Admit it: You no longer loath Adam Eaton.If you're reading The Blog, you're probably a Phillies fan, in which case you have a long memory. The widespread booing of J.D. Drew this week is proof enough of that (get over it, people!). So, you won't soon forget last season when Eaton posted a 6.29 ERA. And that wasn't even the most inflated number associated with Eaton. His $24.5 million contract wins that prize.
The 2-4 record and 4.59 ERA that he'll take to the mound tonight in the opener of a three-game inter-league series against the Angels at the Bank won't win him an All-Star Game selection or suddenly vindicate the Phillies for giving him that awful three-year contract. But, you must admit, Eaton has pitched better this season. He has a 3.06 ERA in his last five starts, arguably his best stretch in four years. A quality start is defined as at least six innings pitched with three earned runs or fewer, and Eaton hasn't had five straight since June 6 to July 3, 2004, when he had six in a row for the Padres.
I spent a few minutes with Eaton before Wednesday's game, and he explains his resurgence thusly: better health = better mechanics = better results. According to Eaton, his shoulder ached so much during the second half of last season that it forced him to alter his delivery and led to a 7.25 ERA in his final 13 starts. He went on the disabled list in mid-August and said the only reason he didn't shut it down sooner was that he felt obligated to live up to his hefty contract.
"I think I have a pretty high pain tolerance," Eaton said. "Maybe that's my problem."
Whatever the reason for his dreadful 2007, the Phillies are hoping Eaton's issues are behind him. And while $24.5 million over three years is far too much to pay for a No. 4/5 starter, the Phils can live with him in the rotation as long as he continues to give them quality outings.
His next test is tonight.
***
A preview of the weekend series against the Angels, who have the majors' best road record (21-12) and are managed by DelCo native Mike Scioscia:
ANGELS (43-30) vs. PHILLIES (42-32)
Tonight, 7:05: RHP Ervin Santana (8-3, 3.40) vs. RHP Adam Eaton (2-4, 4.57)
Saturday, 7:05: LHP Joe Saunders (10-3, 3.06) vs. RHP Brett Myers (3-8, 5.58)
Sunday, 1:35: RHP Jered Weaver (6-7, 4.73) vs. LHP Cole Hamels (7-4, 3.23)
Hot: Angels RF Vladimir Guerrero is 17-for-40 (.425) with three homers and seven RBIs during a 10-game hitting streak; Angels OF Gary Matthews Jr., son of Phillies’ TV analyst Gary Matthews, is batting .358 (19-for-53) over his last 14 games; Phillies SS Jimmy Rollins is 8-for-17 (.471) over his last four games; Phillies INF Greg Dobbs has 13 hits in his last 32 at-bats (.406).
Not: Angels LF Garrett Anderson has one hit in his last 13 at-bats; Angels C Mike Napoli has two hits in his last 35 at-bats; Phillies 2B Chase Utley is stuck a career-worst 0-for-20 slump, surpassing an 0-for-17 funk in 2004; Phillies RF Geoff Jenkins has two hits in his last 27 at-bats.
8 comments:
If Drew had signed with the Phillies, then Pat Burrell would not have been a Phillie.
Burrell is who they picked #1 the next year because they couldn't sign Drew. I would much rather have Burrell than Drew.
I'm with you on that, Anon. I feel like people only boo JD Drew because they feel almost like it's a pastime these days. Let's just hope that Eaton continues his recent success and Chase Utley wakes up tonight.
We may still have taken Burrell since he had the reputation of being the best college hitter ever to play college ball. If we didn't take him, we would have wound up probably taking Mark Mulder, who went second in the draft. Whats interesting is that with the supplemental first round pick we got for not signing Drew we took Valent, the next player to go was Mark Prior
Thanks for the jinx, Scott.
But, anon 10:03, the Phillies only had the #1 pick in the "Burrell" year because the couldn't sign Drew the year before.
If they had signed Drew, they wouldn't have been there at #1 to take Burrell.
It's POSSIBLE Burrell would still have been available whenever the Phillies picked that year, I doubt it.
I'm obviously posting after Eaton stunk up the joint tonight, but I promise I've said this before (check out posts under MattS at TheGoodPhight.com if you don't believe me): Eaton was unlucky last year but has been lucky this year. I have two statistics that I look at to realize this: (1) His opponents' batting average on balls in play and (2) homeruns surrendered per flyball. Both are good indicators of how lucky he's been as both numbers are pretty random from year to year, which means they probably are luck-based rather than skill-based. Last year, both of those numbers were a bit higher than they should be, inflating his ERA, and both of those numbers are a bit lower than they should be this year, deflating his ERA.
If he was truly pitching better this year than last, his K/BB rate would be significantly different. In reality, it's about 1.4 this year and last. If he was actually pitching better, this ratio would show it this far into the season.
In reality, he's probably good enough to put up a 5.50 ERA over time, and like any pitcher, he could be lucky or unlucky by a run in either direction. He's just not someone who will play up to his contract.
About Burrell: No, I think that's why they got Eric Valent, IIRC. Compensation picks are between rounds. They had the #1 pick the next year because they stunk the year before.
Post a Comment