Japanese star looks like a better bet than the one Boston took on Matsuzaka
MLB Photos via Getty ImagesYu Darvish is listed at 6-5 and built more along the lines of a traditional power pitcher, so he appears likelier to stay healthy and be a durable No. 1-2-starter type.
BASEBALL EXPERT MAILBAG
updated 3:06 p.m. ET Nov. 8, 2011
|
Baseball Expert Tony DeMarco has been covering the big leagues since 1987, and been casting Hall of Fame ballots for the last 12 years. He answers questions weekly here:
Q. Have the Red Sox learned their lesson after spending about $100 million on Daisuke Matsuzaka, or will they make a run at Yu Darvish?
? Stephen Shoemaker, Tulsa
A. Answering the second question first, given the state of their rotation, the Red Sox have to explore both free-agent and trade options this winter. And Darvish arguably is the top free-agent pitcher on the market now that CC Sabathia re-upped with the Yankees.
At this point, the Red Sox can count on Josh Beckett, Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz returning from back issues. But John Lackey is out for 2012 (Tommy John surgery) and Matsuzaka is coming off the same surgery and not expected back until the second half.
That leaves Alfredo Aceves, bringing back Tim Wakefield, moving Daniel Bard to the rotation (although I think he will be the closer), or bringing in new help.
While it's true that Matsuzaka hasn't been a good investment at $103 million over six years (including the $51-million posting fee to get his rights), he was brilliant in 2008, compiled a combined 33-15 record in 2007-2008, and a 49-30 mark over four-plus seasons before the injury that required surgery.
What makes Darvish more appealing than Matsuzaka back in the winter of 2006-07? Darvish is 23 and Matsuzaka was 26, so there is less wear-and-tear on Darvish's arm at this point. Also, Darvish is listed at 6-5 and built more along the lines of a traditional power pitcher, so he appears likelier to stay healthy and be a durable No. 1-2-starter type.
That said, Darvish is going to be an expensive risk for whoever ends up signing him, but the payoff also could be huge. You just can't find many guys who are legitimate No. 1-2 starters on championship-caliber teams.
Q. With the upcoming sale of the Dodgers, how can Frank McCourt expect to get close to $1 billion? Who do you see as the favorite to buy the team?
? Bill Mahan, Angeles City, Philippines
A. Although the Dodgers have become something of a dysfunctional mess at the ownership level in the McCourt era, make no mistake: This is one of the elite franchises ? not just in MLB, but in all professional sports.
When you add in the value of the team, the real estate at Chavez Ravine, plus media rights, I believe the selling price will go beyond $1 billion.
Run properly, the Dodgers should be the West Coast version of the Yankees/Red Sox ? a championship contender every year ? and they will move in that direction under new ownership.
Who are the possibilities? Reportedly, a group headed by longtime agent Dennis Gilbert, Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, a group headed by former Dodgers Steve Garvey and Orel Hershiser and a group headed by former owner Peter O'Malley.
It's too early in the process to tell who will come out ahead, but the new owner will have to be approved by MLB as well as federal bankruptcy court in Delaware, as McCourt filed for bankruptcy.
Gilbert, now a consultant for White Sox owners Jerry Reinsdorf, long has been viewed as a solid ownership candidate who likely would have the approval of commissioner Bud Selig and the ownership power bloc.
Cuban is a bit of a loose cannon here. He almost won the bidding for the Texas Rangers last year, and while I don't think other owners would welcome his presence, I'd be very interested to see what he would do with the Dodgers franchise.
While action is expected soon, the key question here is will things move quickly enough for general manager Ned Colletti to take major action in the free-agent market this winter.
Q. We've had a major trend back to old-style ballparks, with seating capacity to match. Over 10,000 fewer Cardinals fans got to see Game 7 in the new Busch Stadium than would have fit in the old one. Are teams killing big paydays for more intimate seating?
? Larry, Encinitas, Calif.
A. On the contrary. While seating capacities are smaller in the new parks, what you have to keep in mind is that creates a greater demand for the seats, which allows teams to charge far-higher ticket prices.
The newer stadiums also have more higher-priced seats ? luxury boxes, premium behind-the-backstop seats, etc. ? than the old stadiums did, and that's where the big money is.
Having the capacity to put a bunch of people in the bleachers or lower-priced seats isn't what drives stadium revenues in this day and age So to a certain point, smaller can be better.
advertisement
More newsGetty ImagesGetty ImagesNationals catcher kidnapped
??Venezuela's government said Thursday it has sent its top investigators to solve the kidnapping of Washington Nationals catcher Wilson Ramos, a case that has shaken the nation's elite athletes and focused attention on the country's sharp rise in kidnappings for ransom.
Source: http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/45209945/ns/sports-baseball/
neutrino carly fiorina girl with the dragon tattoo trailer girl with the dragon tattoo trailer parks and rec facebook announcement mitch daniels
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.