2012 Baseball Season/Off-Season Discussion

[faldor]

Looks like faldor was right (about the housecleaning) and I was right about the compensation (shit).  In terms of pure value of the trade (and not what the trade means, long term), the Sox got ass raped, IMHO.

Which isn't to say it's not a good move for the Red Sox. It likely is.  It clears tons of payroll, which means maybe they can rebuild in the offseason.  It's probably the move they had to make, all things considered.

But (again IMHO), A-gon alone was basically worth what the Sox got back.  Never mind they threw in Becket, Crawford, Punto (who, IMHO, is actually a great pickup for the Dodgers, considering Hairston ended up on the DL) AND cash.

They reportedly threw in between 11 and 12 million, out of over 250 million owed on the remaining salaries.  That's hardly even worth mentioning.  It's not like the Youkilis deal where they ate most of the remaining salary.  Not even close.  I don't have to spell out the reasons this was a slam dunk of a deal for the Red Sox.  Yes they had to part with Adrian Gonzalez, and yes he is a great player and won't be easy to replace.  But to think they could rid themselves of probably the worst current contract in baseball (Crawford) and a perceived malcontent who's owed 35 million himself (Beckett) in one full swoop, color me down.  Not to mention the fact that the Dodgers threw in 2 pretty highly touted pitching prospects.  Webster was their 2nd rated prospect, and many view De La Rosa as a legit top of the rotation prospect.  Now obviously, both could turn out to be nothing.  Such is life with prospects.  But it's not like they got nothing of value in return.  If not for the Dodgers, they probably would have had to make an AJ Burnett type deal with Beckett in the off-season, picking up about half his salary.  And Crawford was pretty much viewed as untradeable, especially considering he JUST had TJ surgery and probably won't be available for the start of next season.  In reality, they probably would have had to eat about half his contract as well in order to make him enticing to other teams.  So in reality, they probably would have been on the hook for upwards of 60 million dollars to rid themselves of both Beckett AND Crawford, yet they only had to pay 12 million.  If that's not a steal, I don't know what is.

They're far from finished, and I still think they should be open to unloading anyone.  But this is certainly a great start.  I couldn't be more ecstatic about the future compared to a mere 4 days ago.  I would've never dreamed they could have done so much in so little time, especially in August.  They had a talented lineup, and still do, but they weren't winning with the shitty pitching they send out there on any given night.  Many felt that Beckett was a bad influence on the young pitchers they have.  We'll see if that was the case, or if they in fact just straight up suck.  Pitching still needs to be improved, and that's not easy to do.  That should still be the focus though.  I would still expect them to explore the idea of trading Ellsbury in the off-season, as he is still a huge question mark as to whether he'd want to re-sign.  They have to make a decision on Ortiz, though I'd expect them to keep him.  And while they could use help in the OF and possibly SS, I think their biggest need is to find a 1B.  Maybe take a shot at Mike Napoli, who could act as a backup catcher and primary 1B, for reasonable terms.  I don't expect them to make a run at either Greinke or Hamilton.  At least I hope not.  I've learned my lesson.  Stop with the spending spree.  Spend wisely instead.

And just so we're clear, I don't think they spent foolishly on Adrian Gonzalez.  He actually may be a little underpaid compared to some of his counterparts.  But giving him up is well worth starting anew.

[faldor]

I find it amusing the sox have been playing much better without Beckett, Crawford and A-Gon.

Well they have played the Royals the last 4 games, plus it's hard to do much worse than they were doing.

Big trades can often light a fire under a team, even if they don't give you great return on investment.  Let's face it, the only one they're truly going to miss in the grand scheme of things is Gonzalez.  They weren't winning much with him in the lineup, it's all about pitching.  Although, the pitching hasn't been great against the Royals, outside of Dice-K today.  Amazingly enough.  The offense will obviously take a hit long term, but pitching is the main reason they're in the position they're in.

Granted it has been against the Royals, we should see what they are capable of when they play the Angels tomorrow. Although, the Angels haven't exactly been playing well.

Yeah the Angles just swept them before they made the big trade, so we'll see if they can fare better this time around.  They still lost a game to the Royals they had no business losing.  A game in which they banged out more than 20 hits.  Have I mentioned that it's ALL ABOUT PITCHING?  Something tells me that Adrian Gonzalez isn't going to make that much of a difference when you give up 10 runs to the Royals.  In fact I can say that with certainty, I watched it for the better part of two years. 

[tim_m]

I find it amusing the sox have been playing much better without Beckett, Crawford and A-Gon.

Well they have played the Royals the last 4 games, plus it's hard to do much worse than they were doing.

Big trades can often light a fire under a team, even if they don't give you great return on investment.  Let's face it, the only one they're truly going to miss in the grand scheme of things is Gonzalez.  They weren't winning much with him in the lineup, it's all about pitching.  Although, the pitching hasn't been great against the Royals, outside of Dice-K today.  Amazingly enough.  The offense will obviously take a hit long term, but pitching is the main reason they're in the position they're in.

Granted it has been against the Royals, we should see what they are capable of when they play the Angels tomorrow. Although, the Angels haven't exactly been playing well.

Yeah the Angles just swept them before they made the big trade, so we'll see if they can fare better this time around.  They still lost a game to the Royals they had no business losing.  A game in which they banged out more than 20 hits.  Have I mentioned that it's ALL ABOUT PITCHING?  Something tells me that Adrian Gonzalez isn't going to make that much of a difference when you give up 10 runs to the Royals.  In fact I can say that with certainty, I watched it for the better part of two years. 

Yeah, not much is going to help you if you can't keep the other team off the scoreboard.

[tim_m]

Looks like faldor was right (about the housecleaning) and I was right about the compensation (shit).  In terms of pure value of the trade (and not what the trade means, long term), the Sox got ass raped, IMHO.

Which isn't to say it's not a good move for the Red Sox. It likely is.  It clears tons of payroll, which means maybe they can rebuild in the offseason.  It's probably the move they had to make, all things considered.

But (again IMHO), A-gon alone was basically worth what the Sox got back.  Never mind they threw in Becket, Crawford, Punto (who, IMHO, is actually a great pickup for the Dodgers, considering Hairston ended up on the DL) AND cash.

They reportedly threw in between 11 and 12 million, out of over 250 million owed on the remaining salaries.  That's hardly even worth mentioning.  It's not like the Youkilis deal where they ate most of the remaining salary.  Not even close.  I don't have to spell out the reasons this was a slam dunk of a deal for the Red Sox.  Yes they had to part with Adrian Gonzalez, and yes he is a great player and won't be easy to replace.  But to think they could rid themselves of probably the worst current contract in baseball (Crawford) and a perceived malcontent who's owed 35 million himself (Beckett) in one full swoop, color me down.  Not to mention the fact that the Dodgers threw in 2 pretty highly touted pitching prospects.  Webster was their 2nd rated prospect, and many view De La Rosa as a legit top of the rotation prospect.  Now obviously, both could turn out to be nothing.  Such is life with prospects.  But it's not like they got nothing of value in return.  If not for the Dodgers, they probably would have had to make an AJ Burnett type deal with Beckett in the off-season, picking up about half his salary.  And Crawford was pretty much viewed as untradeable, especially considering he JUST had TJ surgery and probably won't be available for the start of next season.  In reality, they probably would have had to eat about half his contract as well in order to make him enticing to other teams.  So in reality, they probably would have been on the hook for upwards of 60 million dollars to rid themselves of both Beckett AND Crawford, yet they only had to pay 12 million.  If that's not a steal, I don't know what is.

They're far from finished, and I still think they should be open to unloading anyone.  But this is certainly a great start.  I couldn't be more ecstatic about the future compared to a mere 4 days ago.  I would've never dreamed they could have done so much in so little time, especially in August.  They had a talented lineup, and still do, but they weren't winning with the shitty pitching they send out there on any given night.  Many felt that Beckett was a bad influence on the young pitchers they have.  We'll see if that was the case, or if they in fact just straight up suck.  Pitching still needs to be improved, and that's not easy to do.  That should still be the focus though.  I would still expect them to explore the idea of trading Ellsbury in the off-season, as he is still a huge question mark as to whether he'd want to re-sign.  They have to make a decision on Ortiz, though I'd expect them to keep him.  And while they could use help in the OF and possibly SS, I think their biggest need is to find a 1B.  Maybe take a shot at Mike Napoli, who could act as a backup catcher and primary 1B, for reasonable terms.  I don't expect them to make a run at either Greinke or Hamilton.  At least I hope not.  I've learned my lesson.  Stop with the spending spree.  Spend wisely instead.

And just so we're clear, I don't think they spent foolishly on Adrian Gonzalez.  He actually may be a little underpaid compared to some of his counterparts.  But giving him up is well worth starting anew.

Who else would you personally like to see moved Faldor?

[pilferk]

In no order, here's 12 guys I'd take over ARod right now.

Longoria
Cabrera
Zimmerman
Beltre
Headley
Freese
Bautista
Wright
Sandoval
Ramirez - Hanley/Aramis
Trumbo

"Taking them over" (as in, you want them on your team more than) vs "performing better" are slightly different.

Some of those players I'd take because of age and future potential, not necessarily because, RIGHT NOW or IN THEY PAST, they're outproducing A-Rod.  Neither of those make them better third baseman, now.

Longoria: No arguments
Cabrera: I'm not sure he's really a 3rd baseman. I'll agree...if he ends up there next year.
Zimmerman: No arguments
Beltre: This season? Yes.  Overall? No.  Not at the plate (where it's close) and not in the field (where it's not)...unless you buy into UZR (which I don't).
Freese: On youth, yes.  On production (in the field and at the plate). No.  Not statistically.  And the kids only played a season and a half in the pros.
Bautista: He's really a right fielder, now.  His bat is better, but there's a reason (his fielding) he's not playing 3rd.  Even when he was playing 3rd...bat a resounding yes.  Glove..a resounding no.
Wright: Nope.  With the bat he's a rough equivalent.  A-rod's better with his glove.  Add to that the fact Wright hasn't exactly been Mr. Consistent at the plate. He's likely the guy I would rank right after A-rod...so it's close.
Sandoval? Kidding, right?  He's young..but the past two seasons he's as injury prone as A-rod is. He's never had a season even as productive as Alex's INJURY shortened seasons (or this season). And he's not shown nearly the defensive skills in the field. 
Aramis Ramirez: Bat...maybe.  Glove. This season, Aramis has been better. Historically, A-rod has been much better..  And the age difference isn't all that great.  It's close, though. Maybe right ahead of A-rod...maybe just behind him.
Hanley Ramirez: He's a short stop.  He played 3rd for Miami...but look where he is on the Dodgers, now.  I doubt he'll ever go back.  Not to mention AS a 3rd baseman...he was awful.  Both with the bat and in the field. DEFINITELY not better than A-rod.
Trumbo: He's played a total of 8 games at 3rd base (all this year)...and he's been AWFUL in the field doing it.  I don't even think you can call him a 3rd baseman.

[pilferk]

They reportedly threw in between 11 and 12 million, out of over 250 million owed on the remaining salaries.  That's hardly even worth mentioning.  It's not like the Youkilis deal where they ate most of the remaining salary.  Not even close.  I don't have to spell out the reasons this was a slam dunk of a deal for the Red Sox.  Yes they had to part with Adrian Gonzalez, and yes he is a great player and won't be easy to replace.  But to think they could rid themselves of probably the worst current contract in baseball (Crawford) and a perceived malcontent who's owed 35 million himself (Beckett) in one full swoop, color me down.  Not to mention the fact that the Dodgers threw in 2 pretty highly touted pitching prospects.  Webster was their 2nd rated prospect, and many view De La Rosa as a legit top of the rotation prospect.  Now obviously, both could turn out to be nothing.  Such is life with prospects.  But it's not like they got nothing of value in return.  If not for the Dodgers, they probably would have had to make an AJ Burnett type deal with Beckett in the off-season, picking up about half his salary.  And Crawford was pretty much viewed as untradeable, especially considering he JUST had TJ surgery and probably won't be available for the start of next season.  In reality, they probably would have had to eat about half his contract as well in order to make him enticing to other teams.  So in reality, they probably would have been on the hook for upwards of 60 million dollars to rid themselves of both Beckett AND Crawford, yet they only had to pay 12 million.  If that's not a steal, I don't know what is.

Again, it's a deal they had to make.  It makes good sense for the Sox...and ultimately helps them. 

But not because of what the trade brought them.  They got hosed on the trade, in terms of return value.   Heck, just for the value of A-gon...I'm not sure they got equivalent value in return. Closer, though. But you can't argue that it's not severely lopsided, just in terms of the player swap. It's an NBA style salary dump.

Ever seen "Brewsters Millions"?  Richard Pryor (as Monty Brewster) has to spend 30 million in 30 days in order to inherit 300 million.

This was a Brewsters Millions deal.  They "spent" a whole lot (A-gon) and got next to nothing back for it...by design.  So they could get more down the road.

They're far from finished, and I still think they should be open to unloading anyone.  But this is certainly a great start.  I couldn't be more ecstatic about the future compared to a mere 4 days ago.  I would've never dreamed they could have done so much in so little time, especially in August.  They had a talented lineup, and still do, but they weren't winning with the shitty pitching they send out there on any given night.  Many felt that Beckett was a bad influence on the young pitchers they have.  We'll see if that was the case, or if they in fact just straight up suck.  Pitching still needs to be improved, and that's not easy to do.  That should still be the focus though.  I would still expect them to explore the idea of trading Ellsbury in the off-season, as he is still a huge question mark as to whether he'd want to re-sign.  They have to make a decision on Ortiz, though I'd expect them to keep him.  And while they could use help in the OF and possibly SS, I think their biggest need is to find a 1B.  Maybe take a shot at Mike Napoli, who could act as a backup catcher and primary 1B, for reasonable terms.  I don't expect them to make a run at either Greinke or Hamilton.  At least I hope not.  I've learned my lesson.  Stop with the spending spree.  Spend wisely instead.

And just so we're clear, I don't think they spent foolishly on Adrian Gonzalez.  He actually may be a little underpaid compared to some of his counterparts.  But giving him up is well worth starting anew.

Again, I think it had to be someone like A-gon or Pedroia to lynchpin a deal like this.  There was no other way to convince a team to take all that $$ on.

[GeorgeSteele]

Wright: Nope.  With the bat he's a rough equivalent.  A-rod's better with his glove.  Add to that the fact Wright hasn't exactly been Mr. Consistent at the plate. He's likely the guy I would rank right after A-rod...so it's close.

Hold on, you're not going to believe this, but I disagree on A-Rod over Wright.

Judging on this season, not even close, bat or glove.  Bat-wise, Wright is among top 10 OPS (and many other hitting categories) in the majors and, defensively, this season he ranks in the top 5 among 3rd basemen in most metrics, while A-Rod is well below-average (source: FanGraphs --- http://www.fangraphs.com). 

Going on the past 3 years, yes, it's close.  Defensively, A-Rod has had the better track record, but that has changed in a major way this season.  As for hitting, Wright has the slight edge in numbers, but I expect there would be a much bigger disparity if Wright were hitting in Yankee Stadium instead of Citifield and had the added benefit of the Yankee lineup protection. 

Usually, I agree that you need to go by at least the past 3 years to make a meaningful player comparison.  But in this case, I think the more recent performance has added weight because A-Rod is at an age where the decrease in performance is surely due to getting old rather than a statistical aberration.  Similarly, this season isn't exactly an outlier for Wright (at least offensively it's not), as he's had many productive seasons in the past. 

[LongGoneDay]

At this stage in their careers, I'd take Beltre in a heartbeat over A-Rod, offensively and defensively.

I wasn't in love with the idea when Sox were discussing a potential 4 year deal with him. Thought he was a disappointment in Seattle after one big year in LA, but he's been on a tear starting in Boston and continuing in Texas. Turns out he was one of Theo's last good signings. Especially as a 1 year deal, so he was motivated in a contract year. Could have done without him steamrolling over Jacoby, though.

[pilferk]

At this stage in their careers, I'd take Beltre in a heartbeat over A-Rod, offensively and defensively.

I wasn't in love with the idea when Sox were discussing a potential 4 year deal with him. Thought he was a disappointment in Seattle after one big year in LA, but he's been on a tear starting in Boston and continuing in Texas. Turns out he was one of Theo's last good signings. Especially as a 1 year deal, so he was motivated in a contract year. Could have done without him steamrolling over Jacoby, though.

UZR rates Beltre higher.  Eyeball tests (and actual fielding %, error rate, etc) make A-rod look a lot more comparable.  The problem with UZR and A-rod is he TRIES more plays than Beltre does (which effects his range rating).  Also..the Jeter/Cano combo keeps him, by design, from ranging wide to the left.  It's one reason why UZR penalizes Tex so much, too.  By design, Cano keeps Tex from ranging too far right.

Again "I'd take" isn't the same as "out performs".

This year, I'd agree (based on his bat, mostly).  Last year...I'd have taken A-rod (based on balance,mostly).

Over the past 3 years...at best it's a dead heat. Their age isn't too far apart either.

And if  A-rod is roughly equivalent to Beltre.....you're saying A-rod is a top tier third baseman, which was really the point.

[Falcon]

Again "I'd take" isn't the same as "out performs".

Agree, 2 different food groups.

I'll qualify my 12 above a bit better.

I'd prefer to have any of the 12 in my lineup as a 3rd basemen than Arod right now.

[pilferk]

Agree, 2 different food groups.

I'll qualify my 12 above a bit better.

I'd prefer to have any of the 12 in my lineup as a 3rd basemen than Arod right now.

Same thing, different phrasing:

"I'd prefer" isn't "performs better than".

There's enough A-rod "hate" out there to make that metric pretty irrelevant.

Having said that, I'd "prefer" A-rod, on my team, in my lineup, and in the field more than a good chunk of the people on your list who are actually 3rd baseman (which was actually 8 guys...9 if you include Cabrerra).  There's 4 or 5 that would/could rank ahead of him, if I'm simply looking at performance.  A couple of those are close.

Out of, what, about 30 3rd baseman in MLB?

Again...to me...even that qualifies as "top tier" when it comes to "preference".

[faldor]

At this stage in their careers, I'd take Beltre in a heartbeat over A-Rod, offensively and defensively.

I wasn't in love with the idea when Sox were discussing a potential 4 year deal with him. Thought he was a disappointment in Seattle after one big year in LA, but he's been on a tear starting in Boston and continuing in Texas. Turns out he was one of Theo's last good signings. Especially as a 1 year deal, so he was motivated in a contract year. Could have done without him steamrolling over Jacoby, though.

UZR rates Beltre higher.  Eyeball tests (and actual fielding %, error rate, etc) make A-rod look a lot more comparable.  The problem with UZR and A-rod is he TRIES more plays than Beltre does (which effects his range rating).  Also..the Jeter/Cano combo keeps him, by design, from ranging wide to the left.  It's one reason why UZR penalizes Tex so much, too.  By design, Cano keeps Tex from ranging too far right.

Again "I'd take" isn't the same as "out performs".

This year, I'd agree (based on his bat, mostly).  Last year...I'd have taken A-rod (based on balance,mostly).

Over the past 3 years...at best it's a dead heat. Their age isn't too far apart either.

And if  A-rod is roughly equivalent to Beltre.....you're saying A-rod is a top tier third baseman, which was really the point.

I don't think it's all that close.  "I'd take" Beltre over A-Rod every day of the week offensively and defensively.  They may be close to the same age, but one is showing his age more than the other these days.

And I also agree on David Wright over A-Rod.  Alex is still a good player, but he's slipping in the wrong direction, and has been for some time.

[pilferk]

I don't think it's all that close.  "I'd take" Beltre over A-Rod every day of the week offensively and defensively.  They may be close to the same age, but one is showing his age more than the other these days.

Numbers wise, it's very close.

"Hate-wise"...it's not.  I'd guess that most Sox fans (and many MLB fans) would make the same pick you are. 

I'd also bet that if they were looking at Player A and Player B...and their stats...it would be a lot more split.

And I also agree on David Wright over A-Rod.  Alex is still a good player, but he's slipping in the wrong direction, and has been for some time.

Based on youth, not production.  Or, at least, not consistent production.

Yes, A-rod has slipped.  He's still put up (until this year) 30/100 seasons..or close to it, when you factor in missed time due to injury...while he's "slipped".  He's managed a relatively high BA and OB%, especially considering he's a power hitter.  And he's played very good defense.

No, he's not the MVP candidate every year version of A-rod.  And the Yanks are vastly overpaying for him.  But he's still a top tier (in terms of production and defense) 3rd baseman.  It's just the rest of the league has caught up.

Whether people would "take him" on their team is a different story...linfluenced at least in some part by the fact that pretty much everyone (including a pretty good sized contingent of Yankees fans) hate him...for a variety of reasons.

[faldor]

It really has nothing to do with my personal feelings for A-Rod. I just feel that Beltre is clearly the better player at this point. He's always had the reputation as a good defensive 3rd baseman. Not sure why you think Alex is superior to him there. And offensively Beltre has been better the last few years, with health being a factor.

[pilferk]

It really has nothing to do with my personal feelings for A-Rod. I just feel that Beltre is clearly the better player at this point. He's always had the reputation as a good defensive 3rd baseman. Not sure why you think Alex is superior to him there. And offensively Beltre has been better the last few years, with health being a factor.

No peeking at fangraphs, baseball reference, or whatever your favorite stat site is:

Defense (I leave off UZR specifically for the reasons cited earlier):

Player A:
2009: .959 Fld %, 14 Errors
2010: .957 Fld %, 19 Errors
2011: .965 Fld %, 11 Errors
2012: .968 Fld %, 8 Errors


Player B:
2009: .967 Fld %, 9 Errors
2010: .976 Fld %, 7 Errors
2011: .973 Fld %, 6 Errors
2012: .951 Fld %, 7 Errors


Offense:

Player A: (BA, OB%, SLG%, OPS, HR, RBI, SO)
2009: .265,.304,.379,.683,8,44,74
2010: .321,.365,.553,.919,28,102,82
2011: .296,.331,.561,.892,32,105,53
2012: .313,.351,528,.879,25,81,62

Player B: (BA, OB%, SLG%, OPS, HR, RBI, SO)
2009: .286, .402, .532, .933, 30, 100, 97
2010: .270, .341, .506, .847, 30, 125, 98
2011: .276, .362, .461, .823, 16, 62, 80
2012: .275, .358, .449, .806, 15, 44, 84

Now, the 2011 and 2012 offensive numbers are dead giveaways as to who is who...not because they're particularly bad, but because the HR/RBI/SO numbers are clearly limited by number of games played.

But, all things considered, those numbers are pretty darn close.  Beltre has the edge with the bat over the past couple years...but then, A-rod has been dealing with injuries (one was his body, one caused by an errant pitch).

[GeorgeSteele]

Not sure if we've covered this already, but any thoughts on the Strasburg innings limit issue? 

I happen to fully agree with innings limits for young pitchers.  The numbers clearly show that overuse at a young age leads to problems down the road...

BUT...

This team is a World Series contender for god sakes!  In no way is that a given in the next few years because baseball is a crazy sport and things can change in a hurry.  Get out there and pitch!

[pilferk]

Not sure if we've covered this already, but any thoughts on the Strasburg innings limit issue? 

I happen to fully agree with innings limits for young pitchers.  The numbers clearly show that overuse at a young age leads to problems down the road...

BUT...

This team is a World Series contender for god sakes!  In no way is that a given in the next few years because baseball is a crazy sport and things can change in a hurry.  Get out there and pitch!

If it was just a question of a young arm...I'd be right there with you.  The relatively marginal increase in innings wouldn't be, IMHO, that detrimental to his development.

BUT, it's not.

It's a young arm recovering from TJ surgery.  So it's not just about the increase in innings, like it was with "the Joba rules". It's the strain they're putting on a surgical repair and the RECOVERY TIME for that arm after doing it.  For that...I think you have to just limit the innings and deal with it.  You can't risk him blowing his arm out again..he's likely the future of your rotation.  I know, I know...maybe it's their only shot at the WS.  But...you're talking about risking a kids career, the clubs long term asset (and investment), and the rotation of the future. 

I'd pull him at about 175. Shut him down til spring.  No winter ball, no competitive pitching..nothing.  Long toss and arm strengthening in about 90 days.

[GeorgeSteele]

Not sure if we've covered this already, but any thoughts on the Strasburg innings limit issue? 

I happen to fully agree with innings limits for young pitchers.  The numbers clearly show that overuse at a young age leads to problems down the road...

BUT...

This team is a World Series contender for god sakes!  In no way is that a given in the next few years because baseball is a crazy sport and things can change in a hurry.  Get out there and pitch!

If it was just a question of a young arm...I'd be right there with you.  The relatively marginal increase in innings wouldn't be, IMHO, that detrimental to his development.

BUT, it's not.

It's a young arm recovering from TJ surgery.  So it's not just about the increase in innings, like it was with "the Joba rules". It's the strain they're putting on a surgical repair and the RECOVERY TIME for that arm after doing it.  For that...I think you have to just limit the innings and deal with it.  You can't risk him blowing his arm out again..he's likely the future of your rotation.  I know, I know...maybe it's their only shot at the WS.  But...you're talking about risking a kids career, the clubs long term asset (and investment), and the rotation of the future. 

I'd pull him at about 175. Shut him down til spring.  No winter ball, no competitive pitching..nothing.  Long toss and arm strengthening in about 90 days.

The other factor in this is that he's a Boras client, so I think he'll more likely be the pitcher of the future for the Yankees, Angels, or Dodgers.

[pilferk]

The other factor in this is that he's a Boras client, so I think he'll more likely be the pitcher of the future for the Yankees, Angels, or Dodgers.

Maybe.

But he's under Nats control through AT LEAST 2016..and possibly longer.  That's 4 more seasons, at least.

[faldor]

It really has nothing to do with my personal feelings for A-Rod. I just feel that Beltre is clearly the better player at this point. He's always had the reputation as a good defensive 3rd baseman. Not sure why you think Alex is superior to him there. And offensively Beltre has been better the last few years, with health being a factor.

No peeking at fangraphs, baseball reference, or whatever your favorite stat site is:

Defense (I leave off UZR specifically for the reasons cited earlier):

Player A:
2009: .959 Fld %, 14 Errors
2010: .957 Fld %, 19 Errors
2011: .965 Fld %, 11 Errors
2012: .968 Fld %, 8 Errors


Player B:
2009: .967 Fld %, 9 Errors
2010: .976 Fld %, 7 Errors
2011: .973 Fld %, 6 Errors
2012: .951 Fld %, 7 Errors


Offense:

Player A: (BA, OB%, SLG%, OPS, HR, RBI, SO)
2009: .265,.304,.379,.683,8,44,74
2010: .321,.365,.553,.919,28,102,82
2011: .296,.331,.561,.892,32,105,53
2012: .313,.351,528,.879,25,81,62

Player B: (BA, OB%, SLG%, OPS, HR, RBI, SO)
2009: .286, .402, .532, .933, 30, 100, 97
2010: .270, .341, .506, .847, 30, 125, 98
2011: .276, .362, .461, .823, 16, 62, 80
2012: .275, .358, .449, .806, 15, 44, 84

Now, the 2011 and 2012 offensive numbers are dead giveaways as to who is who...not because they're particularly bad, but because the HR/RBI/SO numbers are clearly limited by number of games played.

But, all things considered, those numbers are pretty darn close.  Beltre has the edge with the bat over the past couple years...but then, A-rod has been dealing with injuries (one was his body, one caused by an errant pitch).

well you have to factor in health when comparing the 2 players. That's why I don't think its close. A-Rod has missed a good chunk of games the past few years, thus his numbers have suffered. If you want to take health out of the equation and just look at projected numbers for a 162 game season, fine. But I don't think that's fair.