Seems a bit pricey, but hopefully he can bring some plus defense.

My initial position had been negative on signing Matsui.  But after thinking about it, and hearing some arguments in favor of signing him, I came around to thinking it would be OK because Matsui stands a decent chance of improving the team.

Don't get me wrong, I still think there is good sized risk to the signing. That risk arises from the Coors Field splits we have talked about in other diaries.

But the projections which have come out on Chris Burke (ZIPS, Bill James) are not very encouraging.  It makes me wonder how much upside Burke really has, and it also made me realize that there is more risk to Burke than Matsui.  Also when you take into account fielding and baserunning, Matsui probably is closer to Iguchi, value-wise than I give him credit.  (On a win shares rate basis, Matsui actually was slightly better than Iguchi last year...and that is adjusted for ballparks.)

Also, those who favor Iguchi point to his base running advantage.  And they have a point.  Bill James did a baserunning analysis on ML teams in 07.  The Astros were dead last as the worst base runners.  Kaz Matsui was among the top 5 in MLB in base running with +44...the best baserunning score by an Astro on last year's team was +7 by Chris Burke.  (Lee and Loretta were -17 and -14, respectfully.)  So Matsui can really help with that area of deficiency on the team....provided that he can maintain a decent OBP, which is why I still worry.

but i'm not going to say it was a collossal mistake or anything.  i just think it was unnecessary.  i'm not convinced Matsui will be much of an upgrade over what Burke would have given us, although i'll grant that his fielding and baserunning might be a bit.  the staggering difference between Matsui at Coors and everywhere else, throughout his entire career in the U.S., is hard to ignore.  not that i'm all about listening to Mets fans, but universally every Met fan i've heard from or read comments from around the internet absolutely hates the guy.  

i'm also not sure the pissing off Berkman angle should be completely disregarded either.  everybody knows it's a business, but when play ball is called, the business becomes a game played by people, who very much thrive on emotion.  ballplayers are always talking about when things are going well, there's a good chemistry in the clubhouse and people are loose and having fun.  i'm not saying it's a reason to sign or cut somebody, but why fuck with it if you're not getting much of a return.

maybe i'm wrong about Matsui.  either way, he's an Astro now.  i'll be rooting for him when he takes the field.

I still want to see what Burke does given time at 2nd base... I don't like the move... I may be a moron, but I wanted to give Burke a chance at 2nd base...

The poll question in the margin asks "Do you want Matsui?"

I don't have an answer. I'm not against him. I'm not for him. It happened (or is expected to happen). Okay,  What's next?

I've read all the he's an upgrade, he's a downgrade debate. Bottom line is I don't know.

What does Kaz Matsui mean in Japaneese? Chris Burke

Why would you want below average production at 2nd for 5mil when you have below average production for 500K?

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Here's some typical Rockies fans from the Rockies "Purple Row" page:

As much as I love Kaz
and it's a lot, if I had equal pick for the next 2-3 years I think I'd take Burke.  He has nice speed.  Nice range.  He's also MUCH cheaper then Kaz and controllable for a few years. The Astro's seem to be in a mode, where if it's not old/experienced/expensive, it's not crap (with the exception of Hunter Pence).  Which makes them great trading partners for a team like the Rockies!  I'd do Fuentes for Burke right now, though I'd like a young reliever type as a throw in.

I miss baseball. Chairman of the re-sign Kazuo Matsui sub-committee!

by Redhawk on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 11:20:28 AM EDT
[ Parent ]  

Eh
I don't like just sending Fuentes for someone who would probably start 08 at 2B, but not end up finishing the season there (we have too many internal options there, and most are better than Burke).  If we got someone else in addition to Burke, it'd be worth looking at more, but just a swap of Fuentes for Burke is no bueno; we can get a much better haul for Fuentes from other teams desperate for a closer.

by oo nrb on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:12:09 PM EDT
[ Parent ]  

Not nearly enough for Fuentes
With the premium being placed on late-inning relievers (see Francisco Cordero), this isn't a good deal.  The back end of the bullpen is so important these days, and I like Burke and would love to see him as a Rockie, but we have so many other options at 2B.  Is Burke really a significant upgrade to Stewart/Baker/Nix et al?  Not with any certainty.

Fuentes for Brian Roberts is more like it.