Click here to submit question.
By Dejan Kovacevic | 12:31 a.m. Wednesday
We have Qs ...
__________
Q: Hey, DK. From what you've gathered, is Pedro Alvarez viewed as a can't-miss future star, or is he simply the best hitter in this particular draft class?
Ray Jena of Cleveland
KOVACEVIC: That is a question much better answered by the editors and staffers at Baseball America who are consumed by these things, but I glad you raised the point, Ray, for this reason: There seems to be this groundswell of opinion that the Pirates could simply shrug off not signing this player, that the No. 3 overall pick next year will be comparable in value.
I find this to be fallacious thinking on three levels ...
1. Because Tampa Bay clearly made its choice at No. 1 for reasons that had to do with something other than talent -- signability and already having an impact young third baseman - it can reasonably be said that the Pirates actually drafted the most talented player in this draft. Not No. 2 and certainly not No. 3.
2. The Pirates themselves have publicly placed Alvarez in a category with Ryan Zimmerman, Troy Tulowitzki and others, at least in terms of how quickly he can be ready. That criteria does not always equate to major league stardom, but those precedents sure are nice. And not every draft has one of those players. Let that serve as the best possible answer to your question, by the way.
3. If the Pirates do not sign Alvarez, they will have to negotiate next year with that No. 3 overall pick without the leverage of the comp pick for 2010. That comp-pick process ends after you use it once. And, if that happens, the Pirates will either have zero to show for the No. 2 overall pick in 2008, or they will be forced into a negotiation in 2009 in which they pay an awful lot.
__________
Q: Dejan, I realize the Pirates have the worst starting pitching in baseball this year. However , I continue to look on in amazement as they continue to give Zach Duke a regular turn.
Duke is not a major league pitcher. He is a pitcher with 546 career innings and a staggering opponents' batting average of .309. There is no scenario where a starting pitcher can allow that type of average and be successful. None. That inning count is a large enough sample. He simply does not have major league stuff nor major league location. The 2005 season was a brief mirage.
What are your thoughts?
John Koury of Corpus Christi, Texas
KOVACEVIC: Normally, I work around the "your thoughts" submissions, John, but your points were worded strongly enough that it made me ... well, give some thought to it.
You certainly are right that the sample size is adequate and that the opponents' average is just awful. No one could dispute the latter. But, to understand baseball talent evaluators, especially when it comes to pitching, a large part of their thinking is that, if it comes out for any significant period, it's in there somewhere. And it is incumbent upon coaches to get it out and keep it out.
Make that pitcher a left-hander, and the equation doubles.
Duke is 25 years old in a league that has a left-hander who is 45 years old. He shot through the system very quickly and had instant success in the majors, giving him very little chance along the way to adjust to adversity the way he has needed to do ever since. Despite that, he has maturity beyond his years, poise and enough stuff to get people out on a regular basis if he can put it together. For sure, 92-93 gets it done from the left side with the fastball alone.
What he needs to do is to become that polished product, and that will not be easy. It might not even be feasible at the major league level. He might need some Tom Gorzelanny time in the minors. He might need time in middle relief, learning how to just rear back and let her rip without worrying about lasting six or seven innings.
But writing him off so definitively at age 25 ... no, I will not agree with that.
__________
Q: Dejan: Adam LaRoche will be back soon. The Pirates will need to make a roster move. Who do you think will go?
The easiest move would be to send Steve Pierce back to AAA until the September call up. There also are Doug Mientkiewicz, Jose Bautista, Jason Michaels and Chris Gomez. With none of these four expected back next year, I'm sure they are being shopped. Realizing that Gomez does not have much of a market, that leaves three. With the year Bautista is having, I doubt there are many interested teams. That leaves two.
Gene Speranza of McDonald
KOVACEVIC: Kind of lost me with the math there at the end, Gene, but you probably are focused on the right guys as far as who is most likely to go.
Of the four bench guys, one can be reasonably sure that all have been moved through waivers - happens to all kinds of guys all the time - for the purpose of opening possibilities for a trade. Even Bautista has a chance to get through that kind of trade, not only because of the down year but also because he would be a second-year arbitration type after this season, and it is no slam dunk that another team would see him as valuable enough to tender him. (It is highly probable, but no slam dunk.)
Sending Pearce down, as you say, is easiest. But I would find it surprising in light of the stated - and acted upon - commitment to giving him a real chance down the stretch.
We will know soon enough. LaRoche could be back today, as he had another productive and healthy game last night in Hickory.
__________
Until tomorrow ...
Posted
Aug 13 2008, 12:31 AM
by
Dejan Kovacevic