I could probably end the post right there, and 99% of readers would understand and agree that this was not good business for the Cincinnati ballclub. Rolen’s having a good year, but …
a) Rolen has averaged just 106 games the past 4 seasons.
b) Rolen’s once-intimidating power has been largely extinguished by his injuries (27 HR in 07-09, just over 300 games).
c) Rolen’s BABIP this year is .347, against a career mark of .314, helping him get a career-high .320 AVG.
d) The Reds are no longer competing (realistically) for the playoffs in 2009.
e) Rolen will be 35 in 2010.
f) Rolen is due $15mil in 2010, plus the remainder of the 2009 $11mil salary. The Reds aren’t on the hook for all this money. St. Louis is reportedly still responsible for the $4mil bonus in 2010, and “undisclosed” cash went from Toronto to Cincy in the trade.
So, the first question is whether Rolen is worth the salary. The Reds seem likely to be on the hook for about $10mil for his 2010 season, plus his “getting acclimated” time in 2009. That hardly seems like a lot of money for a good third-baseman. What’s to like about Scott Rolen?
1) Rolen’s +/- scores at Bill James Online have all been +10 runs saved per season going back to 2004 (compared to an “average” MLB 3bman). Healthy in 2009, he’s on pace for another +20 season, the 3rd-best pace among all 3bmen. So, whatever impact the injury had on his bat, he’s still a force on defense.
2) Rolen’s top 3 PECOTA matches entering 2009 were: Lowell, Ripken, and Matt Williams. It seems safe to assume that his power isn’t going to miraculously return to the levels these guys sustained in their mid-30’s, but that’s some good company.
3) Rolen’s mid-season PECOTA update is a .296/.362/.495 batting line.
4) The NL has been playing weaker in recent years, in case you haven’t heard. :> There are examples and counterexamples, but all things the same, this should result in a slight “bump” to Rolen’s numbers.
5) Cincy’s park should help his power, what’s left of it.
It seems pretty safe at this point to assume that a team would happily pay Scott Rolen $10mil for a 1-year deal this offseason, given the opportunity. It’s a good contract, even with the expectations of missed playing time. Obviously, we don’t yet know the exact details, but +/- 10% shouldn’t change the fact that Rolen should be a good-value player for Cincy in 2010.
The cost to the Reds?
The appropriately initialed “E.E.”, Edwin Encarnacion, is - appropriately enough - an enigma. His fielding stats are as the negative of Rolen’s - consistently awful! He’s ranked 30th or worse in terms of extra runs allowed every full season he’s played, and is 30th again this year… with just 362.1 innings played! And +/- is a quantity stat, not a rate stat, so his current ratio of runs cost per innings afield is beyond the pale. Observers of him over time have to be perplexed, as he always showed the skill set and athletic ability indicative of at least average defensive play. But sometimes players just never get it.
The Jays have “Older”-bay at first base now, and he can’t hit lefties, and with Lind and Snider in the fold, his lefty bat isn’t as crucial to keep in the lineup… maybe EE moves to first base? Encarnacion seems like a talented hitter. He was a hot prospect, and has shown glimpses of an ability to hit for power, in between his injuries and fielding woes. His 75th Percentile PECOTA showed a .304 EqA before this year. If one’s to assume that he’ll be round .300 1 time in 3 (his 60th percentile was a still-robust .295), the Jays could have a .300 EqA hitter every third year at first base. Without a lot of additional optimism, it seems plausible that Encarnacion could also exceed those projections a little, and his fielding at the less-demanding position would become at least “average” with time.
Like Rolen, Encarnacion is signed through 2010. But, as expected, the salary is a lot more palatable to the Wells-suppressed Blue Jays budget. He’s making $2mil this year, and just $4.75mil in 2010. He appears to be on track to have little enough service time entering 2011 to allow the Jays one year of arbitration before he can opt for free agency in 2012. But by the last year of arbitration eligibility, that would probably only matter significantly if he was an MVP candidate in 2010.
So far, so good. The Reds got the better, more expensive player. He fits Dusty’s long-held belief in the importance of defense (unless a guy hits like Bonds, of course), which Jocketty also seemed to respect in St. Louis. The Jays got a cheaper player with “upside”.
Collective shrug.
Here’s the kicker: “and 2 prospects”. I’ll be the first to accept that minor-league relief stats have such a tiny correlation to MLB success as to need a microscope to find. And for the Reds to trade away three of their Louisville bullpen arms for a promising power bat (Wlad Balentien - is Jim Bowden secretly back with this organization?!) and an upgrade at a problem position seems to make sense. But these two guys going to Toronto are quite promising:
- Roenicke will be 27 in 3 days. He’s barely scratched the MLB roster. But he’s an uber-athletic player (walked on to the UCBL baseball team while there on a football scholarship), who throws as hard as you could want for a short reliever. Don’t be at all surprised to see him closing in Toronto in 2010, after being indoctrinated in their “Magical Pitching Program” (how do they do it?!) Stats-wise or scouting report-wise, there’s almost nothing to dislike about this guy’s chances. At this level of development, it’s not even fair to continue to call him a “prospect” - he’s a solid bullpen arm who still has more upside.
- Zach Stewart, just 22 and recently promoted to AAA, all accounts are that he’s a long-term reliever with 2 plus pitches (fastball/slider). But we’ve seen how the pitching wizards in the Toronto organization have converted relievers to starting; Stewart has always been a SP, so it seems likely they’ll try to keep him there. He can throw as hard as 96 MPH, with “good sink on his fastball” (BA Prospect Book), and while he’s likely not MLB-ready yet, this is exactly the sort of guy who has the chance to be a front-of-rotation starter, and a strong likelihood to be at least a decent 4th-starter or setup reliever.
We’ve all seen herds of pitching prospects fail. There’s a real chance that the Reds will look back and wonder why anyone doubted them, getting an upgrade at 3b for a few dollars more. But there’s also an outside chance that this will be looked upon as a disaster of Liriano/Nathan proportions. The final outcome is highly likely to be somewhere between, obviously. But with the current inflated market value of prospects - especially pitching prospects, who are always somewhat dicey - GM Walt Jocketty certainly undersold his assets. Badly.
This one was pretty bad. I'm a Cardinal fan and I know Rolen does nothing for the clubhouse. Jocketty loves Rolen but he has 1 or 2 playing years left. For my money the worst deal that everybody thinks is the best deal is the ChiSox/Padres deal. The Padres got a steal. Peaves is Mark Prior waiting to happen. He'll never be healthy again. This is worse than the Zambramno for Kazmir deal. My rule is that you never trade for a hurt pitcher.
As somebody who is still bitter over the Sirotka trade a few years back, I think it would be appropriate if injuries were to make Peavy a bust for the ChiSox. That doesn't mean it's all that likely to happen, however.
But Sirotka wasn't good before he was injured and Peavy is a former Cy Young winner. It's a bit different. I hope the Jays weren't basing their hopes on a marginal talent such as Sirotka.
Let's see, a 28 year old pitcher who's never started fewer than 27 games in a season until this year (aside from his rookie year in 2002) ... and he's done? Think I'll give the White Sox medical staff the benefit of the doubt on this one.
molnar: See http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=1348
To fill in the blank, according to Bob Nightengale of USA Today, the Blue Jays will be responsible for the salary remaining on Rolen's contract for 2009. Since the Cardinals are still on the hook for Rolen's signing bonus paid out in 2010, the Reds will pay $11mil for his services through 2010.
I think you're exaggerating Zach Stewart's upside a little bit, but I agree that including the two prospects makes this a loss.
How is a 27 year old who throws "as hard as you want" a closer candidate?
Just because he walked onto the UCBL team (whichever abbreviation that is... googles... United Commercial Bank? No... Upper Canadian Baseball League? Whoops, that's a fantasy league.)
Anyway, almost by default, each player in the majors has a ton of talent compared to average Joe Schmoe, and there are a lot of Joe Schmoes who were stars on their college team who never got drafted.
Scout-wise or stat-wise, if he couldn't crack the Reds creaky bullpen over the last few years, then all you have is a 27 year old organizational arm. You just can't say he's going to be a ML closer based on 16 1/3 career innings pitched.
Rather than googling the obvious typo, any primate (borderline or otherwise), half-wit or above, would have simply searched on "Josh Roenicke" and quickly discovered he went to UCLA.
I'm not a half-wit, just trying to make a point (and having a bit of fun with it). The point is that if you use an abbreviation, you should define/describe what that abbreviation is.
I'll admit I thought about googling Josh Roenicke, but figured it was more fun to hunt around and see what UCBL might stand for.. and then watch the Cub game.
Besides, UCBL is not an "obvious" typo for UCLA since the "A" and "B" keys are far apart on most standard keyboards and the "A/B" and "L" are transposed.
How embarrassing - as someone figured out, he went to UCLA. I'm not going to pretend that I had something clever in mind for "BL" replacing "LA", but there you have it.
I think he's a serious closer candidate. It's not all about age. His first exposure to full-season ball was 2007, when his seasonal age was 24, and his seasonal age in 2010 will be 27. If he'd been a position player for those "missing" years, we wouldn't think twice about it. Reports I've read since posting this are that he's actually been clocked at 100 this year. As noted, the prospects *could* be nothing, but a guy who can throw strikes with that much velocity and has something resembling a 2nd pitch has to be considered promising.
"But there’s also an outside chance that this will be looked upon as a disaster of Liriano/Nathan proportions."
I am going to have to disagree with that statement, there is no possibility the deal could turn out as lopsided as that trade. Liriano had just turned 20 when he was traded and going into the previous season was a highly regarded prospect, especially compared to Stewart. Rolen also has more defensive and offensive value than AJ Pierzynski. I see the Nathan comparison, so-so reliever goes to new team and suddenly becomes Rivera-lite out of nowhere, and the aging veteran traded for prospects theme. However, I think that the aforementioned sentence was more hyperbole than anything else.
- Liriano has also been very limited in playing time by his injuries, and age matters very little, as after 6 years, it's free market economics anyway (though the picks are nice).
- Rolen is better than AJ. But the Twins didn't get anyone of EE's ability either.
As a life long Reds fan, I am fine with this deal. At first report when it was Yonder Alonso included I was ready to jump off a cliff...but getting rid of 2 bullpen guys albeit both with some ability is a necessary evil to get Toronto to pay for some of his salary.
It is pretty inevitable that BP and most saber-heads would blast this deal...trading 2 younger players plus a guy BP has loved for years for an aging player is always met with disdain. But the thing is EE had plenty of chances to prove himself over the years and is going to start getting really expensive.
I think the Reds fans need something to get excited about and while this season is lost next year they have a better chance of winning with Rolen in their lineup as opposed to EE.
The only thing that stinks now is Edison Volquez is probably lost for 2010.
"It is pretty inevitable that BP and most saber-heads would blast this deal...trading 2 younger players plus a guy BP has loved for years for an aging player is always met with disdain."
Yeah ... you could have seen this coming from a mile away. BP has been down on Rolen ever since his injury. Last year we heard how Glaus was the better end of the exchange, but now that he's evaporated and Rolen has a decent year, do you think we'd read how the Rolen end of the deal was actually better over the two years?
Not here. Instead we are left with the usual statistical litany to convince you that Rolen's year is a fluke.
I'm not sure even Rolen at his best could make a difference in the mess in Cincy, but I'm pretty sure if all those pitchers come back healthy in Toronto they'll be wishing they had him back.
Long Beach is part of the Cal State system (like Fullerton), not part of the Univ of Cal system (like Berkeley) -- hence, you would never use UCLB for Long Beach, you would instead use CSULB.
The University of California (UC) system is comprised of the "research" schools, is generally considered to have a higher caliber of faculty and students, has more competitive entrance requirements, and higher fees. The California State University (CSU) system has many more campuses, lower fees, and is where the "teaching" schools are, meaning generally more classes for people not needing advanced degrees, and has less stringent entrance requirements. But some great baseball teams!
Either way, demand for going to college in California was so high that around the late 90s (and maybe even today?) it was almost impossible to graduate within four years because not enough classes were being offered.
Don't most large states have a distinction of this type? Each of the 3 states I've lived (CO, CA, IL) has, at least broadly speaking, a "University of XYZ" system, which is more academically prestigious than the "XYZ State University" system.
The line is fuzzier than it used to be. People still think that if you go to a technical college that you're not getting a "real" degree. Meanwhile, there are some schools that call themselves universities but aren't actually accredited and thus, don't award recognized degrees.
Peaves got another owee: The Chicago Tribune reports that White Sox SP Jake Peavy had a setback in in his return from an ankle injury on Saturday in a rehab start for Triple-A Charlotte. Peavy was hit on the elbow by a line drive in his previous rehab start and experienced tightness near that elbow on Saturday in his next outing. He lasted only 3 1/3 innings due to the injury. Peavy was taken out of the game after the Charlotte trainer visited with him on the mound.
Looks like I was right,this is what I said: chronically hurt. Strained tendon, strained muscle, ailing elbow. The list goes on. Peaves is a gamer and we all like him but he is done
40 comments have been left for this post.
This one was pretty bad. I'm a Cardinal fan and I know Rolen does nothing for the clubhouse. Jocketty loves Rolen but he has 1 or 2 playing years left. For my money the worst deal that everybody thinks is the best deal is the ChiSox/Padres deal. The Padres got a steal. Peaves is Mark Prior waiting to happen. He'll never be healthy again. This is worse than the Zambramno for Kazmir deal. My rule is that you never trade for a hurt pitcher.
As somebody who is still bitter over the Sirotka trade a few years back, I think it would be appropriate if injuries were to make Peavy a bust for the ChiSox. That doesn't mean it's all that likely to happen, however.
The Gord Ash years. The not so glory days for the Jays.
David Wells was a fat bust for the Chisox as well.
But Sirotka wasn't good before he was injured and Peavy is a former Cy Young winner. It's a bit different. I hope the Jays weren't basing their hopes on a marginal talent such as Sirotka.