Are D-Backs contenders?

[azdad1978]

By Scott Bordow, Tribune Columnist

Diamondbacks manager Bob Melvin is astonished by the amount of work that’s been done on his fixer-upper. "You’ve got to liken it to Extreme Makeover," Melvin said Wednesday. "This certainly isn’t the team I inherited when I got here."

No, it’s not, and for that we’re grateful. Following a team with 111 losses is about as enjoyable as carpooling to the ballpark with Randy Johnson on the day he pitches.

Here’s the thing, though: You put a new coat of paint on a dilapidated shed and you still have a dilapidated shed.

The Diamondbacks lost 111 games last year. For all of the changes they’ve made this offseason, is there a wrecking ball big enough for them to go from worst to first? "That’s a great question," said second baseman Craig Counsell. "What’s great is that you can ask that question. The fact you’re asking means progress has been made." Good point. It’s still hard to imagine the Diamondbacks winning the National League West. In case you’ve forgotten, THEY LOST 111 GAMES. That’s not just bad. That’s really, really bad. They were so bad they made the Cardinals look good.

But it’s not so crazy to think Arizona can hang with Los Angeles, San
Francisco and San Diego for most of the summer. Colorado was mathematically eliminated last week.

"There’s no doubt in my mind we can come close to reversing our record," said pitcher Russ Ortiz.

Wait a minute. Did he just say the Diamondbacks could go 111-51? Wow. Let’s hope ol’ Russ is a bit more accurate with his pitches.

A .500 season does seem plausible, however, and if Arizona can complete its renovation by acquiring a center fielder and a top-three starter, who knows?

"Each and every day we’re getting everybody’s attention in our division," Melvin said.

If nothing else, the Diamondbacks will be a far more disciplined and fundamentally sound team.

It’s no secret that some of Arizona’s younger players cheated themselves — and the team — last season in terms of their preparation and professionalism.

Infielder Alex Cintron spent more time on his cell phone than he did fielding grounders, and center fielder Luis Terrero’s work ethic was haphazard at best.

They weren’t set straight because the Diamondbacks’ clubhouse was nearly devoid of veterans, and interim manager Al Pedrique didn’t have the juice to keep players in line.

The result: Arizona committed 139 errors — only the Detroit Tigers had more — and hardly a game went by without a boneheaded mistake on the basepaths. That kind of carelessness won’t be tolerated this summer. If one of the newbies fails to hit a cutoff man or misses a sign, he’ll hear about it from veterans like Counsell and Royce Clayton. It’s funny. Matt Williams often was viewed as a clubhouse cancer by those who rarely ventured inside the clubhouse, but last season Arizona desperately missed the example he set in the hours leading up to a game.

"We were a blue-collar team," said outfielder Luis Gonzalez. "Nowadays, with younger players getting paid more, they spend less time in here (the clubhouse). "Hopefully, with the guys we’ve brought in, the young guys will see the different kind of attitude that we had in the past." Every baseball team feels good about itself in January — other than Colorado, that is — so the good vibes coming out of the Diamondbacks’ clubhouse Wednesday shouldn’t be inhaled. But at least fans aren’t breathing in noxious fumes anymore.

Listen to Scott Bordow every Wednesday at 8:05 a.m. on KDUS (1060 AM) with Don DeBaca and Dale Hellestrae and as a guest host on The Night Shift on KTAR (620 AM)
Only Gonzo remains
How complete is the Diamondbacks’ makeover? Barring injuries, Luis Gonzalez will be the only player on the field for Arizona on opening day in both 2004 and 2005, and only Gonzalez and Alex Cintron are still on the Arizona roster.
2004 Opening day lineup (April 6, 2004 vs. Colorado)
Steve Finley CF Traded to Dodgers Roberto Alomar 2B Traded White Sox Luis Gonzalez LF Richie Sexson 1B Left as a free agent Alex Cintron SS Now a backup Shea Hillenbrand 3B Traded to Blue Jays Danny Bautista RF Left as a free agent Brett Mayne C Traded to Dodgers Randy Johnson P Traded to Yankees
2005 Opening day lineup (projected)
Craig Counsell 2B Signed as a free agent Royce Clayton SS Signed as a free agent Luis Gonzalez LF Troy Glaus 3B Signed as a free agent Shawn Green RF Acquired from Dodgers Chad Tracy 1B Product of farm system Koyie Hill C Acquired from Dodgers ??????? CF Eric Byrnes, Jay Payton? Russ Ortiz/Javier Vazquez P Signed as free agents


http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=35022

 

[AZZenny]

Did he just say the Diamondbacks could go 111-51? Wow. Let’s hope ol’ Russ is a bit more accurate with his pitches.


I think he was predicting his BB:K ratio, wasn't he?

 

[moviegeekjn]

I think he was predicting his BB:K ratio, wasn't he?

He'd have to improve by one for the BB portion. With a significant drop in K's, he could hit that mark

 

[Toro]

Not a contender.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

If Khalil Greene, Jake Peavy, Barry Bonds, and Jason Schmit all suffer season-ending surgeries, then the DBacks are a contender in the NL West.

Against the rest of the NL and the AL it's going to take seven or eight career seasons for us to contend.

 

[Djaughe]

.... Colorado was mathematically eliminated last week.

I like this quote!

 

[Skkorpion]

No. Not a contender.

 

[Lefty]

Contender for the NL West. Many of the Giants will be collecting social security. It's wide open.

 

[dogpoo32]

Contender for the NL West. Many of the Giants will be collecting social security. It's wide open.

Agreed.

 

[BOB_Man24]

Agreed.

Our we gonna runaway with out the division? No. But you are damn right we will have a shot at contending in this watered down division. We are the only team that has actually made some positive additions compared to the pads, giants, and dodgers that have in my opinion all lost some ground.

 

[ajcardfan]

They HAVE to stay healthy. If they can, then yes, they could surprise. But, as few as two major injuries could really screw them over.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Our we gonna runaway with out the division? No. But you are damn right we will have a shot at contending in this watered down division. We are the only team that has actually made some positive additions compared to the pads, giants, and dodgers that have in my opinion all lost some ground.

How did the Giants downgrade from last year's squad? Sure they lose a lot defensively with Alou in RF as opposed to Michael Tucker but his bat more than makes up for it. Not to mention their terrible bullpen was shored up in many ways with the Armando Benitez signing, which would have won them the division had they done it a year earlier. Throw in the Omar Vizquel and Mike Matheny signings, a healthy Jason Schmidt and Jerome Williams, and tghe addition-by-subtraction release of A.J. Pierzynski and the Giants are vastly improved from a team that finished a game out of the division lead. I also think the Padres slightly improved as well by improving an already superb bullpen and losing basically nothing in pitching and on offense.

Don't get me wrong, I think the D-Backs have significantly improved from last season, most notably defensively and offensively. I just don't think it's going to be enough to get over the 90 win hump. Every member of our rotation has question marks surrounding them (I think Vazquez and Webb will be fine, the other three concern me) and our bullpen is still very young and unproven in meaningful situations. The offense should be better, but all three power hitters are coming off injury problems and our new SS and 2B can't hit. Not to mention we don't know who our starting CF is going to be. Too many questions for anyone to seriously label this team a contender.

 

[NickelBack]

No. Not a contender.

I agree.

 

[moviebuff316]

I think we can't really say D-backs are contenders but you can't really say they can't contend as well. Its a wait and see. They could be good or bad.

 

[devilalum]

If about 10 players all have career years they'll be the bomb.

Maybe Clark'll springboard off of that career "DAY" he had last year and hit 35 hrs.

Maybe Glaus will return to his old form.

Maybe Gonzos arm is better.

Maybe Webb will thrive in the 3 or 4 spot.

Maybe Vasquez will love it in AZ and return to his Expos form.

Maybe Counsell will hit .230.

Maybe Terrero will do 30/30.

Maybe Shawn Green will get 120 rbi's

How many question marks can a club expect to pay off?

Is there one player on this entire roster that doesn't have a question mark attached to their name?

 

[schillingfan]

Is there one player on this entire roster that doesn't have a question mark attached to their name?

Well, I don't think Gonzo's really a question mark, as I'm sure he'll throw better and he pretty much can be penciled in to have a .390 OBP.

But I could say the same of every club in baseball, even the Yankees have question marks. Pitchers are always a question mark due to injury and very few players consistently perform at all-star level.

Often it's less a matter of the question marks, than the quality of the alternatives if a player has to be replaced.

 

[Stallion]

I think San Deigo's the team to beat in the West this year. I like their lineup, and they have 3 decent starters all under 30. If they all improve (or in Peavy's case, come even close to matching last year), and if Woody Williams has anything left, I think they'll significantly improve on their 87 wins from last year.

I think we'll be a contender....for a .500 record, but that's about it. Our only hope is for a bunch of people to have career years all at once (like '99).

 

[RLakin]

I think we'll be a contender....for a .500 record, but that's about it. Our only hope is for a bunch of people to have career years all at once (like '99).

Yes, but even then it should be a reluctant bet. In 99’ the Diamondbacks had a healthy Luis Gonzalez (who will not match his 99’ effort - in any respect) and Randy Johnson. Even if Javier Vazquez agrees to pitch here (when is that press conference by the way?), the competition in the NL West is formidable - lest we forget the Giants of 99’ were 86 game winners with a staff featuring two current Diamondbacks starters with, shall we say, “control issues.” Perhaps I should spare the euphemism, as I’m more than certain that the exalted one (Joe Jr.) already checked into the matter.

By my count:

1. Dodgers (those pesky sabermetricians)
2. Giants (if Schimdt stays healthy, Bonds "puffed")
3. Padres (close behind)
4. Diamondbacks (in no way)
5. Rockies (already dead)

 

[Stan C]

The dodgers with J. D. Drew as their top run producer? If was as LA fan, I'd be pissed about this off season. Remember, 2002 when they had a good pi
pitching staff with no run support, I think they are back to that position.
Whoops, forgot about Kent, but I sitll don't think it's enough with 82 games in that ball park.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

1. Dodgers (those pesky sabermetricians)
2. Giants (if Schimdt stays healthy, Bonds "puffed")
3. Padres (close behind)
4. Diamondbacks (in no way)
5. Rockies (already dead)

I'll never understand the media's obsession and reverence for sabermetricians. Just because a team is adopting Billy Beane's model, it doesn't mean they are going to match his success. See this decade's Toronto Blue Jays.

 

[RLakin]

I'll never understand the media's obsession and reverence for sabermetricians. Just because a team is adopting Billy Beane's model, it doesn't mean they are going to match his success. See this decade's Toronto Blue Jays.

We’ll, you’re half right with that statement. The media may be obsessed with sabermetricians, but not because their admirers of Billy Beane and certainly not Paul DePodesta. I’ve never considered JP Riccardi as anything other than a pseudo-Moneyball GM, in that he doesn’t adhere to the archaic standards of the baseball conventionalists, who view Beane and the Moneyball progeny as heretics, stat geeks, and –worst of all- financially accountable. (Is there anything worse then adhering to a budget? Certainly not in many baseball circles.)

The media still side with the conventionalists, and I can prove it. For the condensed version, I recommend Michael Lewis’s article in SI (I want to say it was published last May) entitled “Out of their Tree.” If you’re a self-starter, run a search on Paul DePodesta with the word(s) “genius,” “geek,” or “cheapskate.” I’m sure you’ll find something.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

The media's hatred of DePodesta has little to do with his background or his beliefs on building a baseball team. The media doesn't like him because he makes dumb moves, such as the trade last year that resulted in his team nearly blowing a huge lead in the standings.

On the other hand, Beane is widely admired by many members of the media (Rob Neyer, Baseball Prospectus, Gammons, etc.) but is only hated by many good old boys of the baseball media who hate change. I actually think the traditionalist's backing off of Beane may have something to do with DePo becoming a much easier target.

Anyways, I'm getting off point. I don't think there's any way the Dodgers win the West because I believe DePo has himself a poorly constructed team. Their defense has taken a huge step down in exchanging Beltre and Cora for Valentin and Kent. It'll get ugly if Navarro isn't ready because they'll be looking at a Paul Bako-Dave Ross platoon behind the plate. Their pitching should be better in the regular season (Weaver and Odalis will always fail in the clutch) but the Giants have made more improvements and that will put them ahead of the Dodgers.

 

[schillingfan]

The media's hatred of DePodesta has little to do with his background or his beliefs on building a baseball team. The media doesn't like him because he makes dumb moves, such as the trade last year that resulted in his team nearly blowing a huge lead in the standings.

Well, that's sort of a truism. Because the media accepts old school, they think his moves are dumb. They don't understand trading an aging and overrated catcher before his value goes down. I liked the moves DePodesta made at the deadline.

 

[RLakin]

The media's hatred of DePodesta has little to do with his background or his beliefs on building a baseball team. The media doesn't like him because he makes dumb moves, such as the trade last year that resulted in his team nearly blowing a huge lead in the standings.

On the other hand, Beane is widely admired by many members of the media (Rob Neyer, Baseball Prospectus, Gammons, etc.) but is only hated by many good old boys of the baseball media who hate change. I actually think the traditionalist's backing off of Beane may have something to do with DePo becoming a much easier target.

Anyways, I'm getting off point. I don't think there's any way the Dodgers win the West because I believe DePo has himself a poorly constructed team. Their defense has taken a huge step down in exchanging Beltre and Cora for Valentin and Kent. It'll get ugly if Navarro isn't ready because they'll be looking at a Paul Bako-Dave Ross platoon behind the plate. Their pitching should be better in the regular season (Weaver and Odalis will always fail in the clutch) but the Giants have made more improvements and that will put them ahead of the Dodgers.

Fair enough. The Giants are improved from last season and the sighs and smirks from the D-Backs and associates are both nonsensical and hypocritical. (Old age was the vice of choice in 2001, was it not?) As to DePodesta, it would be impossible to imagine the Beane wing of the sabermetric movement succeeding without his active participation. Unlike Theo Esptein (who is but an admirer), DePosdesta was Beane’s right-hand man and closest confidant. Many of the theories put together in Oakland then (which are still in play today) come from Beane/DePodesta, and not one less. The deadline deals made by DePodesta last summer were very Moneyball-esque. You may have seen LoDuca and Mota re-signing w/ Florida for substantial money. It’s impossible to believe that DePodesta could have upgraded his starting rotation (which includes the signing of Lowe and re-signing of Penny and Perez) had LoDuca and/or Mota been on the hook (no pun intended) for the type of money that they are now receiving from the Marlins. I would only surrender the point only if you would concede that Kent, Valentin, and Drew would not be in Dodger Blue along w/ a weaker starting rotation. It’s more of the same, in other words, and I think “Lima time” had its limits. Additionally, the Dodgers were not a championship team last season, and I doubt they could have been with LoDuca and Mota in the fold. I have a sneaking suspicion that this type of forward thinking is what bothers the conventionists - along with that vexatious virtue of adhering to a budget.
Team chemistry is a bad argument in general, and a terrible one in baseball - but let’s not go there. To base an argument on what the Dodgers almost didn’t do strikes me as a bit frivolous if not altogether wasteful. Not getting Charles Johnson was a mistake, but going after starting pitching (w/ a staff like LA had pre-July 30) is always the optimum goal. (By the way, I’m glad the Yankees learned this the hard way).
.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

For the fans, the proof is in the pudding regarding last deadline's trade: the 2004 Dodgers were not as good as a result of it. A healthy Penny would have swayed some opinions, but I even read that Penny was complaining about his arm before the trade. Maybe the conventionalists had a point in saying you don't trade your starting catcher and 'team leader' halfway through a promising season no matter how much he notoriously struggles in the second half. And maybe the conventionalists had a point in suggesting that Darren Dreifort didn't have the stuff or makeup to be Gagne's set-up guy. All things they said which were reinforced by Dodgers nearly choking away the division then getting blown out of the water in the playoffs. Make no mistake, I don't think the Dodgers got ripped off in a talent sense, only that the pundits had a lot of ammunition seeing in that the Dodgers only started struggling after the trade.

Regardless, I think the Dodgers fans would have gotten over the whole LoDuca and Mota for Penny thing if they had decided to use the money they saved in the deal wisely. It's only my opinion, but I would rather have Adrian Beltre and go with a Penny/Weaver/Lowe/Ishii/Jackson rotation than have Drew and those guys plus Odalis Perez. Sure you can suggest 2004 Beltre was a fluke due to a contract year, but the same could be said of J.D. Drew and Drew's talent is nowhere comparable to Beltre's. The difference in price was made up with either Derek Lowe or Odalis Perez, not exactly pillars of consitency or makeup, especially when you're planning on putting a slow-footed defense (notable exception of Izturis) behind them. These signings actually scream anti-Beane more than anything. This offseason Beane realized how overvalued starting pitching was and traded off his staff for guys who will replace them and cost much less while filling other holes. While Beane understood the market, DePo jumped headfirst into this ridiculous pitching market cesspool. Of course, none of us know what will really happen but thankfully it will get played out this summer. I think the Dodgers will be a good team, just not as good as the Giants or the Padres. Man I can't wait for pitchers and catchers to report.