Tuesday, September 04, 2007

No Rant Required

With the caveat that it's Billy Feckin' Traber we're talking about...

Sez Jim Bowden:

"We certainly would have liked to bring Billy Traber up, but we have certain budgetary responsibilities that we have"

Let's see... let's be generous and say that Traber makes $500 K this year. We're calling him up for roughly 1/6th of the season, so that's, at most, $83,000.

There's probably three times that amount in unwrapped nickels in Kasten's top desk drawer.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's Billy Traber, but...


  • Not that I understand the whole options and eligibility thing, but perhaps they want to be able to send Traber back down again next year and bringing him up now would have some effect on that?

    I don't know, just a guess.

    Besides, Traber seems like the past, not the future.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/04/2007 10:12 AM  

  • maybe he was just being diplomatic, and said that instead of "Billy Traber is essentially worthless."

    By Blogger (j)on, at 9/04/2007 10:58 AM  

  • That's essentially what he's saying.

    He's definitely right.

    I don't believe they did it because they don't have the money. They did it because Traber sucks.

    you'd just think that Bowden would have more PR sense than that to say what he said. It just feeds into the perception that's out there.

    By Blogger Chris Needham, at 9/04/2007 11:01 AM  

  • I don't have a problem with what Bowden said. It shows that they can be smart with their money.

    Bringing up Traber for September wouldn't be worth the $83K, especially if they want to take a look at Munoz for the LOOGY role. They should spend the dough on an additional LED panel for the scoreboard. :)

    By Blogger Unknown, at 9/04/2007 11:59 AM  

  • Chris,

    Love to have your take on Bergmann's outing yesterday. (I guess I continue to be a Bergmann doubter.)

    St Barry wrote it up as an impressive outing, which I guess 7 innings and 1 run is, from a results perspective. But it seemed to me like Jason struggled with pitch count the whole day and got himself into (and out of) a fair bit of trouble against the lowly Marlins.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 9/04/2007 12:02 PM  

  • I didn't see it. But with Bergmann, the key thing to look at is his strikeout rate. That tells you whether his pitches are moving and biting.

    He had 9 of 'em, so that tells you something about his pitches. You don't get 9 by accident.

    By Blogger Chris Needham, at 9/04/2007 12:04 PM  

  • I was at the stadium yesterday. Bergmann struggled with his control a bit in the first inning, and worked out of it. After that, save for the solo homer, he was lights out.

    And don't denigrate the Marlins' lineup. Those guys can rake. Their 8th place hitter has as many dingers as our cleanup hitter. They just can't pitch for shit.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/04/2007 12:15 PM  

  • They're in the top 4 or 5 in offense, I think, and that's while playing in a pretty strong pitcher's park.

    By Blogger Chris Needham, at 9/04/2007 12:16 PM  

  • Bergmann had great control yesterday. Lots of movement. He made less mistakes in 7 innings than Cordero usually makes in one, including yesterday.

    I was hoping Manny would leave him in and let him go for the Complete Game... especially after Colome came in and promptly tried to let the Marlins back in the game.

    Props to Rauch as well, whom I am usually not so thrilled to see trot out from right field in pressure situations. His two hard-won Ks to end the 8th (after letting a man on base) were impressive.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/04/2007 12:58 PM  

  • Bergmann was outed yesterday? And here I just thought he had a wide stance...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9/04/2007 1:43 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home