A Tale of Two Villones

JMB · August 25, 2004 at 10:03 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

To expand on what Dave said:

Ron Villone the reliever has posted a 3.42 ERA in 50 innings of work. Per nine innings, he’s allowed 6.1 hits, 4.9 walks and .7 homers, with opposing hitters batting .193 against him.

Ron Villone the starter has posted a 5.63 ERA in 48 innings of work. Per nine innings, he’s allowed 10.5 hits, 5.3 walks and 1.1 homers, with opposing hitters batting ~.290 against him.

Tags:

Comments

10 Responses to “A Tale of Two Villones”

  1. Chris Hanes on August 25th, 2004 10:26 pm

    It seems that we have reached the point where the individual performance form ANY player is without meaning. This team is a ship without a rudder. Melvin is steaming in circles. He gives up Lopez so Lou can walk Ichiro. I can’t stand it anymore. We’ve got to try to establish some form of sanity BEFORE the year is out. Fire this guy and for heaven’s sake do it this week!

  2. matt on August 25th, 2004 10:39 pm

    we should have traded him to the phillies. why do they want to resign
    him how about giving baek a chance

  3. Adam on August 25th, 2004 11:10 pm

    Baek didn’t impress me in AAA. I believe his 0.00 ERA in the show is because he’s not a big enough prospect for anyone to scout him. Just my $ .02.

  4. IceX on August 25th, 2004 11:28 pm

    Baek probably has a higher ceiling than Villone anyday.

    The main trend seems to be that Villone has very low stamina. Villone is historically OK or acceptable up to a certain number of innings, but his batteries blow out and he becomes worthless.

  5. Jon Wells on August 26th, 2004 1:40 am

    Or Baek’s 0.00 ERA could be a product of his having pitched just one inning in the majors…

    Giving Villone a contract extension is what Bill Bavasi and Co. thought was going to get them in good with Scott Boras (who, along with repping a lot of top stars, also represents bums like Villone).
    Unfortunately what the Mariners don’t realize is that “getting in good” with Boras only entitles them to overpay for whatever players he’s peddling on the open market.

    But seriously, the signing of Villone last winter was the first time the organization had done business with Boras since the A-Rod debacle after the 2000 season. Supposedly it was Gillick that hated him the most and Bavasi actually has a decent relationship w/ him. However, Lincoln bashed him after the A-Rod doings so…

    Finally, I’m not sure where they’re at as far as whether Villone has reached all of his $1 million in incentives for starts (the extra money began with five starts), but if he hasn’t, it’s time to take him out of the rotation. It was stupid a) not to trade him and get what they could b) to put him in the rotation so he could earn that extra $1 million so the team could have that “solid veteran” in the rotation. c) not to take him out of there now. September is coming in a few days — get Blackley back up and in the rotation and see if he can rebuild his confidence. Or give Thornton a shot. Or Baek. Anybody but Villone.

  6. tvwxman on August 26th, 2004 6:12 am

    With the exception of Edgar and Wilson, any player that has zero chance of being on the M’s in 2006 should not be getting innings or at-bats.

    Villone, I’m looking right at you. Not blaming him, mind you. Not his fault he wasn’t traded.

  7. Russ Queen on August 26th, 2004 8:48 am

    Why Wilson?

  8. Paul Weaver on August 26th, 2004 9:42 am

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see Wilson still around in ’06 – afterall, he is a fan favorite and the Mariner’s all time greatest catcher… He’ll be a good back up – for defense, and relatively decent contact ability.

    We’re all worried about the retards in the FO. Otherwise, Villone’s chances of being signed are zilch. I liked Gillick – he made good decisions in the offseason, but was too stubborn come trade deadline. A million times more impressive than Bavasi.

    Villone is like anyone who can perform at the major league level. He is worth a price. I wouldn’t put that price as high as a million though. Still, we need a long reliever for when one of our rookies is getting blown out.

  9. tvwxman on August 26th, 2004 2:09 pm

    Wilson because there are no other viable options in the minor leagues, and no one would take him off our hands.

  10. eponymous coward on August 26th, 2004 3:17 pm

    Wilson?

    You’ve GOT to be kidding me. His offense is zilch at this point (not that it was above zilch), and for all his vaunted handling of pitchers, it never actually seems to manifest.

    The only reason to have him around next year is because he’s Jamie’s caddy- but unless Jamie has a year that warrants a resgining AND Jamie comes back, there’s no reason to have the guy around over any number of nondescript, cheap backup C options. (My guess is Jamie came back cheap because Dan was going to be back as well.)