SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
A Mookie Betts Trade Return
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Dec 17, 2019 14:23:12 GMT -5
Would really like Dustin May as a headliner. Would take Verdugo. If they for trade Verdugo, hopefully they include a prospect with upside and a throw in like Maeda.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 17, 2019 14:33:36 GMT -5
Yeah, like I've often said, over one season you have to take a case-by-case basis. If there's some reason a pitcher out-performed or under-performer his FIP then RAA usually captures that. In Buehler's case, it looks like really just a sequencing thing, which is probably bad luck until I see otherwise. I'll take the guy with that stuff and a 1.8 BB/9 any day. The question, though, was specifically about bWAR's park effects. And I don't think park effects is the reason why Buehler's bWAR seems on the low side, it's just that his RAA wasn't particularly great this year. Isn't RAA highly adjusted and includes park effects just like all of Baseball Reference numbers?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 17, 2019 14:49:45 GMT -5
Yes, but in this specific point you could've used un-adjusted RA9 (a not-outstanding for Dodger Stadium but still solid 3.80) and had the same takeaway. RAA (and RAR) just take RA9 and compare it to ExpectedRA9, which is what is adjusted for park, league, etc. Buehler was just kind of unlucky this year in terms of allowing runs. How much WAR should account for that can go back and forth forever - using RAA you'll end up with blips (like Buehler this year) where a guy's peripherals are great but the bWAR is mediocre because some extra runs scored for one reason or another. Using FIP or Expected ERA or another similar stat as the basis for WAR ends up missing out on guys with a skill to outperform their peripherals consistently (Tom Glavine, Mark Buehrle, etc).
I guess the point is that both systems of WAR will occasionally get a guy wrong for one reason or another, so it's helpful to note the reasons why someone's WAR numbers seem out of sorts.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Dec 17, 2019 14:51:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 17, 2019 14:53:11 GMT -5
The risk of Betts leaving applies even moreso for the team trading for him, which would be giving up players to acquire him. It'd be one thing if the Red Sox weren't trying to win this year (which I say hoping not to open that Pandora's Box) and the value he provides in 2020 is meaningless, but it's not meaningless. I'm skeptical they'll get an offer that is worth more than his 2020 production + the potential draft pick if he walks + what I figure to be the decreased likelihood he'd re-sign. There is risk to keeping Betts. There is more risk to trading for him. If there is even a decent chance you want to sign him, yeah you don't trade him. Frankly I already think our owner has made up his mind that he doesn't want to pay one player 350 to 450 million over 10-13 years. If that is the case it kinda changes things, but only our owner knows that for sure. Wouldn't it be stupid if you know you won't resign him and aren't going to fully go for it this year, to not trade him now? Our owner likes to set a narrative so he can explain things to the fans. So I can see him waiting to the deadline to move him. Yet at that point you'd have less teams that might not have much money and those teams won't get a draft pick. Maybe I'm crazy but I think you can easily get an offer that gives you a lot more than Betts production this year and a pick after the 2nd round if you get under the 208.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 17, 2019 15:43:47 GMT -5
Yes, but in this specific point you could've used un-adjusted RA9 (a not-outstanding for Dodger Stadium but still solid 3.80) and had the same takeaway. RAA (and RAR) just take RA9 and compare it to ExpectedRA9, which is what is adjusted for park, league, etc. Buehler was just kind of unlucky this year in terms of allowing runs. How much WAR should account for that can go back and forth forever - using RAA you'll end up with blips (like Buehler this year) where a guy's peripherals are great but the bWAR is mediocre because some extra runs scored for one reason or another. Using FIP or Expected ERA or another similar stat as the basis for WAR ends up missing out on guys with a skill to outperform their peripherals consistently (Tom Glavine, Mark Buehrle, etc). I guess the point is that both systems of WAR will occasionally get a guy wrong for one reason or another, so it's helpful to note the reasons why someone's WAR numbers seem out of sorts. I overall hate Fangraphs way at looking at pitching as FIP is all about strikeouts. Basically lineup your strikeout guys and they are your top fwar guys. Like Buehlers #1 on Dodgers highest strikeout rate, Sale is #1 on Red Sox even in limited innings with highest strikeout rate. Average them together and it's not horrible overall. Overall something just feels off with Baseball References pitching numbers this year, like they over adjusted something. I was guessing park effect, but it must be something else. Look at Cole vs ERod, ERA+ just adjusts for Park, 185 vs 126, 66 runs vs 88 runs and Cole pitched more innings. Yet RAA is 47 vs 40 and bwar is 6.8 vs 6.0. There is a crap load of adjusting going on to get ERod anywhere near Cole.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 17, 2019 15:47:36 GMT -5
I don't get the interest in Will Smith. Yeah he's very good, but they don't need a starting catcher so much.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 17, 2019 15:56:39 GMT -5
I don't get the interest in Will Smith. Yeah he's very good, but they don't need a starting catcher so much. Certainly would make Vazquez expendable and he has a good amount of value coming off of last year and his relatively low price tag. The Red Sox could definitely get some talent for him. Maybe the Sox don't buy his offensive improvement beyond the lively ball. I'm not making that judgment myself, just throwing out the possibility that they may see it that way. Otherwise getting Smith would make little sense.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 17, 2019 16:00:09 GMT -5
If they end up trading Betts, the last thing on my mind would be filling needs via that trade. Get the best return you can. Period.
|
|
|
Post by Legion of Bloom on Dec 17, 2019 16:10:29 GMT -5
If they end up trading Betts, the last thing on my mind would be filling needs via that trade. Get the best return you can. Period. True. Seager, Verdugo and Smith would be quite a haul though for a player who is about to hit free agency and command some serious $.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 17, 2019 16:13:24 GMT -5
Why wouldn't you want Will Smith? If you believe he can be good defensively, he looks like he should have an above average bat for a catcher and you get six years of him.
If you include both you can really pay down Prices contract to increase the return. Heck add in Workman to increase the return even more. Let's get creative!
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 17, 2019 16:31:55 GMT -5
I'll care more when another reporter has this.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 17:00:23 GMT -5
Yes, but in this specific point you could've used un-adjusted RA9 (a not-outstanding for Dodger Stadium but still solid 3.80) and had the same takeaway. RAA (and RAR) just take RA9 and compare it to ExpectedRA9, which is what is adjusted for park, league, etc. Buehler was just kind of unlucky this year in terms of allowing runs. How much WAR should account for that can go back and forth forever - using RAA you'll end up with blips (like Buehler this year) where a guy's peripherals are great but the bWAR is mediocre because some extra runs scored for one reason or another. Using FIP or Expected ERA or another similar stat as the basis for WAR ends up missing out on guys with a skill to outperform their peripherals consistently (Tom Glavine, Mark Buehrle, etc). I guess the point is that both systems of WAR will occasionally get a guy wrong for one reason or another, so it's helpful to note the reasons why someone's WAR numbers seem out of sorts. Broader point, WAR is not an analytic tool for pitchers, period. You can talk about a pitcher's WAR like it means something when he's giving his acceptance speech at Cooperstown.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 17, 2019 17:02:43 GMT -5
I'll care more when another reporter has this. Speaking of which:
|
|
|
Post by blumj on Dec 17, 2019 17:09:46 GMT -5
Am I the only one who thinks the reason they want to get under the CBT now might be because they wouldn't be repeat offenders anymore when they top any offer Mookie gets from another team. Sox owners probably have a better idea than we do if there's likely to be significant changes to the CBT limits and penalties with the next CBA.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 17:15:31 GMT -5
If they end up trading Betts, the last thing on my mind would be filling needs via that trade. Get the best return you can. Period. True. Seager, Verdugo and Smith would be quite a haul though for a player who is about to hit free agency and command some serious $. The report names those three as players who've been discussed. It does NOT suggest a trade of Betts for all three, because that's truly absurd.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Dec 17, 2019 17:26:05 GMT -5
True. Seager, Verdugo and Smith would be quite a haul though for a player who is about to hit free agency and command some serious $. The report names those three as players who've been discussed. It does NOT suggest a trade of Betts for all three, because that's truly absurd. Right? Only DDom would give up that package for someone.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Dec 17, 2019 17:33:02 GMT -5
I'll care more when another reporter has this. Speaking of which: Speier suggests the Sox need to be wow'd by a trade package. I hope someone does it and goes all in for a year.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 17:35:50 GMT -5
The report names those three as players who've been discussed. It does NOT suggest a trade of Betts for all three, because that's truly absurd. Right? Only DDom would give up that package for someone. Not even. Dombrowski traded prospects, all those guys are currently good MLB players.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 17, 2019 18:19:47 GMT -5
Am I the only one who thinks the reason they want to get under the CBT now might be because they wouldn't be repeat offenders anymore when they top any offer Mookie gets from another team. Sox owners probably have a better idea than we do if there's likely to be significant changes to the CBT limits and penalties with the next CBA. I don't think that is our owner. Maybe he wants to save money to use on Betts, but I don't see him as a guy that writes a blank check. He has limits and has talked about financial flexibility more than most big market teams. Heck recently he acted like he wanted to become the Brewers.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Dec 17, 2019 18:25:11 GMT -5
I don't get the interest in Will Smith. Yeah he's very good, but they don't need a starting catcher so much. Jeter Downs (+) should be the target in a trade with the Dodgers
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 17, 2019 18:27:08 GMT -5
Am I the only one who thinks the reason they want to get under the CBT now might be because they wouldn't be repeat offenders anymore when they top any offer Mookie gets from another team. Sox owners probably have a better idea than we do if there's likely to be significant changes to the CBT limits and penalties with the next CBA. I don't think that is our owner. Maybe he wants to save money to use on Betts, but I don't see him as a guy that writes a blank check. He has limits and has talked about financial flexibility more than most big market teams. Heck recently he acted like he wanted to become the Brewers. You have expressed a lot of opinions about what is happening in John Henry's mind based on, as near as I can tell, nothing at all.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 17, 2019 18:53:45 GMT -5
I don't think that is our owner. Maybe he wants to save money to use on Betts, but I don't see him as a guy that writes a blank check. He has limits and has talked about financial flexibility more than most big market teams. Heck recently he acted like he wanted to become the Brewers. You have expressed a lot of opinions about what is happening in John Henry's mind based on, as near as I can tell, nothing at all. Really I was just talking about stuff Henry has said to the Media. He didn't talk about financial flexibility after Theo left? He didn't talk about the Brewers doing more with less or how Tampa has only averaged two fewer wins per year over the last decade with a payroll that's a fraction of ours recently? He didn't talk about how the war totals have shifted to younger players recently? No one knows what he is actually thinking, we can only read between the tea leafs. Yet given his own comments, his history of wanting to sign guys but having a limit see Pedro, Lester, etc and the talk about how free agency has changed because you get so much less value now. He doesn't seem like a guy that is going to write a blank check. Frankly he's never really been that guy and his recent comments at least to me seem to be spelling out what he's thinking. I'm not the only one, seen reports they won't sign him long-term. Yet I haven't seen one report that we are going to sign him no matter the cost.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 17, 2019 21:15:23 GMT -5
You have expressed a lot of opinions about what is happening in John Henry's mind based on, as near as I can tell, nothing at all. Really I was just talking about stuff Henry has said to the Media. He didn't talk about financial flexibility after Theo left? He didn't talk about the Brewers doing more with less or how Tampa has only averaged two fewer wins per year over the last decade with a payroll that's a fraction of ours recently? He didn't talk about how the war totals have shifted to younger players recently? No one knows what he is actually thinking, we can only read between the tea leafs. Yet given his own comments, his history of wanting to sign guys but having a limit see Pedro, Lester, etc and the talk about how free agency has changed because you get so much less value now. He doesn't seem like a guy that is going to write a blank check. Frankly he's never really been that guy and his recent comments at least to me seem to be spelling out what he's thinking. I'm not the only one, seen reports they won't sign him long-term. Yet I haven't seen one report that we are going to sign him no matter the cost. What kind of negotiator would say they were going to sign him no matter what? Also I don't think praising the Brewers = "acted like he wanted to become the Brewers." Obviously the salary cap is a concern for Henry, but it's not even clear how hard and fast a line he wants to draw on it. Meanwhile, he has spent more than any other owner in MLB on his team the last few seasons. I just think there's nothing to be gained by trying to read between the lines here.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 17, 2019 22:02:44 GMT -5
If we're going to talk about what he says AND bring up Lester than we should point out that, prior to signing Sale he said (or, at least, suggested) that they made a mistake with Lester.
|
|
|