Where Have You Gone Andy Van Slyke? - A Pittsburgh Pirates blog

Kevin Goldstein's Top 101

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:51:46 +0000

Over at Baseball Prospectus today, Kevin Goldstein's got his top 101 prospects listed. I could be wrong, but I think this is the first list to put six Pirates in the top 100. Goldstein's Buccos in the top 101 are:

9. Gerrit Cole
13. Jameson Taillon
42. Luis Heredia
43. Josh Bell
56. Starling Marte
76. Robbie Grossman

I have a few thoughts. The first is that, if you remember, Goldstein talked quite a bit about how top-heavy the Pirates' system is on his podcast about six weeks ago, but it's obvious that part of the reason that he thinks it's top heavy is that he really likes the Pirates' top five prospects. I'm also happy to see Jameson Taillon stay high on people's lists because it means that they're interpreting his first-year results (that he had a strong year, even if his ERA was a bit high and he didn't quite dominate) pretty much the same way that I am. And it's nice to see Robbie Grossman get some love. I think he turned quite a few heads in the AFL this year. I hope he's healthy for the season to start.

And finally, it's nice to know that Luis Heredia is the answer to the question of life, the universe, and everything. I assume that Dan Fox and his crew are running simulations to determine the question as we speak. Once that's done, the Pirates will be unstoppable.

I mean, what the heck, why not just fill up the whole front page of the blog with AJ Burnett posts?

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 04:50:39 +0000

@HussarJ I'm absolutely okay with it, the fact is, is that this game is a business and I understand perfectly what is going on within it.
— A.J Burnett (@AJ_Burnett34) February 13, 2012

AJ Burnett is not Matt Morris (and other thoughts on the potential trade)

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:06:57 +0000

I was going to wait until the Pirates and Yankees officially have a deal more about AJ Burnett, but since I'm in lab this afternoon without much to do I figured I'd put together a post that tries to get as much Burnett information into one place as I can. I have this bad habit of assuming that everyone is on the same page as me, even when I write things in November and don't really fully explain them for months after that.

Whether or not the Pirates can complete a trade for AJ Burnett, they definitely need to add another pitcher to the rotation before the season starts. It's true that the rotation as-constituted is pretty much the same as it was last year with Maholm swapped out for Bedard, but that doesn't mean it's good enough and there are several reasons why. First off, the Pirates had five starters last year throw more than 150 innings. That is insane; the Phillies had three, the Giants had four, the Braves had three, and I could keep going down the list with the rest of the NL's best rotations. There's no reason to believe Pirates will be nearly as healthy in 2012 as they were in 2011; Erik Bedard is in the rotation now and Charlie Morton already has a hip problem that could cost him time in April and that's not even considering James McDonald's big inning leap from 2010-2011. Without another starter, the Pirates are going to spend considerable time leaning on guys outside of their top six. That means Rudy Owens or Jeff Locke -- two guys who as of today are certainly not ready for a regular role in a big league rotation -- or some cast-off like Jo-Jo Reyes or Shairon Martis.

Beyond that, the Pirates' first six starters aren't really very good. The team allowed 712 runs last year, which was well below average and 11th in the National League. There's no real barometer for Charlie Morton once he comes back from his injury because of the changes he made last year and he could just as easily take a big step backwards as he could continue forward. Jeff Karstens almost certainly used a bunch smoke and mirrors last year and his ERA will swell at least a little bit once he starts allowing something other than solo home runs. James McDonald is inconsistent and impossible to get a read on. Kevin Correia is awful. Brad Lincoln's ceiling isn't much higher than a fourth starter and there's no real reason at this point to think he'll even be that good. No one can say anything for certain (last year's rotation ended up much better than we all expected, even if it wasn't good), but I have absolutely no qualms about saying that I think the Pirates' rotation will be a disaster in 2012 if they don't find another starter.

So, is AJ Burnett that particular starter? He certainly hasn't been that great in New York over the last two years and he's 35 now, so there's plenty of reason for concern. That said, he's thrown 377 innings over the last two seasons and even though he's been bad in those two years he's managed a lot of strikeouts and a K/BB rate of 1.98 and his xFIPs in those two years have been significantly better than his ERA (ERAs: 5.26, 5.15; xFIPs: 4.49, 3.86). What the low xFIP means is that Burnett's home run rate exceeds what you might expect it to be based on his flyball rate. Given the way that balls have flown out of Yankee Stadium III since it opened in 2009, this is a pretty expected result. In simpler terms what that means is this: if you throw out his high ERA and all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth from Yankees' fans and the New York media over Burnett's performance in pinstripes and just look at the relevant numbers, there's plenty of reason to think that a trade out of Yankee Stadium and out of the AL East would do wonders for Burnett's career.

I don't mean he'll be better because of some stupid Yankee-centric BS reasoning about the spotlight being off of him in Pittsburgh, I mean that his numbers suggest that he can still miss bats at a reasonable rate and that if he moves out of Yankee Stadium his home run rate will probably drop a bit and if that happens, he could still be a productive pitcher for the Pirates for 180 or so innings. Purely on numbers, this trade would look like a win for the Pirates if they can negotiate their end of Burnett's salary down to about $5 million per year and not have to give up any sort of significant prospect. Anyone that compares AJ Burnett at this point in his career to Matt Morris in 2007 should have their keyboard taken away. Burnett has strong peripherals that are being masked by a terrible pitching environment whereas Morris in 2007 had awful peripherals matched by a great pitching environment. Burnett may not work out, but it's not because of something that's immediately apparent from his recent performance if you take any time at all to analyze what he did as a Yankee.

All of these things being said, there are reasons to be nervous about Burnett from the Pirates' perspective, even though these reasons are much less concrete. As mentioned above, Burnett is 35. In 2008, the first season in which PitchFX cameras were installed in every ballpark in baseball, Burnett's fastball clocked in at an average of 94.3 mph. Last year it was down to 92.7. That's still a decent average velocity, but it's obvious from his fastball rate and his tailing strikeout numbers (his 7.0 K/9 in 2010 was the lowest number he's had since returning from Tommy John surgery in 2004, though he rebounced to 8.2 K/9 last year) that he's on the downside of his career. Just like young players don't always improve in linear fashion, old players don't always lose their skills in linear fashion. Burnett could certainly be about to fall off of a cliff in terms of ability. He doesn't seem to be there quite yet, but it's not something that's easy to say for sure.

It's also worth mentioning that while PNC Park is generally more pitcher-friendly than Yankee Stadium, it's better to left-handed pitchers than it is to righties. The right field foul pole at PNC is relative close (320 feet) and the 21-foot high Clemente wall only makes up for so much of that. Left-handed hitters have a significantly easier time putting the ball out of the park than righties do at PNC, so it's possible that the stadium change won't alleviate all of Burnett's home run woes. It should at the very least help a little bit, but let's not pretend that he's moving out to San Francisco or San Diego.

There's also the Pittsburgh Pirate factor. Burnett has made his desire to stay in New York and compete for their last rotation spot well-known. Being traded to the Pirates is something much different. Does anyone really think that Nick Evans is as excited about his invite to Pirates' camp as Bill Hall was for his invite to Yankees' camp? Remember when the Pirates traded Chad Hermansen to Chicago for Darren Lewis and Lewis just flat-out retired rather than join the team? Or the way Jody Gerut milked his knee injury to get released rather than play for the Pirates? I know I don't need to remind anyone about Raul Mondesi or Aki Iwamura or Derek Bell and their illustrious Pirate careers. Burnett's got $87 million in the bank with $33 million more coming over the next two years no matter what. No one can make him want to be a Pirate if he doesn't want to be.

It's incredibly unfair to Burnett to suggest that he's just going to fold up and quit if he gets traded to the Pirates, though. The Pirates are actually offering him an opportunity to pitch every fifth day, and that's not an opportunity that he's going to get anywhere else. Once the Yankees assume the burden of most of his ridiculous contract, there's no reason the Pirates can't flip him at the deadline to a contender if they're out of contention he pitches well enough in the first part of the season. Ray Searage has helped more than a few pitchers with control problems and he's also helped several guys with home run problems keep the ball on the ground. If Burnett thinks he can still pitch (and there's no reason to think he doesn't), getting a chance to pitch every day is exactly what he needs at this point in his career. The Pirates give him that.

For the Pirates, Burnett's not a sure thing and even at $5 million a year he carries some real risk. That's mostly due to his age and his home run tendencies, but I won't blame you for adding in a Pittsburgh Pirate multiplier. Still, the Pirates need a pitcher and it's hard to see where they'll find one at this point with more talent than Burnett. There are plenty of very good reasons to think that he'll be more successful in Pittsburgh than he was in New York and if the Pirates can bargain the Yankees down far enough, this is a risk that they have to take.

Olney: 'Framework' for Burnett deal in place

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:19:42 +0000

Pirates and Yankees have a framework of a possible AJ Burnett deal in place, and they are now working through conditions of that framework.
— Buster Olney (@Buster_ESPN) February 12, 2012

That would make it sound a lot like a deal is just about done, but then Olney went on to say that the deal isn't done and the two sides haven't agreed on players or money.

So how is it different than, "The Pirates and Yankees are talking about AJ Burnett and a deal will probably happen eventually," which is what we've been hearing for two days? I'm not really sure that it is.

Your daily AJ Burnett Sweepstakes update

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 17:15:10 +0000

From Bill Brink at the PG:

First baseman/right fielder Garrett Jones, previously reported as a player the Yankees wanted to acquire in the deal, was not part of the discussions, the source said.

It seems the Pirates prefer to assume more of Burnett's salary rather than part with players from their organization. Burnett will earn $33 million over the next two years, the final seasons of a five-year, $82.5 million contract he signed before the 2009 season. The Pirates agreed to pay $10 million of the $33 million owed to Burnett, according to a CBS Sports report.

It seems to me that the Pirates are playing this one just about right: they don't need Burnett because he carries quite a bit of inherent risk and Joe Blanton and John Lannan are also on the market (Burnett is undoubtedly the most talented of this trio, but I think he also presents a bit more risk of bottoming out). The Yankees, meanwhile, do need to get rid of Burnett's salary. They'd like Jones, but if they don't get him they can sign Johnny Damon or Raul Ibanez. They'd like a prospect, but they're also the Yankees and they're more concerned with the near future. If no one else is interested in Burnett, the Pirates have all of the power in this negotation and there's no reason for them to buckle anywhere.

This is the strange part of the off-season

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:35:02 +0000

With just a few days remaining until pitchers and catchers report and fans move on to ridiculing stories about their favorite fat players being in the best shape of their lives, the baseball world is weirdly focused on the Pirates right now. Pretty much nothing is happening anywhere except that the Yankees are trying to trade a guy and the Pirates seem like the likely trade partner. As a result, something like 99% of baseball news is currently revolving around AJ Burnett and thus, the Pirates. It's very strange. Onto today's AJ Burnett-related stories!

Joel Sherman says he thinks that the Yankees will trade Burnett and they're just looking for the club that will make them eat less of Burnett's salary, Pirates or otherwise. That sort of meshes with my theory about Jones yesterday. Jayson Stark mentions that John Lannan and Joe Blanton may also be traded before the season starts and that the Pirates could also be interested in them. That's presumably contingent upon them not trading Burnett, which makes sense. Burnett represents a bigger risk, but I'd much rather have him than Blanton or Lannan. Jon Heyman says the Pirates and Yankees are currently negotiating how much of Burnett's salary the Yankees will eat, and he makes it sound contingent upon whether or not the Pirates send a player to the Yankees. (Links via MLBTR)

I'm sure we'll hear much, much more about this before the day ends because there's literally nothing else happening in baseball right now. Except "truck day," which isn't a real thing and doesn't count.

More on AJ Burnett

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:03:26 +0000

From Buster Olney, earlier this evening:

Garrett Jones is, in fact, the guy NYY want in any Burnett deal with the Pirates,but PIT not interested in moving Jones. No traction so far.
— Buster Olney (@Buster_ESPN) February 9, 2012

Yankees know they will have to eat a huge portion of $35 million owed to Burnett in any deal -- maybe in $25m to $27m range.
— Buster Olney (@Buster_ESPN) February 9, 2012

If I may speculate a little, what I'm guessing is happening right now is that the Yankees have determined that they're going to have to eat a huge chunk of cash to get rid of Burnett, so they're likely offering to eat a little more in exchange for getting some value out of the trade.

If the Pirates and Yankees are at an impasse, it's likely not over Garrett Jones because I can't figure out where Jones would be an upgrade over what the Yankees have. Instead, the Yankees are likely buying some time and letting everyone know that they're willing to eat even more of Burnett's salary than initially expected to a team that's willing to give them something in return.

A new WHYGAVS Poll!

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:29:06 +0000

A funny thing happened on Monday night: I wrote the Charlie Morton post and since it was the first post of substantial length I've written in months, all of a sudden everyone realized that I hadn't changed the WHYGAVS Poll over since June. It's about time to start updating the poll again, particularly because I'm always interested in where the WHYGAVS readership stands on things like trading for AJ Burnett. I was going to make today's question, "Have the Pirates done enough this off-season?" but since we still have a couple weeks until camp opens, I figured I'd wait until we're sure they're done moving for the winter.

So should the Pirates trade for AJ Burnett? Honestly, I'm torn. The stats make it the exact sort of move that people like me love and predict will work out fantastically for the Pirates, and the other things (Burnett's age, his reported unwillingness to leave New York) are the sorts things that make these sorts of deals end fantastically bad. But what does everyone else think? Poll is in the sidebar (about halfway down the page, right below the Twitter widget ... and yes the sidebar is packed with ads, but hey, grad students aren't exactly made of money) as usual, and you can always sound off in the comments.

Everyone thinks the Pirates should trade for AJ Burnett and I kind of do, too

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:02:48 +0000

Early this morning, Tim Dierkes at MLB Trade Rumors wrote about the Yankees desire to trade AJ Burnett and made up a list of teams he thought might be good fits for the veteran righty. At the top, he put the team that's been unsuccessfully trying to get a vetern right-handed starter to take their money for the last month now: the Pittsburgh Pirates. Shortly after that, Buster Olney openly ruminated that a Burnett-for-Garrett Jones swap might make sense for both sides. Right on the heels of that tweet, Ken Rosenthal mentioned that the Pirates have done their diligence on Burnett and that they're not one of the ten teams that he can block a trade to.

All of this sort of begs the very obvious question: should the Pirates WANT TO trade for AJ Burnett? Burnett is owed $33 million over the next two years, he was pretty bad in 2010 and 2011, his fastball is flagging, he's 35 years old, and even if his no-trade clause doesn't block a deal to the Pirates it's probably a pretty safe bet that he'd be disappointed by being moved from the Yankees to the Pirates. Those are the troublesome aspects of Burnett, but there are some high points to consider, too. The Yankees aren't looking to save $33 million over the next two years, they're just looking to trim enough money to flesh out the offensive part of the roster. Burnett's rate stats were quite good last year and his high ERA was mostly driven by an insane HR/FB rate. His worst xFIP over the last is 4.49. The NL Central is running short on powerful hitters to take advantage of his existing home run problem. He can eat up innings at a reasonable rate. The Pirates seem to do a pretty good job of helping pitchers with control problems. He's not Kevin Correia.

So would it be a good trade for the Pirates? It's hard to say from here without knowing what the details would look like. The Pirates would be insane to pay Burnett more than $8-10 million per year for the next two years. They'd be insane to give up more in value for him than they gave up for, say, Yamaico Navarro or Derrek Lee (I'd be OK with the Jones swap, honestly, except that that deal requires a fairly high level of faith in Pedro Alvarez and Casey McGehee and I really can't see any reason why you'd have that at this point in time). A depth minor leaguer who's behind quite a few people on the Pirates' depth chart with limited upside? Sure. Someone with even a bit more upside that could be more useful in a trade (say, Gorkys Hernandez) down the road? Definitely not. Which is to say that I'd trade Aaron Pribanic for Burnett, but not Gorkys Hernandez. I'd prefer a massive cash dump, to be honest.

But if the Pirates could get the Yankees to eat most of that cash and not have to give up much or anything? Yeah, I'd take a chance on AJ Burnett. There's a good chance that it would be a move that ends in flames and tears, but what the heck? The Pirates need Major League arms in 2012, and Burnett's got a better chance to at least be that than Correia or Jo-Jo Reyes do and if everything works out, he could be one of the club's better starters.

For some reason, my link-making button is broken right now. Here are the links to the stories mentioned in the first paragraphs:
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/02/possible-fits-for-aj-burnett.html
https://twitter.com/#!/Buster_ESPN/status/167313391562670080
http://mlbbuzz.yardbarker.com/blog/mlbbuzz/could_pirates_land_aj/9827083?new_post=true

Edwin Jackson, Roy Oswalt, and the Pirates

whygavs@gmail.com (Pat Lackey) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:34:11 +0000

In the last week, we've learned that the Pirates showed some interest in both Edwin Jackson (who they apparently offered a three-year deal worth in the neighborhood of $30 million and a one-year deal worth around $10 million) and Roy Oswalt (no word on the terms of an offer because they were rebuffed out of hand, but presumably it would've been in the $8 million neighborhood). They didn't land either player because Jackson wanted a one-year deal and the Nationals out-bid the Pirates by $1 million, while Oswalt has no interest in pitching for the Pirates.

It's hard to know exactly what to make of either of these stories. On one hand, the Pirates won't ever sign a useful free agent without making an offer. It'd be extremely cynical to say that the Pirates made these offers for PR purposes. Remember that when the Pirates drafted Pedro Alvarez, a huge portion of the fan base expected the team to not pony up the money and let him walk. The Pirates not only signed Alvarez, but they went on to spend even more money in future years. The Pirates want Jackson and Oswalt because they're good players available at below market value. Putting one of them into the rotation would make the Pirates better and not be hugely costly.

The problem is that the Pirates had to know they were unlikely to sign either pitcher entering the bidding. Oswalt has only seemed interested in pitching for contenders this winter and Jackson had been clearly trending towards taking a one-year deal for about two weeks before he signed. The Pirates weren't going to get into a bidding war over one year of Jackson (Long parenthetical aside: I get that the club has a strict internal value system that it always tries to adheres to as closely as it can, but it's strange to me that they wouldn't want to pay $12 million for Edwin Jackson after they offered $10 million while they were more than happy to grossly overpay Rod Barajas and, to a lesser extent, Clint Barmes. The need in the rotation is arguably greater than the need behind the plate or at shortstop and Jackson inarguably offers a greater upgrade over what the Pirates have than Barmes or Barajas, simply because he's a good player and the potential for him to flame out is much lower than it is for either of the Bs the Pirates signed this winter. It's possible, of course, that Mike Rizzo's comfy relationship with Scott Boras helped him land Jackson on his one year deal and the Pirates didn't even have the opportunity to offer Jackson $12 million, but shouldn't Huntington have a similar relationship with Boras after making the Alvarez negotation work and signing two of Boras's clients to huge contracts last summer?) and so it's likely that they were interested because they knew the price was down, but not all that hopeful that they could get a deal done.

That bugs me, though. The deficiencies in the Pirates' rotation are obvious. When Brad Lincoln is your fifth most talented starter, Kevin Correia is sixth, Jo-Jo Reyes is seventh, and half of your top four are either dealing with injuries or are Erik Bedard, you've got depth problems. It's fine to try and address those problems by diving into the free agent market when someone valuable ends up being more affordable than expected, but the Pirates seem to have done it without a contingency plan. How much more expensive would it have been to bring in Jeff Francis or keep Paul Maholm? Not much at all, really. The Reds have already done this; they signed Francis to a minor league deal and now they're after Oswalt. If they don't get Oswalt, at least they've added some depth to their rotation for the coming year, just in case.

That opportunity is mostly past for the Pirates now. There are two conclusions that you can draw from the way this has all played out.

1.) The Pirates really thought they had a chance to sign Oswalt or Jackson.
2.) The Pirates are OK with their rotation and only tried to sign Oswalt and Jackson because the price came down to a point that they were too much of a value not to pursue.

Neither line of thinking is really all that great.