By chance, I happened to be on lunch at 2pm when this was scheduled to start, so thought I might as well pop in and see what it was like: I hadn't been to one of these before. Things got off to a shaky start, the first two questions hanging in the air unanswered - at first, I suspected our GM was simply ignoring them, and was waiting for a question he liked better [perhaps involving whether he preferred puppies or kittens], but it seems there were technical issues responsible. At 2:18pm we got a test message from Josh Byrnes, and were finally under way.
The first answered question came from none other than Levski, who asked if Arizona, given the loss of Dunn's draft picks (among potentially others), would go for more expensive players or those with signability questions in the supplemental and second rounds. Josh's response was that we might be 'a bit more aggressive' - though the team will always look at value, cost and a player's draft slot. Next up was TAP, with a semi-follow up, asking about our overall objectives in the 2009 draft. It seems, going by the GM's response, that we are looking to 2011 and beyond, rather than at players who can make an immediate impact: "The extra picks associated with the 2009 draft should improve our depth and quality if we were to project 18 months into the future."
We then returned to one of the opening salvoes, unanswered at the time, but one which had been the subject of much speculation since the last online chat: the chances of us getting another starter. It's worth printing Byrnes' response in full. "We are still pursuing a variety of options in the marketplace. Hopefully, there will be good values either in trade or free agency. We have considered a few starting pitchers, but we will not necessarily acquire one. With Webb, Haren, Davis, Scherzer, Petit, Buckner, Gutierrez, Blackley, Valdez, etc., our starting candidates are pretty strong." That should dampen the fires a little bit: we may get a pitcher, or we may not.
Ah, time for the not unexpected poison-pill question: "Can you explain the key reasons why the D'Backs were not able to re-sign Randy Johnson?" Not one I fancy answering myself, and I was half expecting some more "technical difficulties" to crop up at this point ["Sorry, folks: the chat-room has been eaten by a narwhal. See you next month."] While Byrnes seemed to be going out of the way to praise the Big Unit in some depth, here's the short answer: "We could not make the finances work." Which certainly feels both more plausible and straight-forward than Moorad's response to basically the same question the previous month, "We offered to pay Randy what we felt was fair."
Not quite sure I got the next question, a somewhat rambling and uninteresting one about how our off-season will compare to our division rivals, so let's move on to locking Webb, Upton, Drew and Jackson long-term. Josh's response was fairly boilerplate: "Retaining core players is very important to us... We will continue to assess our best risk/reward scenarios as we develop contractual strategy." He did say the team bought out 15 years of free-agency over the past few years, though I'm not sure where that number comes from. Here are the ones that come to mind in this area. Including team options, we extended Haren for three years, Byrnes for three, Snyder for two, and the first year of Young's free agency. Jon Rauch had a year's option exercised, while Webb had two free-agent years bought out in the January 2006 extension, and the Johnson deal included an extension for a year. That's thirteen in total, so I must be missing something somewhere.
None of these chats go by without a question to make you go "WTF?" - such as whether we will go after Prince Fielder - and this time was no exception. HavasuFan asked, "Will there be any emphasis on patience behind the plate this season? With the exception of Connor [sic] Jackson, it seems many of our hitters have never met a first pitch they didn't like. That results in players breaking strike out records." WTF? Actually, the Diamondback who had most at-bats end on the first pitch last year was...Conor Jackson. And it isn't even close: he had 80, no-one else more than 55. You'll be startled (or perhaps not) to learn that none of Mark Reynolds' K's came on the first pitch: indeed, he saw more per PA than any other qualifying AZ player. [Quick question. Only one Diamondback got a hit on a 3-0 count all year. Who was it? Answer at the end] I understand the issue - too many K's - but, really...
Another iceberg hove into view next: "What is the status on Eric Byrnes?" After some diplomatic praise for Eric's off-season work ethic, we get to the meat of Josh's response: "Last year did not go according to plan for Eric, and Conor Jackson showed that he could play LF well. Our roster dynamics have changed to some degree. Competition for playing time is more prominent on our roster than it was at the same time last year." This is true: back then, I was able to write "Basically, outside of second-base, our lineup is all but settled until the end of 2010." Now: not so much, and that may be a good thing, if the competitors use it as a motivational spur to boost their performances. Nothing would be more delightful than Melvin having an embarrassment of good-hitting players to choose from.
It looks like the manager's line-up dice will continue to operate this season, as Byrnes addressed the lack of a prototypical clean-up hitter thus: "Bob Melvin has done a great job at finding the right combinations, and he has been very creative at times. Until a few of our younger players make the 3/4 slots more obvious, we will continue to emphasize a 1-8 lineup mindset." If we can get everyone's OBP up above .330, that'll be helpful, though we have some power. As noted before, with a little luck, we could make a run at the NL record of ten players reaching double-digits in homers, set by the Reds in 1999 and 2000.
A question about our operations in Asia [stronger in Japan than Korea, according to Byrnes] brought us to the last one, concerning the Brandon Webb extension. Josh stressed that we have Webb for two more years, so there's time, but I think the key phrase was "We will certainly take great care to make the best decision for him and our team construction heading into the next decade." [Emphasis added] I take that to mean, we won't be putting all the franchise's financial eggs into a Webb-shaped basket anytime soon, and given it would probably take $20m per year or more to extend our ace at this point, the tea-leaves continue to look distinctly cloudy. Wonder if Webb will get the 31 wins he needs to tie Randy Johnson as franchise leader before he leaves - or, more likely, gets traded?
The chat was a good bit shorter than usual, thanks to the issues which plagued the first twenty minutes: while there were no bombshells, there was still a good amount to chew over, albeit with some reading between the lines required. One sensed Byrnes was somewhat cagey, but given the minefield potentially presented by a number of those questions, I can't say I blame him for that. He didn't dodge the difficult issues anywhere near as much as he might have, and I hope that we'll see him doing more of these during the season. Here's the full transcript.
[The answer to the question, who was the only Diamondbacks to get a hit on a 3-0 pitch last season, is Justin Upton. It came at Chase on May 15th against the Rockies, off Brian Fuentes. In the eighth inning of a game were we leading 6-3. J-Up tripled to deep-center, scoring both Drew and Hudson, and we won 8-5. Actually, I was reminded of the exact circumstances on that one, and you probably recall it too The Rockies had come in high and tight to Upton, on more than one previous pitch, and clearly riled our young outfielder. The next pitch was swatted to the 413-ft mark in right-center. Video - and Daron's fine call - can be found here.]
