Let's face it, there's going to be a lot this season that I'm going to gripe about. I figured, with this post, I can start getting some of it out of the way early.
Something bothered me this offseason. Well, not just one thing (damn you, Ruben Amaro!), but this has been bugging me for a while: why is it, that while we were all talking about the shoddy state of the Yankees' rotation, no one was talking about Phil Hughes? While we were going crazy over a certain new Phillies pitcher, Hughes quietly won 18 games last year. Sure, his 4.19 ERA shows that he's got to learn how to keep his stuff under control, but he turns 25 this season, so he has time to fix his mechanics. He's been an erstwhile starter since 2007 (and went 5-7 in his first 2 seasons) and spent most of 2009 in the bullpen, where he went 8-3 with 3 saves and 18 holds. Of course, with A.J. Burnett turning out to be a colossal bust (at least at the time of this writing) and Andy Pettitte winding his career down, Hughes' necessary return to the rotation obviously proved positive for him. He only had 146 strikeouts in 176.1 innings, but seeing as there's more pressure and more expected of him in 2011, all indications are that he's ready to meet and hopefully exceed the expectations. To be honest, after the way things went down last season and in spring training, I was hoping that Hughes would be lucky enough to be the 2nd starter after CC, but instead, Burnett solidified his name as number 2 in New York (think about it for a second). But maybe, either when A.J.'s contract runs out, or the fans run him out of town, Hughes will get to shine like I think he's meant to.
Another thing I'm having trouble understanding, what is the big deal about Adrian Beltre? Don't get me wrong, I like him, and leading everyone in doubles with 49 last season points to a player that can produces runs like a true pro, but what's he got left that makes him so appealing? He turns 32 in a few days, has been playing for 13 years, and could feasibly reach 2,000 hits this season, as well as 300 home runs (he also hit a grand slam yesterday, leading me to begin to analyze his stats, leading to this post). However, he toiled in moderate obscurity until the past 2 seasons, as he spent 1998-2009 with the Dodgers and Mariners. He really became even more famous last season with the Red Sox, but even they didn't want him back after acquiring Adrian Gonzalez from the Padres and showed Beltre the door. Again, don't get me wrong, he is a fantastic player. A little past his prime, but you could say the same about one of my favorite players who will remain unnamed (hint: he plays shortstop (at least for now) for, surprise, the New York Yankees). Clearly, he's still got at least 3 or 4 more productive seasons in him, if he can avoid prolonged injury. But is he a piece of a championship caliber team? Is he one of those game-changing players, or simply a supporting character? He's in a market that, until very recently, didn't have much going for them. However, after the Rangers' incredible run to the World Series last year, Beltre's return was very welcomed but maybe a little poorly-timed. He's not going to supplant outfielder and reigning MVP Josh Hamilton as the golden boy in Arlington, and his presence alone has caused a great amount of trouble for longtime Ranger Michael Young, who's made 3 position changes in the past 4 years. I think he'll add a lot to this already powerful club, but a) is it really necessary, and b) how much more can he do?
Roy Oswalt, a favorite here at TBF, is scheduled to take the mound for his first official start of the season. I think Cole Hamels should have been given the 3rd spot in the rotation: of course, you won't get into the first or second slot, but a World Series MVP and champion should be before a completely neutral pitcher. Sure, Oswalt has more wins, K's, and a lower ERA, but he's been playing twice as long as Hamels has. He's also 5 years older than Hamels, at 33 and 28 respectively. And yet, look at what each has accomplished: Oswalt led an Astros team that surprised everyone to a World Series in 2005, won the NLCS MVP, and didn't do anything noteworthy before or after, aside from a 7-1 record in 8 games after being sent from Houston to the much better Philadelphia team. Hamels spearheaded a rotation that went to 2 straight World Series, winning the first one, was also the NLCS MVP and World Series MVP, and has managed to stay pretty healthy through his young career. Which one would you pick in a fantasy draft? Plus, I still haven't forgiven Oswalt for his monumental snobbiness last season when, with a 6-12 record, an ERA flirting with 4.00, and a 3.53 K/BB ratio, he demanded that whatever team plucked him out of the dying grasp of the Astros organization not only negotiate a new, lucrative contract for him, but also pay his $16 million option that Houston promised him. This, to me, is a glorious example of the truly gluttonous greed not only in baseball but in all sports. If he had more wins than losses and actually seemed like a pitcher that was making an impact, I would have understood. But 6-12? Really? You're going to be that arrogant with twice as many losses than wins? Give me a break. Oswalt would have to have a Cy Young-caliber season this year (and in a rotation with another, far more talented Roy) for me to begin to think about liking him.
No comments:
Post a Comment