This is Why Blogs are Dangerous

Jon Heyman has a blog. Did you know this? I did not. At least not until I stumbled upon it through this headline:

PINEDA-MONTERO TRADE MIGHT BE 1-SIDED, BUT MAYBE NOT THE WAY YOU THOUGHT

Never before has a headline made so giddy and angry simultaneously. I mean, this is delicious. Judging a trade two months after its completion based on spring training results? Yum yum yum. And it actually gets even better. Heyman says:

The big trade of the winter sent Pineda and pitching prospect Jose Campos to the Yankees for Montero and young righthanded pitcher Hector Noesi And judging by the respective springs of the key young men in the deal -- Pineda and Montero -- so far it's no contest.

This is all factually correct, because it's always fair to say that a trade is "no contest" based on some preseason games (which are incalculably significant in all sports). Look no further than 2008, when the Detroit Lions used a perfect preseason to then go undefeated* in the regular season.

*Assuming of course that your definition of "undefeated" is "winless."

According to Heyman, "the Mariners' end of the trade looks pretty darned good" because of the following reasons:

1. Jesus Montero has two homers and 10 RBIs
2. "The other day Montero gunned down veteran basestealer Brandon Phillips"
3. "Mariners people" believe Montero will be able to catch
4. Michael Pineda "looks rather ordinary in Yankees camp" and "is struggling to prove he belongs in the Yankees rotation"
5. Pineda is "the mystery of the deal"

Right then. Where to even begin?

Never mind that Pineda has been working on getting into game shape and refining his changeup, and he owns a 3.31 ERA and 16 strikeouts in 16.1 innings. Never mind that he can't possibly be the "mystery" of the deal, since he's the only component of the trade with a full major league season under his belt. Never mind that he's probably not lighting up the radar gun because, well, it's MARCH you nimrod.

Never mind that the evidence Heyman provides to support Montero's defense is composed of A) that one time when he threw out Brandon Phillips, who was successful in just 61% of his steal attempts last year, and B) praise given by Mariners people, who obviously must think he can catch or they wouldn't have acquired him in the first place. And anyway, of course the Mariners are going to praise Montero when Heyman asks them about their future star. What are they going to say? "No, we think he's too fat to catch, and we made a mistake trading for him, and our organization is stupid, make sure you put all that in your blog"??? I doubt it.

Now, never mind the fact that all of Heyman's "analysis" is based on spring training--a.k.a., practice games that don't mean anything, a universe in which Ryan Raburn is the best slugger in the sport and NL MVP Ryan Braun is a .095 hitter.

You can ignore all of that, and still think Heyman's argument is idiotic, just by looking at these numbers:

16.1 and 36.

Pineda's innings this spring. And Montero's at-bats this spring.

The sample size is so small, it's nearly worthless, yet Heyman is using it to judge a premature trade victor. Pineda could've given up 18 runs in those 16.1 innings, and Montero could've hit .650 in those 36 at-bats, and we obviously still wouldn't be able to make any definitive statement about these players or the trade they were involved in. It will take YEARS to know who "won" this trade, not three weeks of meaningless spring games. Heck, forget about Montero and Pineda, we'll need to know how the career of Jose freaking Campos turns out before we can judge the deal, and he'll be throwing to Single-A hitters this year.

This has been a very long-winded way of saying that Jon Heyman's blog is a broadcast tower of ignorance, and because of that, I will be eagerly visiting it twice daily.