Are you kidding me??????????????

[jjgmyers]

Gil Meche for $55 mil? $11 mil a year for Gil "Effing" Meche. I LOVE baseball too much to boycott, but this signing is just mind boggling. I DO NOT ever want to hear about Kansas City being "small market" again.

Meche has a 55-44 career record with a 4.65 ERA in 147 games, all of them with the Seattle Mariners.

A quote from the G.M. - "We were proud to be a part of the process and delighted that Gil Meche made the decision to join the Royals," general manager Dayton Moore said. "He is an impact pitching talent who fits in with our plan for long-term success. At 28, he is entering the prime of his career."

""He is an impact pitching talent who fits in with our plan for long-term success. At 28, he is entering the prime of his career."
UHHHHHHHHHHHH WHATTTTTTTTTTT???????????

I wish I was good at Baseball!!!

[British_Pharaoh]

I wish I was good at Baseball!!!

judging from the signing you can be the epitomy of mediocre and get paid

[pup]

I actually commend the Royals for doing something. Is Gil Meche worth $11 million? No. Do they have to start somewhere? Yes.

I really find it funny that we have now been outspent by the Royals

[consigliere]

They'll be trying to crawl out from under that contract in 1-2 years.

THis makes Westbrook worth 5-6 years at $12-13M per now. Westbrook is not worth about 1/5 to 1/6 of the team payroll. He's a goner.

[pup]

They'll be trying to crawl out from under that contract in 1-2 years

...or they will be on their way back to respectability and Gil Meche will be their #3 starter, right where he should be.

You have to stop looking at what a guy is and look at where he fits into the market. It is like the NFL draft. A guy gets paid based on where he slots into the draft. The 8 pick gets less than the 7 pick but more than the 9 pick. The top free agent pitcher gets 16 mil. The 5th gets 11 mil. This has nothing to do with what you think of Gil Meche. It has everything to do with KC needs to get better, and this guy is better than anyone they have, so you have to give him what his going rate is.

[ACrank]

if you stop looking at what a guy is you end up overpaying for people like Gil Meche.....

i just hope the Indians are planning on trading Westbrook now, because w/ that contract Westbrook is going to get 12+ a year, and he's not going to get that from the Indians....

right now it just seems that the Royals are overpaying for a bunch of back end starters

[pup]

if you stop looking at what a guy is you end up overpaying for people like Gil Meche

That is why you might as well pay the going price for the top free agents. There are no bargains anymore, maybe re-treads, but no bargains.

[consigliere]

That is why you might as well pay the going price for the top free agents. There are no bargains anymore, maybe re-treads, but no bargains.

I'll disagree on that. I think guys like Lofton and Dellucci will prove to be bargains. As will someone like Borowski. There are bargains out there....but I do agree that some of the guys who fit into the bargain mold in the past are vastly overpaid now.

Of course, we've seen this before in 2000-2001 when guys like Hampton, Neagle, A-Rod, Manny, Dreifort, Ho Park, etc all got ridiculous deals....but the market settled for 3-4 years after than and guys like Colon and Vlad were getting considerably less than what those guys got just 1-2 years earlier.

[ACrank]

if there are no bargains anymore - then why sign free agents to begin with?

[pup]

if there are no bargains anymore - then why sign free agents to begin with?

I would be fine with no free agents, if the 25 home grown prospects are ready to win a World Series.

Why do free agents have to be bargains? Why can't you just pay what the going rate is, but instead of paying the going rate for 5 guys in the bottom of the free agent class, pay for 1 guy at the top.

Do you do all your shopping at Costco? Sam's Club? Wal-Mart?

[Big Lu]

Why do free agents have to be bargains? Why can't you just pay what the going rate is, but instead of paying the going rate for 5 guys in the bottom of the free agent class, pay for 1 guy at the top.

Do you do all your shopping at Costco? Sam's Club? Wal-Mart?

I agree, Pup!

[ACrank]

Free agents are either good buys for the money or horribly overpaid....and lately they seem to be horribly overpaid....

marquee free agents for a market like Cleveland in the current status of MLB just does not work

no one is saying no free agents at all - however a team like the Indians cannot be as risky with free agents as major market teams are, because they can't affoard to swallow their own mistakes

and a team like the Indians will never be able to outbid major market teams for the same players, because to outbid them the Indians would have to outbid them by a huge amount

[pup]

no one is saying no free agents at all

You did:

if there are no bargains anymore - then why sign free agents to begin with?

Free agents are either good buys for the money or horribly overpaid

No they are not. If you give Carlos Lee 16 mil and he hits .300 with 40 homers and 130 rbi, he is worth the money, but not a bargain. A horrbily overpaid FA would be Eric Gagne spending 4 months on the DL.

and a team like the Indians will never be able to outbid major market teams for the same players, because to outbid them the Indians would have to outbid them by a huge amount

What flavor of Kool Aid is Shapiro serving today? This is what he wants you to believe, and to make this happen he goes after guys that will serve this point. Did you really expect Trevor Hoffman to leave San Diego? Why wouldn't Moises Alou chose to stay in the NL, the only league he has ever known, and where their is only about 3 teams to compete with for a World Series trip. Craig Counsell? Most people knew it was time he wanted to go home to Milwaukee. Name me a free agent that spurned Cleveland that was open to switching teams/cities/leagues that we put an equal or slightly greater offer out there for.

[ACrank]

Hey pup - i bet i asked you this before, but can you name me the last big time free agent the Indians went after and signed.

I mean ever....

No they are not. If you give Carlos Lee 16 mil and he hits .300 with 40 homers and 130 rbi, he is worth the money, but not a bargain. A horrbily overpaid FA would be Eric Gagne spending 4 months on the DL.

For one year, perhaps, but i think he was signed for 6 years.

[pup]

Hey pup - i bet i asked you this before, but can you name me the last big time free agent the Indians went after and signed.

I mean ever....

And my answer is the same as last time...name me a time where they needed one. They needed veteran, complimentary players in the 90's and they went out and got them.

Those were also quite different times in the free agency market. A few million got you a pretty decent ballplayer. That is like $10 mil today, in this market.

[ACrank]

Guess we just disagree again....

because the Hart era Indians could have used a marquee free agent to put them over the top, and they had the money to actually be able to affoard one...

but i know - you are a fan, you don't care about stuff like that....

(and another board going down the tubes because the fascination is on Dolan not spending money - while ignoring the financial inequities of MLB)

[pup]

Guess we just disagree again....

This is true.

because the Hart era Indians could have used a marquee free agent to put them over the top, and they had the money to actually be able to affoard one...

You are questioning a team that played in 2 World Series for not making an over the top move, while chastising me for questioning the non-moves of a sub-.500 team.

but i know - you are a fan, you don't care about stuff like that....

I care about one thing...the Cleveland Indians fielding the best team in baseball in 2007.

(and another board going down the tubes because the fascination is on Dolan not spending money - while ignoring the financial inequities of MLB)

So because everyone on the board does not agree with you, the board is going down the tubes? What is the point of a message board if it is just a bunch of people agreeing with each other?

The financial inequities of MLB are what they are. I am sorry that it has you so upset that you are willing to support an inferior product on blind loyalty. While the Indians sit around trying to play the martyr role for the small revenue clubs, the rest of our division continues to improve and make the gap wider.

[consigliere]

While the Indians sit around trying to play the martyr role for the small revenue clubs, the rest of our division continues to improve and make the gap wider.

I must have missed it, but what have the White Sox done? All they have done is re-sign Podesdnik and trade Garcia.

Oh, and are the Twins still alive? They have done nothing. Who is in that rotation again besides Santana? Thought so.

The Indians, so far, have made the most improvements of any of the Big 4 in the central. Hell, KC has arguably done the most of them all.....but mostly that was throwing some money around as Meche is not going to get it done.

[pup]

Maybe I should have said the rest of the division will continue to improve themselves. Sorry for giving you that out.

Of course, you still think that adding Borowski/Hernandez/Fultz is better than adding Mota/Saurebeck/Graves/Karsay last year.

The Indians, so far, have made the most improvements of any of the Big 4 in the central

Did I miss them doing something meaningful?

[consigliere]

Of course, you still think that adding Borowski/Hernandez/Fultz is better than adding Mota/Saurebeck/Graves/Karsay last year.

Um, yes. Graves/Karsay were both minor league invites....so, yes, Borowski/Hernandez/Fultz is much better than Mota/Sauerbeck.....and we may not even be done yet.

Did I miss them doing something meaningful?

And, again, it boils down to whether you believe they needed to do something meaningful. From what I have seen, a vocal minority of Cleveland fans want something significant done (add a premium bat)....but when perusing other team's message boards (White Sox, Twins, Tigers) they feel the Indians don't need much. Also, the national media....guys like Gammons, Olney, Neyer, Sheehan, Stark, etc are all in line with saying two things: the Indians may be having one of the better offseasons in baseball, and that they don't need to do much except in the bullpen.

It's been my belief this team is very good except for the manager, defense and bullpen. They have made good strides to improve the defense and bullpen....although we'll have to live with Wedge for at least another year.

[pup]

Um, yes. Graves/Karsay were both minor league invites....so, yes, Borowski/Hernandez/Fultz is much better than Mota/Sauerbeck

They might have been minor league invites, but one or the other was definitely considered part of the plan going in.

Is Borowski/Hernandez/Fultz better than Wickman/Mota/Saurebeck? I am sure you will say yes, but there is little to no proof that that is in fact true.

Best case scenerio has us exactly where we were last year at the start of the season. That was good for 78 wins. This year it wll be good for 95? Please explain that to me.

guys like Gammons, Olney, Neyer, Sheehan, Stark, etc are all in line with saying two things: the Indians may be having one of the better offseasons in baseball, and that they don't need to do much except in the bullpen.

These are the same guys that thought last year's team was going to win 100 games and represent the AL in the World Series. Explains why they think the exact same team will be projected to win close to 100 games and make a World Series run. I tend to try to learn from history, not repeat it.

Please enlighten me as to how the Indians as of December 2006 are better than the Indians of April 2006.

[ACrank]

Guess we just disagree again....

This is true.

because the Hart era Indians could have used a marquee free agent to put them over the top, and they had the money to actually be able to affoard one...

You are questioning a team that played in 2 World Series for not making an over the top move, while chastising me for questioning the non-moves of a sub-.500 team.

Because that team that made the 2 world series could have easily affoarded to add the one piece that would have put them over the top, and they did not.

You expect this current management/ownership group to be able to do something that group did not, and you wonder why i chastise you?

but i know - you are a fan, you don't care about stuff like that....

I care about one thing...the Cleveland Indians fielding the best team in baseball in 2007.

(and another board going down the tubes because the fascination is on Dolan not spending money - while ignoring the financial inequities of MLB)

So because everyone on the board does not agree with you, the board is going down the tubes? What is the point of a message board if it is just a bunch of people agreeing with each other? [/quote]

Didn't say that. But there has to be something else to talk about besides whether or not Dolan is cheap, isn't there?

The financial inequities of MLB are what they are. I am sorry that it has you so upset that you are willing to support an inferior product on blind loyalty.

Lets put it this way - the whole money discussion is turning me off of MLB almost entirely. And it has nothing to do with Dolan being cheap (because, quite honestly, i don't think he is) but it has everything to do with a sport that allows such a massive difference in payrolls between the lowest and highest teams. Thats the true issue here.

While the Indians sit around trying to play the martyr role for the small revenue clubs, the rest of our division continues to improve and make the gap wider.

You mean like the WhiteSox did last year? And for all we know right now Gary Sheffield could do to the Tigers what Jim Thome did for the WhiteSox. Absolutely nothing.

[ACrank]

Um, yes. Graves/Karsay were both minor league invites....so, yes, Borowski/Hernandez/Fultz is much better than Mota/Sauerbeck

They might have been minor league invites, but one or the other was definitely considered part of the plan going in.

How many innings did Karsay pitch in Cleveland last year? Graves was a mistake.

Is Borowski/Hernandez/Fultz better than Wickman/Mota/Saurebeck? I am sure you will say yes, but there is little to no proof that that is in fact true.

Little proof that it is false either.

[quote[ Best case scenerio has us exactly where we were last year at the start of the season. That was good for 78 wins. This year it wll be good for 95? Please explain that to me. [/quote]

I'd like you to explain how

Best case scenerio has us exactly where we were last year at the start of the season. That was good for 78 wins

guys like Gammons, Olney, Neyer, Sheehan, Stark, etc are all in line with saying two things: the Indians may be having one of the better offseasons in baseball, and that they don't need to do much except in the bullpen.

These are the same guys that thought last year's team was going to win 100 games and represent the AL in the World Series. Explains why they think the exact same team will be projected to win close to 100 games and make a World Series run. I tend to try to learn from history, not repeat it.

Please enlighten me as to how the Indians as of December 2006 are better than the Indians of April 2006.[/quote]

They are certainly better than the Indians of September/October 2006.

[consigliere]

Again, it seems that outside of the fans in this town, people generally like the Indians chances in 2007. Here's another:

BA's Jim Callis Chat Today:

Graham (Michigan): Who do you think is the favorite in the AL Central at this point in the offseason?

Jim Callis: (2:25 PM ET ) I think Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and Minnesota are all legitimate contenders, and Kansas City will be improved. Right now my pick is the Indians

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
joe, detroit: You (and a couple other prominent baseball experts, Olney and Neyer) like the tribe in the AL Central, despite a 4th place finish, why?

Jim Callis: (2:38 PM ET ) Because last year's finish doesn't matter. Cleveland's record was a fluke, in that they outscored their opposition by a lot more than their W-L would indicate, and I think they'll bounce back.

[pup]

I can go through and probably find most of those same people who thought the Indians were the favorite at the start of last year as well. This means absolutely zero to me. What matters to me is what I see as far as the players they brought in, the players they lost, and how I believe this affects the 2007 Cleveland Indians.

I am not here saying I am right. I hope I am wrong. I just don't get what everyone thinks is this big change that converts a 78 win club into 100 wins.

Is the starting rotation better? Sowers over Johnson is an improvement, but most teams will have a report on him so I do not see the huge upgrade.

Is the bullpen better? I do not think so. It looks like they are going with the exact same formula as last year, which blew up in their face.

Is the lineup better? Slightly. Marte should provide an upgrade over Boone. Barfield is, at best a wash with Fat Ronnie. Jhonny is Jhonny. Blake is every other year. Travis and Grady are coming off career years. Can they duplicate that? They will have to for the offense to equal 2006.

Is the defense better? Barifeld is considered a step up. Marte is better than Boone. Garko wears a skillet instead of a glove. Jhonny is Jhonny. Victor can't throw.

Is the manager better?


But this year they will win 95 games? Why because we want them too?

[consigliere]

We are fans....those guys are experts in their fields. They are paid to research these teams and be up to speed on them. When forming opinions, we use the advice of others in deciding what to believe or not to believe. Like with what a financial advisor may recommend for your portfolio.

Whether you want to believe what these guys say is up to you.....but what they say carries a ton more weight than what you, I, or Joe Fan thinks. Especially from a jaded sports town like Cleveland.

[pup]

These guys don't know anything more than you, I or most people I talk to, with the exception of some access they have that we don't.

I do not need their inside access to tell me the Indians are a terrible fundamental team, with a bottom 5 manager and a reluctance to make a serious move to improve the team.

I do not need anyone to tell me that Roberto Hernandez is a 42 year old coming over from the inferior NL and is a key piece to our winter.

I do not need them to tell me that signing Borowski was simply because his appearance looks more like Bob Wickman than any of the other free agents.

What did all their information show us last year? This year, though, they are dead on with their evaluations. Super. When can I buy World Series tickets?

[consigliere]

Wow. Maybe you should work for ESPN then. Their access to the inside info is EXACTLY why their opinions matter more.....they are more informed.

Since all these talking heads mean nothing....I am sure you never bother watching NFL LIve about the matchups, or College Gameday, etc. Since, of course, you know it all.

[pup]

I watch most of those shows for two reasons. Entertainment being the biggest. Second is for their inside information.

Don't turn this into something stupid. I do not know everything. I am actually trying to give credit to someone like yourself. If your Minor Happenings is based only on what some talking head tells you, I would be surprised. I assume you take a look at the numbers and base your opinions, rankings and future worth on those numbers. Not because you talk to Chris Kline once a week and he tells you what to write, correct?

They are more informed about many things. However, I do not feel their information helps me decide if Roberto Hernandez is going to be effective in the AL, pitching in pressure situations. Their inside information does nothing to make me feel better about going into a season with what I feel are question marks at 1B, SS, 3B and RF.

Maybe you should work for ESPN then

Maybe I should. Unfortunately, I never played MLB, do not have a broadcast degree nor do I have any friends at the network.

Their access to the inside info is EXACTLY why their opinions matter more.....they are more informed.

So I won't need to read any of our Tribe material this year, since all I need is ESPN to get your opinion?

[consigliere]

Just an FYI....there was a lot of sarcasm in my previous post.

[pup]

I am pretty sure we know each other well enough to bust some balls on these boards, but that does not change the fact that I think I am the smartest man alive

[consigliere]

Hey look, another guy who likes the Indians:

From David Gassko at Hardball Times:

Since I did predict that the Tigers would make the playoffs (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/artic ... edictions/), I'll take the liberty of making some early predictions (note: subject to change without notice). I like another team from the AL Central to
break out next season: the Cleveland Indians. The Indians won 78 games
last season, but they should have won 89 based on their Pythagorean
record (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/teams/).

They also have one of the best signings (in terms of production per
dollar) of the offseason in David Dellucci, and their lineup will further be improved with a better year from Jhonny Peralta and a full season from Andy Marte. Josh Barfield was a very nice acquisition as well. Then again,
offense wasn't a problem last year for the Indians, who finished second
in the AL in runs, so it doesn't really even need to improve.

On the pitching side of things, Cleveland has the most underrated star
in the game in C.C. Sabathia, who finished eighth in the American League in Pitching Runs Created (http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/m ... er%5B%5D=1) last year, and they should also benefit from a full year from Jeremy Sowers. Barfield and Marte should help shore up the Indians infield defense, which was atrocious last year, and Peralta will likely have a better season than he did last year as well, which will really help out the pitching staff, especially Jake Westbrook. I think this is a 90-win team, and maybe the favorite in a suddenly tough AL Central.

I also bet you'll be seeing a lot of writers "discover" Travis Hafner next season.

[pup]

[ACrank]

Yeah godforbid media people actually like the Indians....

sometimes people go out of their way to be negative....

[consigliere]

I know where Pup is coming from. I mean, I don't just blindly follow what these guys say. I take their comments, good or bad, and rationalize them and come up with my own opinions after I research it.

The thing is, what these guys are saying, is what I was saying when the season ended. That the Indians are not as bad as the 2006 season showed. A top 5 offense in all of baseball, and a top 5-10 starting pitching staff. The defense and bullpen (and manager) the team's biggest achilles heels. Of those three, I think they did a decent job of fixing the bully and defense.....as for the manager, we'll have to live with it.

But, I wouldn't make mention of all these guys if the common theme didn't appear that it seems almost unanimous that baseball people believe the Indians are in for a rebound season. All the top baseball people so far have said so. Usually, you get varying opinions by these guys, but to date they all pretty much have said the same thing.

[pup]

Just so Crank knows, I am not a hater (except of Wedge).

I completely understand the philosophy. I almost agree with it. I think the only part they need to adjust is finishing off job. I know they are afraid that if they are wrong about that one guy, it will cost us for 4 years. Why can't we think what happens if that same guy rakes for those 4 years?

The only thing this core group of guys has not been able to do is make the post-season. Why not show them you are willing to do whatever it takes to make the unit as a whole, better? They have a great core group and am actually more excited than ever about the future. I just hope the future gets here some day.

[ACrank]

with all due respect, pup, you don't have me convinced....

your idea of doing whatever it takes to make them better is a sound one in theory, but becomes highly irrational when you consider some of the players mentioned

[pup]

For a guy that thinks David Delucci brings the same thing to the table as Carlos Lee, I wouldn't really expect to convince you of anything.

Maybe the world is round?

[consigliere]

Offensively, Carlos Lee brings more to the table than David Dellucci. Absolutely no question. A Dellucci/Michaels platoon is a little better than just Dellucci out there full-time.

But, where Dellucci may have an affect on the team that helps bridge the gap in the offense is Dellucci's defense compared to Carlos "DH" Lee. Also, the base-running. There are a lot of intangibles that Dellucci is so much better at than the one-dimensional Lee.

So, while Lee is the superior offensive player.....I am not seeing that much of a difference between the two when you look at both of their all around games. And, as we witnessed last year, there are other things just as important as hitting a baseball.......

[pup]

I am not a stat geek, but if I understand the fielding stats on baseball reference, Carlos Lee is about an average defensive left fielder throughout his career, with an above average range factor.

Delucci is a slightly better fielder in terms of errors, but his range factor is actually lower than Carlos Lee's. (1.57 fro Delucci, 1.89 for Lee, I apologize if I am reversing the meaning of those numbers).

Carlos Lee averages about 12 stolen bases throughout his career, including 19 last year. Does not sound like he is the slow footed bad base runner you would like to portray him as. Delucci averages about 2 per season, with a high of 9.

[consigliere]

Have you ever seen Carlos Lee play? A flat out butcher in the field, and the guy is slow. A lot of those stolen bases are of the Albert Belle variety from back in the day when he would steal a base because no one paid attention to him.

Probably the best stat I can provide is BPro's VORP stat (value of replacement player). VORP is the number of runs contributed beyond what a replacement-level player at the same position would contribute if given the same percentage of team plate appearances. VORP scores do not consider the quality of a player's defense.

Lee: 27.2
Dellucci: 17.7

So, even without considering defense, Dellucci was not far off. Lee is superior offensively, but let's not over-rate Lee. The guy was 88th in VORP, and people just above him are Omar Vizquel, Moises Alou, Pat Burrell, and Mark Teahan. The elite offensive players in the top 10 like Sizemore, Hafner, Howard and Pujols all had VORPs of 70 or above.

[ACrank]

For a guy that thinks David Delucci brings the same thing to the table as Carlos Lee, I wouldn't really expect to convince you of anything.

I said that? Where? Or did you make it up to attempt to prove a point?

Yes i was against the Indians signing Lee. I questioned his ability defensively (remember there are still two sides to the game of basieball) specifically wondering how soon it would be before he would be limited to playing Dh.

But i never said Dellucci > Lee.

[consigliere]

FYI on Carlos Lee. He is a terrible defender now. He used to be decent in LF, but he is plummetting fast:

Per BPro, Lee was a good left fielder in 2004 (Rate 109, 13 FRAA). But in 2005 he was not good (Rate 97, -5 FRAA), and in 2006 he cratered (MIL/TEX: Rate 87/90, -12/-5 FRAA). That is awful, and ultimately, he's getting older and fatter, and it's hard to see a renaissance.

[pup]

Per BPro, Lee was a good left fielder in 2004 (Rate 109, 13 FRAA). But in 2005 he was not good (Rate 97, -5 FRAA), and in 2006 he cratered (MIL/TEX: Rate 87/90, -12/-5 FRAA). That is awful, and ultimately, he's getting older and fatter, and it's hard to see a renaissance.

Wow. I have no idea what that means, but in the real world of what actually happens and matters on a baseball field, so what? A slow defnesive left fielder might cause a team what 5 runs in a year?

Maybe we should have forwarded this info to the Astros, so they would not have signed him...