Kicking Around John Smoltz
Joey Matschulat
Does John Smoltz make sense for Texas?Those of you who love terse, quick-to-read morning reports -- yeah, yeah, like time constraints are really any excuse -- and especially love rumors centered around high-risk commodities are in plenty of luck this morning, as the FOXSports.com hot stove power team of Ken Rosenthal and Jon Paul Morosi have reported that the Texas Rangers are among a seven-team collective which has expressed "preliminary interest" in free agent right-hander John Smoltz. And the beat goes on and on and on ...
This one would be all too easy to heave upon the fast-growing "who really cares?" pile of hearsay and unsourced rumors, except that the Rangers were, to some extent, interested in acquiring Smoltz following his designation for assignment by the fed-up Red Sox in early August; shortly thereafter, the 42-year-old hurler landed in St. Louis and figuratively stepped on the Senior Circuit's throat, logging 38 innings of sub-3.50 ERA baseball down the stretch while posting a brilliant strikeouts-to-walks ratio of 40-to-9 and, in essence, revitalizing his eroding market value. If you can miss bats like that at the age of 42, you've got a place in this league somewhere.
One thing that really struck me right after Smoltz was cut loose -- well, beyond the back-and-forth verbal jousting between those who believed he was washed up and those who believed he had something left -- was the stated notion that because it was Theo Epstein who had released him, Smoltz truly was finished; in other words, if Epstein couldn't find it, then it simply wasn't there to find in the first place. Yeah, Epstein's a fine general manager and he runs an excellent front office, but it's foolhardy to operate off the assumption that the smartest baseball people can't screw up. Heck, it probably happens more often than we think.
Regarding the present-day version of Smoltz, there's some thought that he could capably serve as a closer if no teams express interest in utilizing him as a starting pitcher; there's also no clarification as to what sort of role he might fill in Texas, but if the Rangers are seriously motivated to protect their limited cache of major league starting pitching depth through the 2010 regular season's early weeks, there's some logic behind the idea of slotting Smoltz into the No. 5 hole and keeping the phone numbers of Brandon McCarthy, Matt Harrison and Neftali Feliz programmed into speed dial. You know you'll be ringing at least one of them up sooner rather than later.
Conversely, dumping Frank Francisco to create a vacancy in the closer's role for the sole benefit of Smoltz doesn't make nearly as much sense, unless you can somehow leverage Francisco into other meaningful roster improvements (e.g. as part of a package deal for a primo starting pitcher or slugger) and are reasonably confident that Smoltz's diminished velocity won't precipitate another crash-and-burn situation. Cutting loose your fifth starter on the fly is one thing, but when you start to run multiple people through the ninth-inning role in a short period of time and leads start being lost, that's when things can really get ugly.
Quick Hits: According to Evan Grant of the Dallas Morning News, prospective owner Chuck Greenberg and Rangers team president Nolan Ryan have fielded "significant interest from local investors" and seem to have formed a de facto partnership; ESPN.com's Buster Olney reported last Saturday that final bids to purchase the ballclub were to be submitted this week, further closing Hicks Sports Group's window to retain majority control of the franchise.
Reader Comments (14)
Honestly, I will be shocked if Tanner Scheppers isn't the 5th starter by May. And I believe Brandon McCarthy is better than Smoltz.
Snf no, to be a closer. No, no no. Might they move Francisco and move Feliz at closer, yes, they could and maybe, they should. Whether Feliz should start or close is a decision for Maddux and RYan and the boys. I do think Feliz is ready to close though and would do a great job. Shope Francisco for a bat isn't such a bad idea.
But Smoltz? No.
If they picked up Smoltz wouldn't it have to be on a no-promises kind of deal, where he would have to prove he could contribute? And certainly he wouldn't be counted on to do anything much - it would all have to be gravy. He wouldn't be a bad guy to have around the young kids, though - maybe that's what's really going on here.
Umm... I'm going to go with no on Smoltz. Let's take a look at his GB/FB ratio and FB% since 2002:
2002 - 1.45 GB/FB, 31.7% FB
2003 - 1.23 GB/FB, 36.8% FB
2004 - 1.39 GB/FB, 34.4% FB
2005 - 1.59 GB/FB, 30.2% FB
2006 - 1.39 GB/FB, 33.4% FB
2007 - 1.26 GB/FB, 35.4% FB
2008 - 1.30 GB/FB, 37.5% FB
2009 - 0.94 GB/FB, 42% FB
Anything there stand out about last year's performance? If he's lost the ability to keep the ball on the ground on a consistent basis, he'll have a hard time pitching at the Ballpark. Homie don't play that.
Absolutely no on Smoltz. The numbers in St. Louis are irrelevant(see NL), and his failure in Boston, had less to do with Epstein being wrong on Smoltz's contributions, but more so on on his performance(see AL). Besides at this stage of his career he can cherry pick his destination, and sorry folks Arlington isn't it. I'd rather you run Harrison out there every 5th day, until Feliz is ready. I want to see Feliz & Holland in the rotation all year long, and keep McCarthy in the pen where he belongs. He's less likely to hurt himself.
Let's tap the brakes on Scheppers, Arlington's a long way from the AZL.
NO on Smoltz... absolutely not! We saw last year that Kris Benson took a few starts away from what ultimately became our most effective starter; Scott Feldman. Let's not make the same mistake twice by signing Smoltz in lieu of a younger SP, whether it be an in-house guy or FA/trade.
Also, I think JD has to put his hand in everything right now to show the fans, his players/coaches, and most importantly available free agents, that the Rangers are still players, despite unsettled ownership.
First off I like the title in a more literal sense. I don't want Smoltz as a starter. If he wants to be a late inning bullpen arm, fine I'll take him, but I'm not bumping one of the young guys for what will only be marginally better production at best. And if we're going to trade one of our bullpen arms to "make room" for him, I trade CJ. I think the fact that he's a lefty gives him more trade value, and though on paper that makes him more valuable his making a stink about wanting to return the rotation makes me think he's going to be more trouble than he's worth going forward. I say trade him even if we don't sign Smoltz for the bullpen.
If we're going to kick the tires on a vet, then I'd rather opt for a Braden Looper type, who had previously been a fairly effective guy before last season's debacle.
I think it's fascinating how the "kicking the tires" metaphor is so prevalent in this situation (go to mlbtraderumors.com and see how often the writers there use it, for instance). Actually, it's really a metaphor within a metaphor, since no one really, literally "kicks the tires" of an auto to see if they should buy it - It's an obsolete metaphor. Maybe a more accurate one would be something like, "The Rangers are currently checking John Smoltz's Carfax." Maybe not. Kicking tires it is!
Ok, the only way that I would say yes to Smoltz is if he's willing to take a setup role for only around one million guaranteed. If CJ actually wins a starting job (and can hold it down), Smoltz could be suitable as a setup guy who probably still has more left in his arm than Guardado did. Personally even if Wagner doesn't have the compensation baggage, I'd still like to avoid him. He could have an excellent season for us (and I like the guy), but he could also tank and I don't think he'd be nearly as cheap as Smoltz.
On a side note, I still believe Andrus deserved to be rookie of the year. However, If there's any argument to be made, it's for Brett Anderson. Here's the WAR breakdown for the top Rookies of 2009.
Rick Porcello --> 1.9
Gordon Beckham --> 2.0
Andrew Bailey --> 2.4
Ricky Romero --> 2.7
Elvis Andrus --> 3.0
Jeff Nieman --> 3.2
Brett Anderson --> 3.8
As far as hitters go, the only higher WAR in all the majors (for rookies) was Andrew McCutchen at 3.4. WAR isn't one of my favorite stats, but it's does a pretty good job of putting Bailey and Beckham in their places.
Joey, David,
When you have time, could you discuss Minor League FA's?
There's a knuckleballer/3rd -string catcher and 2b/3B Ruben Gotay who come to mind as possible fits for us... But I don't want to hijack this thread (there's no more BBTIA "Forum" link, right?)
Keeping an open mind with regards to age is a good idea. I love good, young pitching. But I also look at (former Ranger) Jamie Moyer and saw that he was still getting guys out at age 45. And there have been others who pitched well into their 40s -- our own Nolan Ryan is the best example. Smoltz hasn't been injury-prone, as well as I recollect, and that to me is the main concern with older guys (McCarthy proves that age isn't the only factor with that problem). So the Rangers should, by all means, look and discern if Mr. Smoltz would be a good fit. Just like a great meal sometimes needs a dash of salt, a great team needs a sprinkling of wise, old veterans. Build the Rangers for greatness, not just to be competitive or so-so!
Ugh, so many typing errors in my previous post - my apologies..
About Scheppers: I have heard and read many minor league (internet) *experts* talk about Scheppers much in the same vein as Strasburg. I still say I will be shocked if he's not the 5th starter on May 1st.