The numbers below come from Tango's Fans scouting reports and Sean Smith's forecasts linked yesterday. For the Tango numbers, I'm pretty sure 50 represents an average defender.

Arizona:

• Chris Young 69 (-1)
  
• Chris Snyder 64
  
• Stephen Drew 62 (-9)
  
• Augie Ojeda 61 (-2)
  
• Justin Upton 53 (0)
  
• Mark Reynolds 41 (-8)
  
• Chad Tracy 39 (-2)
  
• Conor Jackson 34 (-1)

There seems to be a considerable disconnect between what D-backs fans are seeing their defenders do and what the objective analysis says they've been doing. I think it might be a situation where excellent pitching is making a below average D look better than it really is. Contrast that to Colorado, where poor defense made the pitching look worse in 2008, but projects to turn that around in 2009. At any rate, losing their one true plus defender (besides, perhaps Snyder) in Orlando Hudson is going to inflict a heavy toll on the Diamondbacks in 2009. You all know my bias against Snakes, so take what I say about them with a grain of salt, but I'm hopeful that a further hit on the defense combined with regression to the mean in their pitching staff bumps their runs allowed up to at least the 730 run range for the season (they allowed just 706 in 2008), preferably as much as 750. This would put a lot of pressure on an offense that's probably incapable of scoring 750 themselves, and leave a door open for the Rockies to step up as the main challengers to the Dodgers next year.

Colorado:

• Troy Tulowitzki 77 (+11)
  
• Carlos Gonzalez 76 (+9)
  
• Ian Stewart 64 (+2)
  
• Todd Helton 63 (+8)
  
• Clint Barmes 59 (+7) 
  
• Ryan Spilborghs 57 (0)
  
• Chris Iannetta 54
  
• Brad Hawpe 41 (-15)
  
• Jeff Baker 41 (-4 2B, -6 OF)

I think Barmes is a little underrated here. Meanwhile, Hawpe could be getting a little too much credit for his arm by the voters, particularly in his accuracy, while for some reason there were too many who thought Willy Taveras threw like Juan Pierre. Tulowitzki is a major factor for the Rockies in 2009, as last season his offense wasn't the only part of his play to suffer through a sophomore slump. The Rockies absolutely need him to rebound to be the defender the fans and numbers say he will be. Without Gonzalez the Fans average score is 57, with him we obviously go up from there.

Los Angeles:

• Matt Kemp 72 (0 corner, -10 CF)
  
• Russell Martin 71
  
• Andre Ethier 68 (0)
  
• Andruw Jones 64 (+1 CF)
  
• James Loney 62 (+1)
  
• Blake DeWitt 61 (+5 2B)
  
• Manny Ramirez 32 (-15)

Call LA the Lake Wobegone of defense, where everybody's above average, at least according to the fans. Their two dynamic young outfielders seem to be the only visible overrates, however. The bad news for the Dodgers is that without re-signing Rafael Furcal, their team defense will be taking a hit in 2009. Similarly to the Rockies 2007, defense was an important part of Los Angeles' run, albeit without as much publicity. There have been signs that Kemp and Ethier have been slipping, Orlando Cabrera projects as a +1 at short, Edgar Renteria as a -6. The Dodgers have been talking to the Pirates about Jack Wilson, who would be an asset (+7) on the field, but he'd be only a marginal player in the lineup. Similarly to the D-backs situation with Orlando Hudson, it seems like there's no way around a downgrade at this position for the Dodgers. Speaking of Hudson, the Dodgers aren't going after Furcal, it could probably be safely assumed that they'll forego the cost of an upgrade at second as well. I'm getting the sense that they're saving their pennies for Manny and a pitcher. Ramirez's bat still more than makes up for his inability to defend, by the way.

San Francisco:

• Randy Winn 69 (+7)
  
• Emmanuel Burriss 65 (-2 SS, +4 2B)
  
• Aaron Rowand 65 (0)
  
• Fred Lewis 52 (1)
  
• Bengie Molina 51 
  
• Eugenio Velez 38 (-12)
  
• John Bowker 37 (-1)
  
• Pablo Sandoval (-3 3B)

I'm starting to see the imperative for San Francisco to sign either Hudson or Furcal, as their projected middle infield's just ugly brutal both offensively and defensively, and you'll note that despite their minor league depth, there's just not a really high quality talent at second or short. They've got a quality defensive outfield, but given how far behind they are offensively from the other three clubs, they could have used a defensive advantage to make up ground. Unfortunately, that advantage is just not there.

****************************

Right now, depending on LA's offseason moves and who wins the Rockies centerfield and second base jobs, it looks like the Rockies or Dodgers will project to be best defensively in the division in 2009. Both will be a good bit ahead of Arizona and San Francisco in this category, but currently neither has the starting pitching of those latter two clubs, so run prevention could still turn out to be very tight among these four. The Rockies actually need it to be, compare the last two seasons:

2008 Runs Allowed:

1. Los Angeles 648
   
2. Arizona 706
   
3. San Francisco 759
   
4. Colorado 822

2007 Runs Allowed:

1. San Francisco 720
   
2. Los Angeles 727
   
3. Arizona 732
   
4. Colorado 758
   

I think the recipe for a successful Rockies team in the current NL West is to be in that 750 RA range, while scoring about 850 or so on offense, much like the 2007 squad. If LA only allows 650 again, however, we could be in trouble. I think currently that the Dodgers are a 700 plus allowed team, but there's a lot of offseason left to change that.

Troy Tulowitzki's leg appears to be finally fully recovered after his early season quadriceps tear according to an update from Troy E. Renck. While Renck mentions how important this is for Tulo's offense, his defense also suffered pretty badly and the Rockies need both sides to be at full strength to compete in 2009. I'll have an NL West defensive preview up later today, but it should be no surprise that Tulo's a vital cog for the Rockies on that end.

Other notes by Renck include the report out of Oakland that the A's are considering offering arbitration to Alan Embree, who the Rockies have interest in. Since Embree's a type B free agent, there's no risk of losing a draft pick for the Rockies in signing him, all the risk would be for the A's if he accepts and they're burdened with an overpriced reliever. Embree on the free agent market is likely to come in well below the $3 million he made in 2008 but he still might be too expensive for such a limited role, as he's likely to require a two year deal, particularly if the A's do offer arbitration. I really wonder if there's not a better, cheaper option to fill our left handed reliever role out there.

Renck's notes also allude to this New York Times piece about the Mets looking to fill their bullpen via trade before offering contracts to K-Rod or Brian Fuentes, with one of their targets being Huston Street. I don't buy that this is anything more than a leverage play on the part of the Mets GM. The fact is that New York probably needs two late inning relievers, and they can only sign one and keep any sort of bargaining strength. They will have to eventually trade for another one. That Minaya turned down a fairly safe trade with the Rockies for Street leads me to suspect that his real intent is just the opposite of what the report says, he'll sign the first of the free agent pair to crack, and then trade for his other guy by the Spring.

Finally, Renck attempts to connect Yorvit Torrealba to Boston's search for a catcher, but that's sort of ridiculous knowing what type of player Yorvit is and what types of players Boston's actually been targetting for the slot. It's not going to happen, even as a stopgap.

The other day while writing about our left handed starters, I pointed out how costly the Rockies defense was to their competitiveness in 2008. In 2009, if we are to have any chance at all, this has to change. Using defensive projections from Sean Smith (infielders, outfielders) let's look at some of the possible alignments for 2009. This is one I think would be the Rockies ideal situation, with part of that ideal being Carlos Gonzalez' bat maturing quickly, so you could probably substitute Dexter Fowler's name if he does the same:

• 1B Helton +8
  
• 2B Baker -4
  
• SS Tulowitzki +11
  
• 3B Stewart +2
  
• LF Spilborghs 0
  
• CF Gonzalez +9
  
• RF Hawpe -15

I think Ian is a little underrated here defensively, but this arrangement already projects the Rockies a net positive of eleven runs (one win) on defense. If you believe that a porous defense cost the team fifty runs to the average in 2008, which I do, this change would be a six game swing from last season, meaning a close to .500 team without upgrades to our lineup or pitching staff. 

Okay, here's what we look like keeping Atkins at third and moving Stewart to left, Spilborghs to center. I'm going to put Barmes in for Baker at second to make up for some of the defensive hit we'd take at other positions while upgrading offensively:

• 1B Helton +8
  
• 2B Barmes +7
  
• SS  Tulowitzki +11
  
• Atkins -7
  
• LF Stewart ?
  
• CF Spilborghs -9
  
• RF Hawpe -15

We go from a plus 11 in the top example to a negative 11 here. Smith doesn't project either Stewart or Atkins in the outfield, but I'm going to assume Stewart plays around a Jeff Baker (-6) level and Atkins around a Manny Ramirez (-14) level. I've been suggesting that I'd rather move Atkins to left, keeping Stewart at third, which would amount to only a one run difference. That said, like I said in the first alignment, I think Stewart's capable of being a better than +2 third baseman, so it could be that the separation will be bigger than that. There's a pretty realistic variation on this Barmes as principal 2B, Spilly in center theme in the event of an Atkins trade, which looks like this:

• 1B Helton +8
  
• 2B Barmes +7
  
• SS Tulowitzki +11
  
• 3B Stewart +2
  
• LF Baker(-6)/Seth Smith (0)
  
• CF Spilborghs -9
  
• RF Hawpe -15
  

This would be a decently potent lineup, but we'd praying for groundballs all the time. Speaking of which, here's an alignment that Aaron Cook would probably love if he could hit like Micah Owings:

• 1B Helton +8
  
• 2B Barmes +7
  
• SS Tulowitzki +11
  
• 3B Stewart +2
  
• LF Smith +2
  
• CF Taveras +3
  
• RF Gonzalez +14
  

The Rockies would have a +47 in the field, but obviously it would not be worth it to lose Hawpe, Spilly and Baker's bats. Conversely, Cook would probably call his agent demanding a trade to Newark as long as it got him out of Denver if we settled on this arrangement as it's both an offensive and defensive sinkhole:

• C: Torrealba
  
• 1B: Baker -2
  
• 2B: Stewart +4
  
• SS: Quintanilla +5
  
• 3B: Atkins -7
  
• LF: Seth Smith +2
  
• CF: Ryan Spilborghs -9
  
• RF: Brad Hawpe -15

I added the catcher there just to emphasize how brutal things could get. There are a couple of anomalies thanks to small sample sizes in the projections so take a few of them with a grain of salt. The Stewart as a positive at second base projection is one of these. You can pretty much assume that over a full season that the number would tilt somewhere into the negative side of things. Similarly, Chris Iannetta is not going to be neutral at third base, and Dexter Fowler should be considerably better than the minus nine he's projected at in center.

Tracy Ringolsby, after awarding some turkey to figures around the league who haven't exhibited the best judgment or integrity this season, notes that even without Matt Holliday's contract, the Rockies are in line for a $5 million plus rise in their player payroll for 2009 from the 2008 season. 

So where we're at is that the Rockies will pay more for players in 2009 than they did in 2008, but less than they would have had they retained Holliday. So strictly speaking, this isn't going to be a downsizing, but certainly a scaling back. Fans obviously would like the payroll to be closer to or above that Holliday level of payroll, but articles like this make it pretty clear that this is not what we're going to be getting. Ringolsby's projection includes Garrett Atkins and Willy Taveras, two players that may not be with the team on opening day given the amount of rumors surrounding them, and there is a strong possibility that whoever's left in place of them will come at a lower salary, so how the team ultimately winds up relative to last year remains to be seen.

Compared to the rest of the division, the Rockies might actually be gaining on three of their rivals in player payroll if the $5 million increase estimate holds. The Padres are cutting back drastically, the Diamondbacks figure to settle between $70 million and $72 million, which at the top range is a slightly smaller increase than what the Rockies would be seeing, and recent statements by the Dodgers owners make it seem almost certain that LA's going to be paring back from last season's $118 million spent on players. The Giants seem eager to spend more after a year without Barry Bonds brought their salary close to Colorado, San Diego and Arizona's level, so I'd expect them to see a bump closer to the $90 million they were spending in 2007, perhaps more if they land CC Sabathia.

Of course, keep in mind that payroll's only valuable as a rough gauge of veteran talent, and by itself doesn't really say much about the overall talent level of the team.

So the direction my NL West preview posts have been taking me leads me to believe that a good part of the Rockies fate in 2009 lies largely in four left arms, namely those of starters Jeff Francis, Jorge De La Rosa, Greg Smith and Franklin Morales and how well they are able to fill three slots in the rotation. The question is what needs to be expected of them to make the Rockies competitive? My assumptions that have led me to this point are that:

1. The Rockies will lose ground in their rotation to the D-backs and Dodgers
   
2. The Rockies will gain ground on the Dodgers and Diamondbacks on offense
3. The Rockies bullpen will gain ground on the Diamondbacks, but lose ground to the Dodgers
   
4. The Rockies have no need to worry about the Padres, and should only worry about the Giants conditionally, so for the moment we won't focus on them.
5. Ubaldo Jimenez and Aaron Cook are likely to be positive contributors to keeping our total rotation loss to a minimum.
6. There is uncertainty with the other three rotation slots, but an opportunity exists to make further cuts into our two primary rivals' advantage.

Follow me after the break for a long dissection of the why's and how's that could make these four southpaws crucial components to our 2009 playoff hopes.

Continue reading this post »

Once again, what I wanted to write and post by this morning is turning out to be a much more in depth project than I initially thought, so expect a post about what to expect from our left-handed starters in 2009 later tonight or early tomorrow, but for a preliminary discussion on the topic in the meantime, a common theme in KC threads about this week's Ramon Ramirez for Coco Crisp trade, was that the Royals basically got a steal by turning Jorge De La Rosa into Crisp with a year of effective relief in between. The point of any trade is to be better going forward, past performance quickly becomes irrelevant after the deal's been done, but here is what the three provided in 2008:

Given that, who do you see as most valuable to their team in 2009?

A couple of seasons ago, I was cautiously optimistic that the Rockies could keep up with Arizona's highly thought of youth movement. I analyzed every move the Rockies made by highlighting how it might or might not allow us to compete with the D-backs. 2008 saw a shift in my focus, however, as the D-backs no longer appear to me to be the most dangerous threat in the division for the next three seasons. They will be a major nuisance, and competitive, but I'm no longer viewing them as the primary objective. I wonder if I'm right in seeing Los Angeles as the bearer of the title of most respected rival now, or if LA's 2008 success is just pushing my long term vision temporarily out of focus. So up for discussion is the youth of the division, who has the best, who needs to play some catch-up.

For each team I've listed the players 27 and under that I consider "core" players, players each team is counting on to play a part in their contention over the next two to three seasons and would be hesitant to part with unless offered an equally valuable young player at a position of need. I'm going to differentiate between an outer and inner core, the players in bold are the most important, and seem to be almost completely off limits for trades. For offensive players, where applicable, I've listed their Marcel projected wOBA for 2009, and for the pitchers their Marcel projected ERA. Some prospects won't have projections, simply because I don't do them myself and can't find them online. Young players that are successful in very small samples of experience tend to get overrated (or conversely, underrated if the opposite is true) by this simple projection tool, so before you think the Giants' Conor Gillaspie (.349 wOBA for 2009) is on his way to the Hall of Fame, just temper your expectations a bit.  For players like Blake DeWitt, Dexter Fowler and a few of the Giants like Gillaspie, I would trust other projection systems more.

Continue reading this post »

I'm working on a longer piece looking at the development of the young cores for the NL West teams, but it's taking longer than I thought it would, so I'll post this for now.

The Rockies have received permission from the Yankees to talk to Butch Wynegar for their vacant hitting coach position. Wynegar joins Don Baylor and Greg Colbrunn as interviewees for the position.

The Snakes have offered Ramon Vazquez a contract. Vazquez will be a clear downgrade from Orlando Hudson, both offensively and defensively, and might not be much of an upgrade from Chris Burke or Augie Ojeda. Clearly Arizona is hoping Vazquez is able to repeat his production with Texas from last season, but an anomalous BABIP to his career leaves considerable doubt this will be the case. While the Rockies now currently project to have the division's best second baseman (so long as they don't choose to give the job to Clint Barmes), they are not out of the woods yet with both the Dodgers and Giants pursuing Hudson to some degree.

2009 Marcel Projected wOBA for NL West second basemen:

1. Jeff Baker .335
2. Blake DeWitt .331
3. Matt Antonelli .328
   
4. Ramon Vazquez .320
5. Kevin Frandsen .316

• Orlando Hudson .346
• Clint Barmes .307

We started discussing this in a thread last evening, but the Rockies have made their moves to protect players from the Rule 5 draft coming up in December. Players added to the roster include RHP's Shane Lindsay, Ryan Mattheus and Samuel Deduno, as well as infielders Chris Nelson, Hector Gomez and Eric Young Jr. (who can also be used in the OF). The Rockies had space on their roster for all but one of these six, which necessitated outrighting catcher Edwin Bellorin to Colorado Springs to open the final spot.

I had speculated in August that Bellorin's stock had fallen when the team chose to call up Adam Melhuse instead of him to back-up Chris Iannetta after Yorvit Torrealba got injured. Yesterday's move was the confirmation that I was right. With Michael McKenry ascending the depth chart rapidly, it seems that Bellorin, Rick Guarno and Neil Wilson are having to get out of the way.

As for the six who were protected, there really weren't any surprises given strong fall performances from at least four of them (with the exceptions of Deduno and Gomez), and solid MLB level tools for all six.

Have the Rockies left any critical players exposed to the Rule 5? The team has excelled at identifying who is really of interest to teams around the league, safely letting EY2 and Lindsay go exposed last year at this time without seeing them drafted. This season, there are three players, right-hander Aneury Rodriguez, left-hander Xavier Cedeno (update, these two are ineligible, see comments), and infielder Daniel Mayora, that I could see as possibly desirable, and none of them are of the caliber or have the advanced skills of the six we did protect, so I think the Rockies will probably be safe with that trio. Right-hander Andrew Johnston might be an interesting wildcard, however. He's got some hallmarks of a typical Rule 5 pick (bullpen friendly, one MLB caliber pitch) that could entice a team, much like Steven Register did last season with the Mets. Similarly to Register, I wouldn't be surprised to see Johnston drafted, let's hope it's to another contender that can't afford to keep him all year.