tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post115363515992619636..comments2024-02-23T20:49:09.057-08:00Comments on obsessivegiantscompulsive: Trade Analysis: Hillenbrand/Chulk for Accardoobsessivegiantscompulsivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-1154116619012251472006-07-28T12:56:00.000-07:002006-07-28T12:56:00.000-07:00I thought Accardo for Hillenbrand was a fair trade...I thought Accardo for Hillenbrand was a fair trade, but to get Chulk, too, who is very close to being equal to Accardo NOW, makes the trade very lopsided in our favor. In otherwords, because of Chulk, we gain without loss, as Chulk comes very close to replacing Accardo, even if not in the exact same role.<BR/> BTW, I don't really see Accardo as a future closer. Possible yes. I saw him pitch in the ninth earlier this year and really struggle, especially with the final out. Definitely not ready (also evidenced by a nearly 5 era). He is kind of an F Rod, a pretty good 8th inning guy, which I think they should have made him, but not closer material for a few years and very iffy.allfrankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03603053163603458876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-1154099139508913152006-07-28T08:05:00.000-07:002006-07-28T08:05:00.000-07:00I do believe that Sabean scours the retirement com...I do believe that Sabean scours the retirement communities to find his players these days.Cathiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07291479913130967235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-1153933170032831102006-07-26T09:59:00.000-07:002006-07-26T09:59:00.000-07:00Not arguing, but wanted to know where I was underv...Not arguing, but wanted to know where I was undervaluing Chulk, I would like to hear what you have to say on that. It's not like I really know him as a pitcher, this was my interpretation (as always) from looking at his stats plus reading my baseball books.<BR/><BR/>Speaking of which, my BP 2006 book says that "Chulk's ERA actually underrates him, as he squashed more than his fair share of rallies by holding hitters to .230/.289/.352 with runners on base. Nevertheless, Chulk isn't that different from any number of former starters who survive in the bullpen for a little while despite mediocre peripherals and stuff." Basically, his low K/9 rate from 2005 was freaking out analysts, but he seems to have answered that with a return to his prior K/9 rate, so 2005 appears to be a fluke year, for now.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-1153780523680336262006-07-24T15:35:00.000-07:002006-07-24T15:35:00.000-07:00Excellent analysis, Martin (and not just because I...Excellent analysis, Martin (and not just because I agree with you). I think we saw the benefit the very first time he was in the line up - hitting 6th, pushing Feliz to 7th. That is just so much better a line up. And, as you point out, it really strenghtens the bench. And when Sweeney plays against the tough RH starters, we have Hillenbrand on the bench. You didn't say, but I expect that his familiarity with the NL West will help raise his Ba and overall offensive performance. <BR/> I also think you under value Chulk.<BR/> Finally, I think Sabean's plan is likely to try to resign Feliz and Hillenbrand - their asking prices being reasonable, of course. That would give him a pretty solid foundation for next year, as he would have in place:<BR/>1b, ss, 3b, cf.<BR/> He has a shot at having these positions filled: C (Matheny, Alfonso, Green), LF (Bonds), 2b (Durham would not be a total shock; Frandsen, tho I don't think he is the answer). Even RF, w/ Linden and the other minor leaguers might make do until July 07. I think next year has suddenly become a lot less scary.allfrankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03603053163603458876noreply@blogger.com