relievers tend to get hurt disproportionately by Baltimore's shalllow power alleys. Sinkerball relievers might be the way for them to go.

Johnny Dickshot Nov 28 2006 12:13 PM

Goofy-motioned sinkerballers are vthe way for every team to go, I think. That is to say, every team oughta have one or two. Bazooka Joe Smith, welcome to big-league camp.

Frayed Knot Nov 28 2006 12:31 PM

I like Bradford -- but I also [u:2cfcf2fd18]dis[/u:2cfcf2fd18]like giving middle relievers 3-year deals which is apparantly what lured him (nothing official yet) to Bal'mer.

patona314 Nov 28 2006 12:36 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: I like Bradford -- but I also dislike giving middle relievers 3-year deals which is apparantly what lured him (nothing official yet) to Bal'mer. agreed.. how many times does a middle man pitch effectively for 4 straight years. very few come to mind.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2006 12:41 PM

How many times does a closer? The Mets likely knew they could beat other teams on money, but not on years. Good teams rebuild their bullpens regularly.

Willets Point Nov 28 2006 01:20 PM

Crazy idea, but why not negotiate to re-sign Glavine and Traschel for the bullpen. They're no longer effective in long outings so letting them pitch only 1-2 innings at a time would be the best way to take advantage of their strengths. Actually, it occurs to me that if Pedro isn't able to fully recover from his injury to be an effective starter, he would make an excellent closer. Of course,dealing with the egos and the $'s makes the idea pretty pointless.

metsmarathon Nov 28 2006 01:36 PM

Willets Point wrote: Crazy idea, but why not negotiate to re-sign Glavine and Traschel for the bullpen. They're no longer effective in long outings so letting them pitch only 1-2 innings at a time would be the best way to take advantage of their strengths. Actually, it occurs to me that if Pedro isn't able to fully recover from his injury to be an effective starter, he would make an excellent closer. Of course,dealing with the egos and the $'s makes the idea pretty pointless. plus, there's that wagner chap.

metirish Nov 28 2006 01:43 PM

Plus the small matter of Glavine wanting to reach 300 wins...Pedro in the pen I can see.....

Willets Point Nov 28 2006 01:57 PM

metsmarathon wrote: plus, there's that wagner chap. Well, the Mets could make a good deadline trade with Wagner in that case.

RealityChuck Nov 28 2006 02:00 PM

Trachsel in the pen: Willie calls for help in the third inning, and Trachsel is ready to go by the sixth. The fifth, if he rushes it. Trachsel is so slow warming up that Heinz Ketchup can beat him in a race. He he takes so long to get warm that he can prevent global warming

TheOldMole Nov 28 2006 02:44 PM

Good one-liners, RC.

Nymr83 Nov 28 2006 03:51 PM

I hate to see Bradford go, but he's getting too long of a contract and I'm glad the Mets aren't trying to match it.

ScarletKnight41 Nov 28 2006 03:57 PM

I agree - I wouldn't want to give a long term contract to someone with a history of back problems, no matter how much I like the guy.

Gwreck Nov 28 2006 10:57 PM

Biggest loss so far from the 05 to the 06 Mets.

iramets Nov 29 2006 06:38 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 29 2006 08:05 AM

A query--not specific to Bradford, but it seems to me that there are a couple of spots on a pitching staff, what they used to call "long relief," that are basically dedicated to crappy pitchers. You're down 9 to 2 in the fifth inning, and you're looking to get the damned game over without blowing out anyone's arm, so you put the POS pitcher in the game for a few innings, knowing full well you won't miss him in tomorrow's game if it's a close one because you wouldn't trust him in a close game anyway. So if you signed up three guys like Bradford (good relievers who can't count on to be sharp every year) to long-term contracts, it seems to me that one or two of them will have decent seasons over the next three or four years, and one or two won't, but that should be okay because you always need a POS pitcher for the long relief jobs. If they're good clubhouse guys, and capable of having a good season or two, and if you're going to be scrambling to pick up an extra arm here or there, why wouldn't you sign them up to 3 or 4 year deals and just not expect them to be consistently effective? (I admit I like watching Bradford pitch.) If Bradford were on another club next year, and they cut him because he's having a lousy year, it strikes me that he's just the sort of guy (Danny Graves, anyone?) whom the Mets would pick in mid-season. Now, that's a worst case scenario--at best, he could be having another good season from the get-go. I know there's a money difference, but still it doesn seem strange that you'd sign a good reliever having a bad year who's cut from another team but not sign the same pitcher before the year starts.

MFS62 Nov 29 2006 07:24 AM

I guess he can fill their Dick Hyde (righty reliever with a weird delivery) Memorial Roster Spot. Later

Edgy DC Nov 29 2006 09:00 AM

I like using the mopup/emergency starter spot to find out who among your emerging starters isn't crappy.

MFS62 Nov 29 2006 09:19 AM

="Edgy DC"]I like using the mopup/emergency starter spot to find out who among your emerging starters isn't crappy. Works for me. :) In his book The Long Season, author/pitcher Jim Brosnan commented that the term "long man" made his arm feel tired. Later

metirish Nov 30 2006 04:19 PM

Just read that the Mets get a third round pick from the O's http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2678840&name=law_keith

Frayed Knot Nov 30 2006 04:26 PM

Well Balt can't lose their 1st round pick because they're a bottom-half club, and someone other team must have lost a higher ranked FA to the O's so they'll get the 2nd rounder. The kicker is that we'll also get a "sandwich" pick - an extra pick between rounds 1 & 2 (prolly #35 or so) - which will be a whole lot higher than the 3rd rounder (prolly around #80-something)

sharpie Nov 30 2006 04:26 PM

You attached one of those elitist ESPN Insider pages which one can't see unless they pony up the bucks.

metirish Nov 30 2006 04:31 PM

Good article explaining picks... ] Explaining Type A, B free agentsposted: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 | Print Entry Some top free agents bring a small amount of compensation back to their former clubs when they sign with new teams in the form of extra picks in the subsequent Rule 4 draft. Although this rule was ostensibly designed to give clubs some kind of compensation for losing good players, especially lower-payroll clubs who couldn't or wouldn't retain those top free agents, it was also put in place to produce a slight drag on free-agent salaries. Not only has it clearly failed on both of those goals, but it has slightly distorted the market for free agents, making certain players more or less appealing than they otherwise would be. The compensation rules were simplified in the most recent collective bargaining agreement, so that now there are only three types of players: • Type A players, ranked in the top 30 percent of players at their positions. A team that signs a Type A player gives its top draft pick to the club that the player is leaving. The "losing" club also receives a supplemental pick in the "sandwich" round between the first and second rounds. • Type B players, ranked below the top 30 percent but in the top 50 percent of players at their positions. A team that loses a Type B player receives a supplemental pick, but the signing team does not lose any picks. • All other players, who carry no compensation at all. There had previously been a third class of "Type C" players, but that was eliminated in the new CBA. The two compensation classes will shrink beginning in the winter after the 2007 season; the Type A pool will only comprise players in the top 20 percent of their positions, and the Type B pool will only comprise players in the second quintile (21-40 percent). The rankings come from a formula that MLB and the players' union agreed on in the early 1990s, entrusting Elias with the task of generating the statistical rating for each player. The formula -- the specific components of which no one seems to know -- looks at player statistics from the preceding two seasons, combining both bulk statistics (that is, ones that increase with playing time) and simple rate statistics (such as batting average). It then ranks players in each of those categories and then assigns each player a points value inversely related to his ranking. In this respect, the formula is based on where a player ranks in relation to his peers in each category -- not how the player actually performed. If you led all players at your position in home runs over the past two years, it wouldn't matter if you hit 40 or 80 -- you'd get the same number of points. If a team has a draft pick in the first half of the first round (that is, in the top 15 picks), its first-round pick is protected from the compensation process, meaning that the highest pick it can lose for signing a Type A free agent is its second-round pick. This has already affected three clubs -- the Cubs (for Alfonso Soriano), Orioles (for Danys Baez) and Indians (for David Dellucci) all signed Type A free agents, but lost their second-round picks rather than their first-round picks. Given the rapidly expanding sandwich round and the weak college crop in the 2007 draft, it's likely that one or more of those clubs was more willing to surrender that second-round pick knowing that its value this year is low. If a team signs more than one Type A free agent, its picks are parceled out to the "losing" clubs in an order determined by the ratings of the free agents the team signed. For example, Baltimore signed Baez, whose rating was 69.810, and Chad Bradford, whose rating was 62.890. Since Baltimore's first-round pick was protected, the Orioles lost their second-round pick to Atlanta (for Baez) and then their third-round pick to the Mets (for Bradford). If, however, the Orioles were to sign a Type A free agent with a rating higher than Baez's rating, then that player's former club would get Baltimore's second-round pick and Atlanta and the Mets would get the O's third- and fourth-round picks respectively. The picks in the sandwich round follow the normal draft order, meaning that it takes place in reverse order of finish (but only includes teams that have received extra picks). However, a team that has received two sandwich picks must wait until every team that picks in the round has selected once before it makes its second pick; a team that has received three picks must wait until all teams with two or more picks have selected twice; and so on. There is also a set of quotas governing how many Type A and B players one club may sign as free agents in one winter, with that number determined by the total number of Type A and B players who elect free agency in that offseason. • If fewer than 14 Type A or B players elect free agency, no club may sign more than one such player. • If 15-38 Type A or B players elect free agency, no club may sign more than two such players. • If 39-62 Type A or B players elect free agency, no club may sign more than three such players. • If 63 or more Type A or B players elect free agency, "the Club quotas shall be increased accordingly," according to the basic agreement. Since 93 Type A or B free agents filed for free agency this winter, the per-club quota this offseason is eight. However, each team may sign as many Type A or B free agents as it loses in any particular winter, even if those signings would put it over the quota for that winter. At this writing, only Baltimore has signed three such free agents (Baez, Bradford, and Jamie Walker, who was a Type B). The rating system groups players into five categories -- catchers, starting pitchers, relief pitchers, infielders other than first basemen, and first basemen/outfielders/designated hitters. Players are ranked in five to seven statistical categories, with the specific categories varying by their position grouping (e.g., there are no fielding stats used in the 1B/OF/DH group, but the catcher and infielder groups each include two defensive stats). Cumulative statistics may be adjusted for players who spent time on the disabled list, restoring stats for up to 60 days of missed playing time. Each player is then given a point total for each statistical category that is inversely related to his actual ranking. For example, if there are 100 starting pitchers in the ranking, then the pitcher with the lowest ERA gets 100 points, the pitcher with the second-lowest ERA gets 99 points, and so on, until it reaches the pitcher with the highest ERA, who gets one point just for writing his name. This system has an obvious flaw, of course, as it gives no weight to the distance between any two players: If the top pitcher's ERA is 0.1 or 0.01 or 1.0 runs better than the ERA of the next-best pitcher, it doesn't matter, as he still only gets one extra point. Point totals within each position are then scaled to make 100 a perfect score.

Nymr83 Nov 30 2006 08:44 PM

the fact that Soriano and Danys Baez are worth the same type of compensation is a joke.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2006 10:05 PM

It's only just a few hours ago that the Orioles finally announced the Bradford signing.

Zvon Nov 30 2006 10:21 PM

ugh--this bummed me out. He was pretty crucial.

Nymr83 Nov 30 2006 10:52 PM

i liked him alot but good teams dont give middle relievers deals like that.

metirish Nov 30 2006 10:59 PM

Agreed ,Bradford was great for us and he got a great deal out of it...good for him.

patona314 Nov 30 2006 11:00 PM

Edgy DC wrote: It's only just a few hours ago that the Orioles finally announced the Bradford signing. i believe that steve schmoll is still on the mets 40 man roster and he is a carbon copy of mr.bradford. am i wrong?

ScarletKnight41 Nov 30 2006 11:06 PM

Schmoll (one of my adopted prospects, btw) is definitely on the short list of possible in-house replacements for Bradford.

Edgy DC Nov 30 2006 11:19 PM

It depends what you mean by "carbon copy." Copying the style doesn't necessarily produce a copy of the results. Schmoll clocked a 4.69 ERA in Norfolk, though he had enough solid peripheral numbers to keep things interesting. He is on the roster. He's 26 but his face is that of a boy.

patona314 Nov 30 2006 11:21 PM

someone slap that hat off his head.

metirish Nov 30 2006 11:22 PM

Huge hat he has...

cleonjones11 Nov 30 2006 11:49 PM

Wasn't Roberto Hernandez supposed to do the middle-thing... anything? We need starting pitching..all else is moot

metirish Nov 30 2006 11:50 PM

Bert is going to the Indians...so reports say....