Pillsbury or Ball Four?

by nyyfaninlaaland on Mar 24, 2008 6:17 PM EDT Comment 10 comments

Since it appears to be among the last issues left, what's the opinion consensus here - Dohmann or Balfour? Balfour's got the ST performance edge, Dohmann the edge from '07 and the out of options thing playing for him.

The reserve IF seems Johnson. Have to make a roster move to elevate Cannizaro, and it seems Zobrist's job again once he's healthy. Hinske seems a certain add, Backup C is DeFelice's to lose, no? Will require another roster move to keep both - who goes? Perhaps a Dohmann waiver? Orvella or Birkins to the 60 day? I'd have just waived Orvella - since he's hurt he'd likely clear, but that could be against the rules. And where in the world is Juan Salas?

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

Ball Four all day. He is still at about the 2 yr mark from Tommy John and should continue to build strenth. Ball Four doesn't have the stuff that D'man has but he is clearly a more refined pitcher.

I agree that Hinske and Johnson should have spots (absent a trade) but most accounts I have read have Riggans as the back-up.

by bobbyray1 on Mar 24, 2008 6:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

Not sure I'd call Balfour "more refined".

I actually expect they'll keep Dohmann since they can demote Balfour. With Orvella and Birkins hurt, Salas MIA, pen depth is a little strained. No sense making a decision that could cost another player in that role. Should Dohmann continue to struggle the switch could still be made and Pillsbury would be even more likely to clear waivers. He can declare FA if they outright him - but if he's pitching poorly would he?

by nyyfaninlaaland on Mar 24, 2008 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

Pretty sure Lancaster said both must go through the waiver wire.

by ttnorm on Mar 24, 2008 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

I thought that was so as well, but RJ commented that there's a contractual agreement giving the Rays flexibilty. Not sure how that could work or whether it violates baseball rules, but only possibility to me would be that he agreed to forego FA if he cleared waivers and was outrighted. The waiver risk would remain. Perhaps RJ could elaborate.

by nyyfaninlaaland on Mar 25, 2008 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Per Cots

Grant Balfour rhp
1 year/$0.5M (2008)

re-signed 12/13/07 (avoided arbitration)
split contract paying $0.15M in minors

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 25, 2008 7:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

My preference is Balfour because I like the strikeout potential, although Dohmann can strike people out too. Both seem to go through stretches when they are nearly unhittable punctuated by terrible outings that send their ERAs skyrocketing. Off last year, I suppose Dohmann deserves the spot, but looking at their entire careers, majors and minors, I give Balfour a slight edge.

My understanding was that the likely backup catcher was Riggans which would make adjusting the 40 man roster unnecessary. I doubt that Difelice's uncharacteristic offensive outburst this spring will alter that plan, although the Rays might like his veteran knowhow about setting up batters.

I wish Salas were here. I prefer him to either Dohmann or Balfour-or Glover for that matter. There is another player (from another team, but I forget which) from the Dominican Republic unable to get to spring training apparently also because of some drug issues.

by bobr on Mar 24, 2008 6:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

I guess Salas' PED suspension has become an issue for a return to the States?

If Riggans is the choice, and he deserves the shot, that would solve things. I don't think much of DeFelice either, but this is a role where experience might offer a benefit. But I'd think Riggans' greater familiarity with the pitchers could be just as valuable. Experience can come in different packages.

Balfour also seems to have a better GB ratio - something that could come in handy with runners on base, and a quality not typical among Rays pitchers. Still I stick with my prior reply for what I expect to happen.

by nyyfaninlaaland on Mar 24, 2008 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

I think Balfour has a little upside left to his performance because of the releatively recent Tommy John surgery. If you consider them close to equal at this point then I would think that would give the edge to Balfour.

It's not like Dohmann was that much better than Balfour last season, and the number of innings they pitched was pretty low anyway. The way I look at it, Balfour is performing better at this point and therefore has momentum heading into the season.

If we lose Dohmann through waivers is that really such a big loss? If we need a minor league call-up I thought Munter looked decent this spring, and there's always Salas if he ever makes it stateside.

by TonyT on Mar 25, 2008 12:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pillsbury or Ball Four?

"If we lose Dohmann through waivers is that really such a big loss?"
_________________
I think this is a good point. I know that I have a tendency to overvalue the Rays' players because I am always focusing on the upside, so when we lose one I tend to worry about all we might be missing out on. But the fact is that pitchers like Dohmann (and for that matter Balfour and Glover and even more well-known relievers) are released every year. In fact, that is how we got Dohmann (and Glover) in the first place, and Balfour cost us McClung.

In nearly every case, these players are crap shoots and are interchangeable. Good organizations are able to discover those with more chance to succeed, but it is not as if any of them are irreplaceable. I just think it is an improvement that the Rays are selecting between Balfour and Dohmann rather than Miceli and Harville.

by bobr on Mar 25, 2008 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs