Good to see moneyball Neyer defending the Marlins by saying they didnt get dominated in this deal.

 

Overall, he says some pretty good things that we need to be hearing right now about the moving and the trade.

 

He also mentioned Becketts road ERA. I also noticed this recently. Beckett really shows differences in preformance when he goes away from the friendly confined of Pro Player. And this is evidenced over the last three years too. Of course a lot of pitchers might show that if one buys into the "preform better at home" stuff.

 

The Marlins are going to move, huh?

 

The following appears in the Associated Press story:

 

The team has lobbied for its own stadium since original owner H. Wayne Huizenga sold the team to John Henry in 1999. The team's latest ballpark plan, a 38,000-seat stadium with a retractable roof that would be built next to Miami's Orange Bowl, came apart this spring.

 

The ballpark had an estimated cost of $420 million to $435 million, and the financing plan included $60 million in state funding. While money was approved in April by the Florida House, the state Senate refused to go along.

 

For one thing, the Marlins don't need a retractable roof. For another, after reading the above, you'd think that nothing stands in the way of a beautiful new ballpark except $60 million and those dastardly state legislators. But we simply can't take that $60 million, or any other figures the team throws around, at face value.

 

In a recent Baseball Prospectus article, Neil deMause reviews a study published by urban planner Judith Grant Long, in which Long attempted to "compile data on the true costs of stadiums and arenas to the public treasury."

 

Long found that the numbers we see aren't necessarily the numbers the public pays.

 

To see why, let's take a closer look at the Giants' Pac Bell Park (now SBC Park, and soon to be AT&T Park if the latest merger-related rumors are true). The widely reported $15 million in public funds -- used to relocate a public transit facility that was in the way of the ballpark -- was just the tip of the iceberg, it turns out. Long estimates $33 million in value for the land itself, donated by the local government for the cause at no cost to the Giants; $25 million worth of municipal fire, police and garbage services; and $83 million in forgone property taxes, because despite being privately owned, the stadium nonetheless receives a full property tax exemption.

Privately financed? Pac Bell Park cost $343 million (in 2001 dollars), and the actual public cost was $142 million. In other words, a stadium that supposedly was 95 percent team-financed was actually 59 percent team-financed.

 

I don't mean to make the Giants look like bad guys. Compared to the Mariners and the Brewers (just two examples), the Giants are the Robin Hood of professional baseball. According to Long's figures, Safeco Field cost the local citizens $553 million ... even though construction costs were "only" $538 million. Bud Selig's Brewers pulled off an even bigger caper, though. Miller Park cost $357 million ... and the public got stuck with a bill for $436 million!

 

Oh, and by the way, the Brewers didn't need a retractable roof, either. But you can see where the Marlins come by their hubris. Considering the commissioner's personal history of feeding at the public trough, the Marlins would look like saps -- not to mention lousy business partners -- if they didn't make every effort to get their own sweetheart deal.

 

If I were a Marlins fan, though, I wouldn't be too worried about them moving. Las Vegas isn't anywhere near ready for a major league team, and there's no money in Portland for a shiny new ballpark. The Marlins are locked into Dolphin Stadium next season, and have one-year options through 2010; I'll be shocked if they don't exercise each of those options.

 

The Marlins -- like every other franchise that wants a new ballpark -- are asking for a huge public subsidy. They're well within their rights to do that, of course. But at the very least, let's all be honest about the size of the subsidy.

 

*********

 

I don't know what the Red Sox are doing. Really, I don't. Unless they're 1) absolutely convinced that Mike Lowell's 2005 performance was essentially a fluke, and 2) absolutely convinced they can solve Josh Beckett's blister problems, this deal just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

 

Looking at the last three seasons:

 

Fenway Park was the third-friendliest ballpark in the American League for hitters.

 

Dolphin Stadium was the third-friendliest ballpark in the National League for pitchers.

 

Does that mean Beckett's going to turn into a pumpkin the moment he dons a Red Sox uniform? Hardly. But Beckett's road ERA over the last three seasons is 4.07, and Fenway is tougher than the average road ballpark. So you've got the durability question -- in those same three seasons, Beckett averaged only 159 innings -- and you've got the home/road question ... and you're going to trade two top prospects and commit $18 million to Lowell, when you've already got a fine third baseman (Kevin Youkilis) on the roster?

 

In 2004, Anibal Sanchez struck out 101 batters in 76 innings. Those numbers were compiled in low Class A -- the New York-Penn League -- but he was only 20 at the time. In 2005, Sanchez blew through the Class A Carolina League, then pitched well after a promotion to Double-A. In all, Sanchez pitched 136 innings in '05, struck out 158 batters, and walked 40. Without knowing anything about his stuff, this is exactly what you'd look for in a young pitcher ... and by all accounts, he's got wonderful stuff.

 

Can we assume that Sanchez will someday become an ace in the major leagues? Hardly. But should we be surprised if, in four years, Sanchez is pitching better than Beckett? Nope.

 

Meanwhile, Hanley Ramirez is a better prospect than Sanchez. He took his lumps in Double-A this season, but he's a shortstop and he's still very young (he turns 22 next month). But with Edgar Renteria signed though 2008 -- and yes, that was another move I didn't understand -- there's really no place in Boston for Ramirez, since he's not going to hit enough to play outfield (at least not anytime soon).

 

That doesn't mean they have to trade him now, though. Why not let him play a season at Triple-A Pawtucket and drive his value up even higher? Or if the Red Sox think he has peaked, why not include him in a trade that doesn't include Lowell?

 

Look, I understand that the Red Sox employ a few dozen people who've forgotten more about baseball than I'll ever know. But 2005 happened, you know? I saw the Red Sox blow 519 plate appearances on Kevin Millar. I saw them bat Renteria No. 2 all season long. I saw them distribute 27 starts to Wade Miller and Curt Schilling, even though neither of them were in condition to pitch championship-level baseball.

 

Of course, it almost worked. Given one tiny break over the course of the long season, the Red Sox would have ended their long streak of second-place finishes. Even without former general manager Theo Epstein, the Red Sox might be the smartest organization around. But nobody's perfect. Just wait and see.

Great reading! Thanks, Mollusk.

 

:thumbup

He certainly has valid points, but the bottom line is that we got prospects for a great player and a former very good player. Prospects have a way of not panning out, which is why major league teams don't have stars at every position.

He certainly has valid points, but the bottom line is that we got prospects for a great player and a former very good player. Prospects have a way of not panning out, which is why major league teams don't have stars at every position.

 

Josh Beckett is not a great player yet

He certainly has valid points, but the bottom line is that we got prospects for a great player and a former very good player. Prospects have a way of not panning out, which is why major league teams don't have stars at every position.

 

Josh Beckett is not a great player yet

 

Excellent point. Beckett is still young and has not even come close to his peak....yet. Blisters tend to go away with age, and Beckett likely has the worst of it behind him.

 

Sure Sanchez could be the next Beckett. And Beckett *could* be the next Clemens. Who can say for sure? Only time will tell. It's much easier to analyze past performance that to predict the future.

Kerry Wood was supposed to be the next Nolan Ryan, but could never be consistent enough due to nagging injuries...