The Millwood Debate: Vote Here
by FormerLSBUser on Sep 16, 2009 6:25 PM CDT
Email
Print
We have discussed this topic endlessly over the last two weeks, but I figured we could benefit from voting on the issue here, just to try and gage our public(or community) opinion...
As a frame of reference, Rob Neyer had some thoughts this afternoon, referencing Tim Cowlishaw's blog post covering the matter. Neyer's thoughts are seen after The Jump...
Millwood's next outing worth $6 million
With the Rangers having practically eliminated themselves from playoff contention, Tim Cowlishaw has a timely money-saving idea:
-
Now that they trail Boston by 5 1/2 and the Angels by 6 games, are the Rangers really in any kind of a hunt? I would say only if they sweep the Angels this weekend should they continue in full pursuit.
Anything less than that and I wouldn't pitch Kevin Millwood again this season. Would you?
After pitching like an All-Star the first half, Millwood's now at 10-10 with a 3.94 ERA. I would take that ERA any time in Arlington but, at 35 next season, do you think he has another number like that in him?
If Millwood makes it to 180 innings, the Rangers are on the hook for $12 million for Millwood in 2010. If he's a free agent, Texas could sign him for half of that. Probably even less unless the economy makes a shocking full recovery in the next few months.
Could the Rangers really sign him for "half of that?" Maybe not if he believes he was artificially dropped from the rotation to save $6 million. Players are people and people can be stubborn; some people would rather earn $4 million from an employer that didn't screw them than $6 million from one that did.
Which would be no big loss for the Rangers. If you can't sign Millwood for $6 million, you certainly can sign someone likeMillwood for $6 million. Or less. This year his ERA is fine, but his walks are up and his strikeouts are down, and he's giving up more homers than usual. As fullcountpitch.com's Gary Armida writes, much of Millwood's success -- and that of his pitching teammates' -- can be attributed to the Rangers' vastly improved defense(and probably a spot of luck, too). The Rangers might miss Millwood's innings and his veteran leadership, but it shouldn't be real hard to replace his underlying performance.
Fortunately, the Rangers do have an excuse for sitting Millwood: in his last five starts, he's 1-4 with a 7.62 ERA, and only one of those starts was even modestly successful.
Unfortunately, it's not clear that they can sit him enough. One turn in the rotation, maybe. Or even two. But he's just 13 outs away from vesting that $12 million. I think the Rangers are just stuck.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It would be a pretty fucked up thing to do...
…to bench him totally and not allow his option to vest. He was good most of the year. The Rangers signed a contract that said if he got 180 innings this year, he’d be back another season. To weasel out of it is plain wrong, and it will be noticed around baseball.
I don’t want to see him start, either, but he’s no worse than Holland. Really I think you could probably let him pitch out of the pen. Maybe he’d do a little better there, you never know until you try.
i see it as if
it were a “team option” which is very common.
he has not pitched well for most of the year. only the first half.
second half stunk big time.
texas’ option is not for him to pitch again this year and he can find a new place to pitch at next year.
if anyone believes he earned that 12 million contract for next year, they are crazy. just because he didn’t go on the dl doesn’t mean he earned the right to next year.
by mo on Sep 16, 2009 9:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Well you're seeing it the wrong way.
To quote rooster:
If you think it’s hard to get an FA Ace to sign here now, wait until the Rangers tell the world they’ll play contract games with their players.
He will file a grievance and state that he was good enough to pitch 180 innings, and was benched to prevent his option from vesting. He’ll be right, too, and will be under contract with the Rangers next year either way.
If it were a team option it would be a team option. But that’s not the contract that both he and the Rangers signed. The guy won the AL ERA title the year before he came to the Rangers and that’s the contract it took to get him here. He has been a disappointment, but a deal is a deal. Nothing is without risk.
I’m tired of hearing about this.
by Black Francis on Sep 16, 2009 10:30 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think you can bench him if you want to sign another free agent pitcher
Particularly one like Ben Sheets, whose contract would probably be incentive-laden.
Unless we can prove Milldew is hurt, I think it’s pretty much that simple.
Hank is 7 runs below a zombie replacement at first base. Do you realize how terrible that is? Zombie’s can’t think, they’re slow, and they’re often ejected from the game for eating opposing baserunners’ brains. - Ben quantifies Hank Blalock
Yep
12 million is too much to spend to demonstrate your forthrighteousness, but to even let it appear you are stopping him from his contract deliberately would be adquisition suicide at some point down the road.
And despite my pessimism about Kevin Millwood ever being a good to very good pitcher again, he could “bring it” for a hundred innings next year up to the deadline and be worth the money to that point and possibly justify being traded for someone else’s veteran SP need.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912) also -
"Telephone, n. An invention of the devil which abrogates some of the advantages of making a disagreeable person keep his distance."
~Ambrose Bierce
by Ed Coffin on Sep 16, 2009 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm not for benching (in a bubble)
But we’re in the real world and I think that Milly is hiding an injury, so I say bench him.
I saw let him pitch and then next year after spring training sit him till June
Hank Blalock hasn't played in a game since Sept. 6, and is hitting just .182 in 99 at-bats since Aug. 1.
It would be a flagrant middle finger
to Millwood and the MLBPA to completely sit him unless he’s injured. It is not going to happen. If he’s injured he’ll sit, otherwise all this speculation is utterly stupid.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Millwood's last several starts have been a flagrant middle finger to the organization
His performance doesn’t deserve another start, and that should be the end of the story.
"You can probably stick a fork in the Rangers' playoff chances for 2009." - AJM on 7/26 with the team 4.5 games out
by tricer on Sep 17, 2009 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ok, then you need to be ready
to sit half the team, because a hell of a lot of them have sucked ass lately.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
The ONLY reason that Millwood should be skipped is injury.
There is no way you sit him just to keep him from vesting for next year.
If you think it’s hard to get an FA Ace to sign here now, wait until the Rangers tell the world they’ll play contract games with their players.
BTW, it terms of this year’s playoff chances, it doesn’t matter if he pitches since the offense can’t score.
Wonderboy, what is the secret of your power? Wonderboy, won't you take me far away from the mucky-muck now. -- Tenacious D
"There is no way you sit him just to keep him from vesting for next year."
Exactly right, you sit him because he has sucked horribly over the last couple months. He doesn’t get another start because of his performance, not because of his contract.
"You can probably stick a fork in the Rangers' playoff chances for 2009." - AJM on 7/26 with the team 4.5 games out
Since you're repeating yourself
I will. Ok, then, sit the entire offense, their last 4 games are much worse than Millwood’s last 4 starts.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
silly response
I’m talking about not pitching a starter that gives basically no chance to win a game. You’re talking about forfeiting games, I guess?
Maybe it’s just me, but my idea seems to make some sense, I don’t see how yours does.
"You can probably stick a fork in the Rangers' playoff chances for 2009." - AJM on 7/26 with the team 4.5 games out
Think about it this way
If Millwood started hot (like he did) and then stunk it up like this in July, would you bench him for the rest of the season or just hope he broke out of his funk? I’m guessing everyone would say the latter. So the only reason you’re benching him now isn’t because of performance but to weasel out of his option. Don’t try to claim his performance justifies benching.
Remember Red, hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.
So he's guaranteed to suck
every time out, now? I can see sitting him for a start or two but there is zero justification for calling it a season unless he’s injured.
This is just not reality. You can not just sit a healthy player with a handful of innings to go before a vesting option. I completely understand the emotion behind your posts, but it is simply not going to happen. You’re thinking like a fan and you can’t operate an organization like that. Do I like it? No, but I’m not going to engage in wishful thinking just to spite reality.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
This is silly
The only way the Rangers can not let him start anothe rgame this year is if he came to the ballpark on Monday with an amputated right arm.
Elvis Andrus - 2009 AL Rookie of the Year
Mitch Moreland -Tom Grieve Rangers Minor League Player of the Year
Martin Perez - Nolan Ryan Rangers Minor League Pitcher of the Year
he did it to
himself. last 7 inning start was June 21st. only 3 good starts out of last 13.
era went from 2.62 on june 21st to present 3.95.
whip from 1.22 to 1.4
explain to me why he deserves this contract. if he would have pitched even average he would have gotten to 180 innings a couple of weeks ago and texas would still be in a race. he let the team down by not revealing injury or by just plain sucking for an extended period of time. excuse me for not feeling sorry for him. but he let the team and the fans down one way or another.
His argument will be
…“I was good enough to pitch 170 innings through 90 percent of the season but not 10 more the rest of the way? That’s bullshit”.
And he’d be right. If they were going to bench him it should have been three weeks ago. A month ago. Whatever. But you can’t pull the string this late because it sends some pretty fucked up signals to the players. The Rangers know this so you can whine all you want. His option will vest.
by Black Francis on Sep 16, 2009 10:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah. You can't sit him. The Rangers had their chance to address hiding his bad performance when
they reorganized the rotation. They could’ve set up so that Millwood pitched the fewest times and could’ve elevated BMAc on the premise that he was freshest and had a relatively hot hadn.. Instead, they made Millwood one of the three stretch drive workhorses.
Wonderboy, what is the secret of your power? Wonderboy, won't you take me far away from the mucky-muck now. -- Tenacious D
I'm willing to bet...
it would be pretty hard to sign a guy like Ben Sheets to a incentive-laden deal after benching Millwood 4 innings short of getting the extra year on his contract.
Of course it doesn’t matter, because as many here have said. It’s not going to happen. Millwood will hit his 180 IP and be back next year.
Rangers 2010 rotation :
Sheets
Feldman
Millwood
Hunter
Holland
Will be interesting to see what the team does with guys like McCarthy, Harrison, Nippert, Hurley, Mathis, and Moscoso.
Feliz can take Millwood’s spot after he’s traded the end of June.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
Millwood
I say let him pitch if he’s healthy. Texas would be hurting its reputation with other players and free agents throughout the league if it benched him. Penny wise, pound foolish.
"Was this really necsarry?" - cowpoke/hurler hurley
As much as I hate to do it
you pretty much have to play him and let it vest.
"I don't condone steroids or any other type of growth hormones or anything else, but I could care less, and, for the most part, I don't think the fans give a (bleep). The people that care about it are the people that probably don't like baseball," - Jim Leyland
why?
I expected support from you of all people.
Since the ASB, opposing batters are posting a .879 OPS against the dude – he’s got basically no chance of winning a game for the team (only 4 of his last 12 starts have been wins), and I don’t see why you would trot out a starter for a game when you know in advance that he doesn’t give the team a chance to win the game.
"You can probably stick a fork in the Rangers' playoff chances for 2009." - AJM on 7/26 with the team 4.5 games out
Because
you’d have problems when the grievance is filed explaining how you are benching a 10-10 pitcher with a 3.94 ERA given the teams other pitching options.
First they’d have to replace Holland, before they could credibly claim they need to replace Millwood.
"I don't condone steroids or any other type of growth hormones or anything else, but I could care less, and, for the most part, I don't think the fans give a (bleep). The people that care about it are the people that probably don't like baseball," - Jim Leyland
Holland has been markedly better than Millwood lately
Since July 1, Millwood has a 6.35 era and 893 ops allowed, Holland’s numbers are 5.88 and 821.
"You can probably stick a fork in the Rangers' playoff chances for 2009." - AJM on 7/26 with the team 4.5 games out
I think
He plays. If the team sits him, it will have a hell of a time appeasing players in the future. Additionally, the MLBPA will almost certainly file a grievance.
It seems likely he gets traded in the offseason, however.
I like steak.
yep unfortunately you're right..
it will be too much of a brouhaha if the Rangers stick it to him for him sticking it to the Rangers.
I’m not sure if they trade him in the off season or after the first half of next year. His value is at an all time low right now and everyone knows this old prince turns into a frog right around the all star break so I doubt you can get much next year either.
HH is that a sock in your puppet or are you happy to see me?
"His value is at an all time low right now"
I’d say his value right now is basically the same as it has been the entire time he’s been here – next to nothing. There was a small window earlier this season when he might have been tradable, but that window has long since closed.
"You can probably stick a fork in the Rangers' playoff chances for 2009." - AJM on 7/26 with the team 4.5 games out
I would of liked to think...
that the Rangers could of gotten something.. ..a couple mid range prospects back when he was being considered for the All Star team, maybe I’m wrong , with eating some salary taken into consideration…
However, today we’d be lucky to get a spitoon for Wash’s sunflower seeds.
HH is that a sock in your puppet or are you happy to see me?
Put it on Mildew.
Let him make his next start. Pitch a good game and get your option. Pitch like Mendoza again, get the hook and lose your spot. If he makes the option, work him hard in the first half of next year then trade him.
Your 2009 Snow Monkey Ambassador
I think this is what you have to do
It is weird saying this, but I think you have to run him out there at least one more time and hope he gets hammered.
by Sherman McCoy on Sep 17, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Send him up against LA
If he gives us a good performance, it might still help us in the pennant.
If he doesn’t and gives up 3+ runs in the first two innings while walking 2+ batters, pull him and send Mathis or Moscoso in, and say he’s done for the year.
If he can’t get his 3.2 IP in 1 start w/o blowing the game, then it’s his own damn fault at that point and you’re looking at next year by starting the rookies in his place.
Bascik and Sea Bass
have been calling for them to just release Millwood. What would be the implications of that? The MLBPA can’t do anything if they release him right?
Hmm
That’s interesting. I guess not.
I like steak.
by Conjunction on Sep 17, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Same problem
He’d file a grievance. Only difference is, if he won, he’d get his $12 MM for next year and the Rangers wouldn’t have anything to show for it because the released him.
Remember Red, hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.
I don't think anyone is looking at this the right way.
Why is everyone in such a hurry to save Hicks 12 million.
You think he’s going to keep the budget the same if Millwood does/doesn’t vest?
Phrase the question this way:
Do you want Millwood and his sub-4 ERA back next year?
You either get Millwood and a 52 million budget…
or you get nothing and a 40 million budget.
I really really want Millwood to get his innings because it’s the only way we’re going to “force” Hicks to spend any money this offseason.
I look at it this way
If Milwood isn’t on the books, the club’s not as likely to be hamstrung by MLB.
I like steak.
by Conjunction on Sep 17, 2009 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions
OK, so let's go with something like this...
52 million with Millwood. No major free agents.
40 million without. Hicks (and MLB) allows an extra 5?!?!
So, for 45 million, you get one 5 million dollar free agent.
You think you can get something “better than Millwood” for 5 mil?
For whatever price, I think Millwood will be one of the best 5 the Rangers can put out there.
The only way Hicks/MLB pays for the Rangers to have Millwood is if he vests.
As a Ranger fan, I think the team is in a better position if he vests. I don’t care about Hicks saving 12 mil.
by Oracle Galvez on Sep 17, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions
With 5M..
The Angels got Bobby Abreu last offseason.
The Dodgers got Orlando Hudson + 2M last offseason.
I imagine we could get a better DH than Blalock/Davis this offseason for 5M.
Millwood is not beneficial next year at 12M and wouldn’t get anywhere near that in the market. A Millwood level pitcher probably earns 6M/year on the market this offseason.
I want Millwood to go three and two thirds his next start
Only to be rocked to the tune of eight hits, three walks and seven runs
whoooahhh... landslide victory to bench his ass
HH is that a sock in your puppet or are you happy to see me?
emotional responses
And very understandable ones, too.
by Black Francis on Sep 17, 2009 5:54 PM CDT up reply actions
It's funny
The poll says one thing, the comments say the opposite.
Hank is 7 runs below a zombie replacement at first base. Do you realize how terrible that is? Zombie’s can’t think, they’re slow, and they’re often ejected from the game for eating opposing baserunners’ brains. - Ben quantifies Hank Blalock
heh ....lots of closet haterzzzz apparently.
correction: landslide victory to bench his fat ass
HH is that a sock in your puppet or are you happy to see me?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
