david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (01/11/85)
Pardon me as I once again succumb to the kibbitzing urge, and pass comment on the major trades I omitted last time, and the signing of a few free agents: Salazar (sp?) et. al. for Hoyt: Padre fans ought not get too excited about the acquisition of Hoyt from the White Sox. First of all, Hoyt has never had a truly outstanding season (the year he won the Cy Young award, for example, he had an ERA in the upper 3's while his teammates were kind enough to score seven runs a game for him. With that kind of backing, it isn't an amazing feat to win 24 games), and the loss of Whitson to free agency leaves the Padres with no substantial improvement to show in what has got to be the weakest starting rotation ever to capture a divisional title. The White Sox needed a third baseman after trading Law to Montreal, and did good to trade Hoyt rather than Bannister or Dotson. With Seaver apparently still effective, the Sox could afford to give up the starter. V. Law for James: Not a blockbuster, but at least some improvement is now in sight for the South Side's bullpen blues. James always looked like a tough competitor with Montreal, and while he has been used to start, pitch short relief, and pitch long relief (perhaps an ideal dispostion for a long reliever), the White Sox would be wise to try and make a true stopper out of him. I think he'd be a decent one. The Expos will use Law at second base, thus getting some production out of a position that has not given much to the team previously. This deal, and the acquisition of Brooks from the Mets for short, makes it pretty clear that the Expos have had it up to here with glove men. Terrell for Johnson: Definitely a plus for Detroit. They give up a man they really weren't using for one they are certain to put to good use, and are therefore clearly strengthened. The Mets were evidently preparing to send Brooks to Montreal and needed another infielder. That he can also hit left-handed and has some power figured prominently in the Mets' calculations, but New York is taking the gamble: if someone is ready to join the Mets' rotation as a fifth starter (Schiraldi?) or if Lynch recovers his control, the deal would probably look pretty good; otherwise it will look very, very bad. Almost Everyone Resigns with the Cubs: It took quite a capital expenditure, but the Cubs resigned Sutcliffe, Trout, and Eckersley. The big move was the resigning of TROUT, not Sutcliffe, as the former is the ideal pitcher for Wrigley. A lefthanded sinkerball pitcher! Who could ask for anything more? Sure, Reuschel was left unsigned (but Cub management under Dallas Green is somewhat less sentimental than earlier regimes) and Stoddard defected (there was a limit to what the Cubs were willing to spend, apparently), but the Cubs will pretty much stand pat with a good hand. Unless, of course, the Phillies should have a few lefthanded prospects with power that they'd like to trade....nyaah, they're not going to deal with Green again if they have any sense...do they? Stoddard Signs with the Padres: Gaining some welcome depth in the bullpen, but without some better starters, it's unlikely Stoddard's and Gossage's arms will make it though the season. It seems the Padres indulged in a luxury before satisfying a necessity. Whitson Signs with the Yankees: Evidently trying to undo the damage done to the staff by the Henderson deal, the Yankees pay star prices for a decent pitcher. Look for the Yankees to lose a lot of games by the score of 7-5... Sutter Signs with the Braves: Call this a Tale of Two Cities. St. Louis, treating baseball players as if it were 1950, and Atlanta, boldly advancing to the Land of Promised Megabucks (a.k.a. cable TV). After Herzog's demonstrated propensity to trade players established in the community (Hernandez, Oberkfell, Hendrick) being well established, it was natural for Sutter to seek protection from a similar fate. After all, the Cards could only trade Sutter for another 10 months or so anyway, after which he'd be a 5/10 year man with veto power over trades. Gussie Busch, the quintessential owner of the '50s, refused on "principle", even though Sutter had expressed a willingness to accept the Cardinals' somewhat less lucrative financial offer. Ted Turner, the quintessential owner of the '80s, did not share that particular principle, and was able to apply some of his cable earnings to invest in making his cable product more attractive. Result: the Braves have corrected there greatest need in a big way, look as though they might establish themselves as the dominant team in the West for the next few years, and every team without a national cable syndication ought to be quaking. David Rubin
mmf@sdchema.UUCP (Marsha Fanshier) (01/14/85)
David Rubin posted the following comments on Padre trades and aquisitions along with an array of interesting comments on other personnel changes in both leagues. >Salazar (sp?) [I think that's it--we call him "Saladbar"] et al for Hoyt > > Padre fans ought not get too excited about the acquisition of >Hoyt from the White Sox. First of all, Hoyt has never had a truly >outstanding season (the year he won the Cy Young award, for example, >he had an ERA in the upper 3's while his teammates were kind enough to >score seven runs a game for him. With that kind of backing, it isn't >an amazing feat to win 24 games), and the loss of Whitson to free >agency leaves the Padres with no substantial improvement to show in >what has got to be the weakest starting rotation ever to capture a >divisional title. The White Sox needed a third baseman after trading >Law to Montreal, and did good to trade Hoyt rather than Bannister or >Dotson. With Seaver apparently still effective, the Sox could afford >to give up the starter. > >Stoddard Signs with the Padres: > > Gaining some welcome depth in the bullpen, but without some >better starters, it's unlikely Stoddard's and Gossage's arms will make >it though the season. It seems the Padres indulged in a luxury before >satisfying a necessity. > David seems to be implying that the Padres will be coming into the new season with a net loss in their pitching staff. I think we could all agree that that would spell disaster for the Pads. But when you look closer you can see that David hasn't weighed the gains and losses closely enough. Hoyt is a replacement for Lollar. Lollar was great fun to watch: he gave up scads of runs but he often got them back with his bat. It is just too bad they sent him to the American League. Anyway, it is safe to say that Lollar was the weakest link in Padre starting pitching last year and I think that the Padre organization had finally given up on him. I would be very surprised if a Cy Young winner could not top him. (Lollar's ERA for last year -- 4.06) There is no denying that Whitson is a loss to the Pads. I would have been much happier to have seen Show take a hike. Whitson's position is now up for grabs between Hawkins and Dravecky. You know them -- they're the two who carried the Padres in the playoffs and series. For the last two years they have been shuttled between starting and the bullpen. There is no doubt but that they are *very* talented. What they have lacked is consistency and maturity. I know they both want that starting position and I'm sure they're both working for it. Maybe they'll both end up starting, maybe one will be in the bullpen. I'm betting that they will both have great years. (Returning starters: Show -- 15-9, 3.40; Thurmond -- 14-8, 2.97) What's left of the bullpen? Besides Gossage and Stoddard lets not forget Lefferts. He was also a big game saver for the starting staff last year. Lefferts was so consistent (2.13 ERA) it is hard to think of him having a bad year. DeLeon is due back after a year of injuries and there are a couple others who might improve. I think the Padre pitchers will be able to take on anyone in the league. Other than the pitching staff and coaches there are no substantive changes planned for the Padres. Not only are they going with the same starting staff but the lineup will also be the same (starting off with the one-two punch of Wiggins and Gwynn). There is a great deal of room for improvement in the hitting performances of Kennedy and Martinez. I think we'll see that. It might be a bit much to expect another .351 season out of Gwynn but he is just too good not to be productive. As it now stands I don't see who in this division is going to take the title away from the Padres. The Mets and Cubs would do well not to underestimate their opponent to the West. See ya all in Spring, Marsha Fanshier UCSD {decvax,sdcsvax}!sdchema!mmf