A CITIZEN'S BLOG

There are basically three ways a player leaves his team: free agency (we want you, but can’t afford it), he’s released (we don’t want you) or a trade (there is someone better than you out there…) Every year there is a blockbuster trade that everyone talks about and debates: last season it was the failed Red Sox-Rangers A-Rod deal, followed by the actual Yankees-Rangers A-Rod deal. In 2000, everyone was talking about the Reds-Mariners deal for Ken Griffey, Jr. In 1998 the Wells-Clemens deal was the talk of baseball. I think the Pirates – A’s deal for Jason Kendall is the premiere trade of the 2004-2005 off-season: I just don’t see any teams making a spectacular move and there aren’t any unhappy superstars wanting out the way Griffey did from Seattle.

So who are the winners and losers in the Pirates – A’s deal. The conventional wisdom is that both teams came out winners. I suspect that isn’t exactly true: as I said yesterday, I thought that the deal was a good one for the A’s, and less good for the Pirates. Here’s why:

We basically know what the A's are getting. Kendall is an OBP machine: career .387 OBP with 51 fewer career strikeouts than walks. He's had a .399 OBP for the last two years. This guy was made to hit in the two slot for the A's. The A's are getting a fairly young (31), durable (he caught 146 of the Pirates 162 games last year) catcher who hits for a high average. Aside from the money, I can't think of a downside for the A's, aside from the cash.

So what are the Pirates getting? The prize in the deal for the Pirates is Mark Redman. He hurled 191 innings last year and went 11-12. Not bad, but naturally a look inside Redman’s stats reveal a few problems.

Let me begin by pointing out that Redman's 2004 ERA was 4.71, significantly higher than the A's team 4.17 ERA. Redman’s FIP ERA climbs to 5.29 … that's pretty high and a troubling sign when you note that he’s going to a team that ranked last in the NL in ZR in 2004 and 29th of 30 teams in the MLB. The A’s played pretty good defense behind their pitchers in 2004, and Redman is going to a team that isn’t, quite frankly, that good on the field. He could be in for real trouble in 2005 if the Pirates don’t play good defense. Oh, and by the way, Redman's WHIP was 1.50, much worse than the team's 1.37 ...

Redman’s -7 Runs Against Average was worst on the A’s staff. Why? Unlike Hudson and Mulder, groundball pitchers (2.58 and 2.02 G/F ratio, respectively), Redman threw a lot more flyballs in 2004: 1.00. While I don’t think his propensity for flyballs will hurt him much- PNC Park doesn’t strike me as a hitters haven -but the lack of range of the Pirates outfield could be a problem.

His control wasn’t quite what Mulder (even in a serious slump) and Hudson’s was either:

K/BB ratio:
Hudson: 2.34
Mulder: 1.69
Redman: 1.50
(Zito: 2.01)

So the Pirates didn’t exactly get a world-class starter from the A’s. Redman is a decent third starter, maybe even a two, but I don’t see him as the compliment to the Pirates pitching they think he is.

As for Arthur Rhodes, I suppose the Pirates will use him as their closer in 2005 or deal him to a team needing bullpen help. If the Pirates keep him I'd say they've made a mistake. If they deal him, then the jury is still out. What did Rhodes do in 2004? Nothing much: his 1.73 WHIP meant he allowed too many baserunners to survive as an effective relief pitcher. Rhodes 4.9 BB/9 was the worst on the A's staff with pitchers having hurled over ten innings. Rhodes 5.12 ERA actually obscures a 6.18 FIP ERA. While it is true that Rhodes suffered from slightly below-average defense, bear in mind that he's going to a team that plays poorly in the field to begin with. I don't see this working out.

So chalk this up as a victory for Billy Beane. I don't think this is a terrible deal for the Pirates though: losing Kendall's salary is victory enough. The Pirates now have some room to maneuver and build for the future: they have a young, talented core of players and I think they could make a run at .500 or better next year. Still, I think the Pirates got the short end of the stick, while the A's got an OBP machine for expendable arms. To me it just highlights how franchises mired in conventional thinking don't stand a chance against the Billy Beanes and Theo Epsteins of the MLB world.

But hey, I could be wrong.