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.
Red Sox Sign Adam Duvall (1 Year/$7 million)
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Apr 4, 2023 8:41:16 GMT -5
I thought he had a player option for the 2nd year? He does not. He's got the QO option and the Rangers will get us an additional 1st rounder next year when they sign him to an ill-fated 3 year deal
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Apr 4, 2023 16:56:22 GMT -5
I thought he had a player option for the 2nd year? He does not. Maybe that was Turner.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 7, 2023 13:17:46 GMT -5
How good has Duvall been in 6 games played so far? Well aside from the best player in baseball, he's been so good that Steamer, which at the time of his signing had him projected as a 0.5 win player over 555 PAs, now projects him as a 1.33 win player (going forward) over 555 PAs, which if he is to hit that PA number given his current base of 0.8 would have him end the season as a 2 win player. So the Steamer full season Duvall projection is now up 4X from where it started.
I'm clarifying full season because the original projection was actually for 325 PAs, and the new one is only for 450. The more bullish projections (ZiPS) now have Duvall as a 3.5 win player over 114 games, or a 4.5 win player over 145. These all also have him projected for zero or negative defensive value, but he's historically been a very good defender in the outfield, especially in center (though he has -1 OAA so far).
ADD: Fangraphs also says he's already been worth $6.8M which is essentially his contract, but his WPA is already at 1.4 (leading MLB, 70% higher than second place) so he's been worth more than added win over replacement when adjusting for the situation.
|
|
|
Post by backwardsk on Apr 8, 2023 8:38:31 GMT -5
How good has Duvall been in 6 games played so far? Well aside from the best player in baseball, he's been so good that Steamer, which at the time of his signing had him projected as a 0.5 win player over 555 PAs, now projects him as a 1.33 win player (going forward) over 555 PAs, which if he is to hit that PA number given his current base of 0.8 would have him end the season as a 2 win player. So the Steamer full season Duvall projection is now up 4X from where it started. I'm clarifying full season because the original projection was actually for 325 PAs, and the new one is only for 450. The more bullish projections (ZiPS) now have Duvall as a 3.5 win player over 114 games, or a 4.5 win player over 145. These all also have him projected for zero or negative defensive value, but he's historically been a very good defender in the outfield, especially in center (though he has -1 OAA so far). ADD: Fangraphs also says he's already been worth $6.8M which is essentially his contract, but his WPA is already at 1.4 (leading MLB, 70% higher than second place) so he's been worth more than added win over replacement when adjusting for the situation. I canâÂÂt help but think how great our lineup would be if you remove Kiké and insert X. I love Kiké for his personality because you need players like him in the clubhouse but i think the way we treated X last year still has an effect on this years team. To be that special at that position and get so mistreated isnâÂÂt a good look. I think Mayer getting drafted automatically made us move on from X. It makes me sick. I know the smart way to build a team is to keep developing prospects and fill in the holes with 1 year free agent deals but as a life long Red Sox fan itâÂÂs very tough to be patient! As long as one of Duvall/Turner stays hot we can get through this season but next offseason itâÂÂs like weâÂÂre back at square one being most of our top prospects are far away and our best SP have yet to pitch a full season. Went way off track but i just wish this guy was maybe a 3 year deal seeing he can take over at DH/4th OF when Rafael is ready. 1 year deals coming out of last place just donâÂÂt make sense. If you steal a guy he gets paid the next year and you let him go. If you have Xander then you're probably not going to get Yoshida, say if you signed Xander to 150 million in spring training in 2021. Maybe that meant Duvall in RF, Kiké in CF, and Verdugo in LF, but an extra 7.5 million AAV would be be spent on Xander versus Yoshida. So you may or may not have signed Duvall or Kiké on top of not getting Yoshida.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 8, 2023 10:30:31 GMT -5
Let’s keep this thread on Duvall. There are other threads to discuss other offseason moves and nonmoves.
|
|
|
Post by backwardsk on Apr 8, 2023 10:53:50 GMT -5
Let’s keep this thread on Duvall. There are other threads to discuss other offseason moves and nonmoves. Sorry. I thought it was relevant. Butterfly effect. You sign Xander = Not signing others (like Duvall) because Xander cost more. I don't think people think about that side of it. I prefer Yoshida and Duvall for less years. I think the Sox made the right move there.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 8, 2023 10:54:08 GMT -5
How good has Duvall been in 6 games played so far? Well aside from the best player in baseball, he's been so good that Steamer, which at the time of his signing had him projected as a 0.5 win player over 555 PAs, now projects him as a 1.33 win player (going forward) over 555 PAs, which if he is to hit that PA number given his current base of 0.8 would have him end the season as a 2 win player. So the Steamer full season Duvall projection is now up 4X from where it started. I'm clarifying full season because the original projection was actually for 325 PAs, and the new one is only for 450. The more bullish projections (ZiPS) now have Duvall as a 3.5 win player over 114 games, or a 4.5 win player over 145. These all also have him projected for zero or negative defensive value, but he's historically been a very good defender in the outfield, especially in center (though he has -1 OAA so far). ADD: Fangraphs also says he's already been worth $6.8M which is essentially his contract, but his WPA is already at 1.4 (leading MLB, 70% higher than second place) so he's been worth more than added win over replacement when adjusting for the situation.1.4 WPA a week into the season is just absurd. Bear in mind 0 WPA isn't replacement level, it's average, so he could have -1.4 WPA for the rest of the season and still have average value overall - which would be a great deal on his contract.
Another angle on that stat: only 47 batters had 1.4 WPA for the entire 2022 season. Xander Bogaerts had 0.98. Duvall's 1.4 is also more than Juan Soto, Yandy Diaz, Jeff McNeil, and Carlos Correa had - all guys with a 140 wRC+ or better.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 8, 2023 10:57:40 GMT -5
How good has Duvall been in 6 games played so far? Well aside from the best player in baseball, he's been so good that Steamer, which at the time of his signing had him projected as a 0.5 win player over 555 PAs, now projects him as a 1.33 win player (going forward) over 555 PAs, which if he is to hit that PA number given his current base of 0.8 would have him end the season as a 2 win player. So the Steamer full season Duvall projection is now up 4X from where it started. I'm clarifying full season because the original projection was actually for 325 PAs, and the new one is only for 450. The more bullish projections (ZiPS) now have Duvall as a 3.5 win player over 114 games, or a 4.5 win player over 145. These all also have him projected for zero or negative defensive value, but he's historically been a very good defender in the outfield, especially in center (though he has -1 OAA so far). ADD: Fangraphs also says he's already been worth $6.8M which is essentially his contract, but his WPA is already at 1.4 (leading MLB, 70% higher than second place) so he's been worth more than added win over replacement when adjusting for the situation.1.4 WPA a week into the season is just absurd. Bear in mind 0 WPA isn't replacement level, it's average, so he could have -1.4 WPA for the rest of the season and still have average value overall - which would be a great deal on his contract.
Another angle on that stat: only 47 batters had 1.4 WPA for the entire 2022 season. Xander Bogaerts had 0.98. Duvall's 1.4 is also more than Juan Soto, Yandy Diaz, Jeff McNeil, and Carlos Correa had - all guys with a 140 wRC+ or better.
That’s fine statistically… but if he is a below average player for the remaining 155 games, even if his advanced numbers say he is average — is it true — he will have been a bust. Having 7 massive games doesn’t outweigh being below average for 155 games no matter what that kind of metric says. Not going to happen, so hypothetical. But it is a massive flaw in rhat kind of measurement.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 8, 2023 11:25:30 GMT -5
1.4 WPA a week into the season is just absurd. Bear in mind 0 WPA isn't replacement level, it's average, so he could have -1.4 WPA for the rest of the season and still have average value overall - which would be a great deal on his contract.
Another angle on that stat: only 47 batters had 1.4 WPA for the entire 2022 season. Xander Bogaerts had 0.98. Duvall's 1.4 is also more than Juan Soto, Yandy Diaz, Jeff McNeil, and Carlos Correa had - all guys with a 140 wRC+ or better.
That’s fine statistically… but if he is a below average player for the remaining 155 games, even if his advanced numbers say he is average — is it true — he will have been a bust. Having 7 massive games doesn’t outweigh being below average for 155 games no matter what that kind of metric says. Not going to happen, so hypothetical. But it is a massive flaw in rhat kind of measurement. I don't follow your logic. If I gain $1 million in January and then lose $50,000 in each of the next 11 months, I end up $450,000 ahead. That's a good year, even if 11 of the 12 months were bad.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 8, 2023 11:37:57 GMT -5
That’s fine statistically… but if he is a below average player for the remaining 155 games, even if his advanced numbers say he is average — is it true — he will have been a bust. Having 7 massive games doesn’t outweigh being below average for 155 games no matter what that kind of metric says. Not going to happen, so hypothetical. But it is a massive flaw in rhat kind of measurement. I don't follow your logic. If I gain $1 million in January and then lose $50,000 in each of the next 11 months, I end up $450,000 ahead. That's a good year, even if 11 of the 12 months were bad.
Not the same. If I drive in 10 runs in one game then go oh-fer for my next 4 games, I’m averaging 2 RBIs a game… but I’ve only helped my team in 20% of the games. No matter how many runs you add in a game, you can only win once. So if I’m worth 1 win in one game then -.1 for 10 straight, I might be worth 0, but I’ve actively hurt my team 9/10 of the time. Is that really breaking even?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 8, 2023 11:59:38 GMT -5
I don't follow your logic. If I gain $1 million in January and then lose $50,000 in each of the next 11 months, I end up $450,000 ahead. That's a good year, even if 11 of the 12 months were bad.
Not the same. If I drive in 10 runs in one game then go oh-fer for my next 4 games, I’m averaging 2 RBIs a game… but I’ve only helped my team in 20% of the games. No matter how many runs you add in a game, you can only win once. So if I’m worth 1 win in one game then -.1 for 10 straight, I might be worth 0, but I’ve actively hurt my team 9/10 of the time. Is that really breaking even? I honestly do not understand why my money example is disanalogous. I don't share your intuitions that a player's 10 rbi game wouldn't outweigh 4 0 rbi games, or that having a 1 win game followed by 10 sub-replacement level games wouldn't pencil out as replacement level. So I'll just leave it at that.
To jlebowski's point: Betts was paid to be worth $60 million or whatever. But as part of a 13-year contract that's also paying him to be like a $5 million player when he's 39. It all evens out to a $30 million AAV.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 8, 2023 12:03:25 GMT -5
1.4 WPA a week into the season is just absurd. Bear in mind 0 WPA isn't replacement level, it's average, so he could have -1.4 WPA for the rest of the season and still have average value overall - which would be a great deal on his contract.
Another angle on that stat: only 47 batters had 1.4 WPA for the entire 2022 season. Xander Bogaerts had 0.98. Duvall's 1.4 is also more than Juan Soto, Yandy Diaz, Jeff McNeil, and Carlos Correa had - all guys with a 140 wRC+ or better.
That’s fine statistically… but if he is a below average player for the remaining 155 games, even if his advanced numbers say he is average — is it true — he will have been a bust. Having 7 massive games doesn’t outweigh being below average for 155 games no matter what that kind of metric says. Not going to happen, so hypothetical. But it is a massive flaw in rhat kind of measurement. Clarification here: his contract pays him like he’s half as good as an average player. So he could be below average all season and be more than worth it.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 8, 2023 12:29:47 GMT -5
Not the same. If I drive in 10 runs in one game then go oh-fer for my next 4 games, I’m averaging 2 RBIs a game… but I’ve only helped my team in 20% of the games. No matter how many runs you add in a game, you can only win once. So if I’m worth 1 win in one game then -.1 for 10 straight, I might be worth 0, but I’ve actively hurt my team 9/10 of the time. Is that really breaking even? I honestly do not understand why my money example is disanalogous. I don't share your intuitions that a player's 10 rbi game wouldn't outweigh 4 0 rbi games, or that having a 1 win game followed by 10 sub-replacement level games wouldn't pencil out as replacement level. So I'll just leave it at that.
To jlebowski's point: Betts was paid to be worth $60 million or whatever. But as part of a 13-year contract that's also paying him to be like a $5 million player when he's 39. It all evens out to a $30 million AAV.
Not analogous because each day’s income reflects on the previous day’s in a way run production does not. Once a game is lost, an RBI tomorrow doesn’t make up for yesterday’s deficit. Taken to absurdity: a guy who drives in 200 runs opening day in a 200-0 rout has a massive head start on his numbers. But if he has zero RBIs for the remainder of the year, he’s a massive practical negative, even if he ends the year with impressive or even average statistics. Put differently: no one can be “worth a season” in a few games, no matter how good those games are, because 7 games is just 7 games. If Duvall were below average for 155 games but these big numbers propped him up, I’d still call it a bad season. Again, I’m talking hypothetically. I don’t expect him to turn into a pumpkin. But no one justifies a contract seven games into a season.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 8, 2023 12:37:50 GMT -5
The difference between getting 1 WPA in one game vs over 162 is that you virtually guaranteed single handedly that your team won a game, vs. you slightly increased their odds in a bunch of games. Why is it so apparent that the latter is preferable?
Also this is a totally hypothetical argument because this just isn’t going to happen. Yeah if Duvall never gets an extra base hit again for the Red Sox he’ll pretty much never add more WPA, instead will detract and if they don’t cut him he’ll end up not worth his contract. But that isn’t going to happen so what’s the point here?
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Apr 8, 2023 12:45:56 GMT -5
This 200 RBI argument reminds me of the sports talk folks and their "How disappointed will you be if the Bruins don't win the Cup?"
"They were FRAUDS, caller!"
Personally, I don't think what follows can detract from what has been. As a fan and viewer, I have already banked that entertainment.
Duval has been terrific and helped dramatically in a couple of wins. Is there greater value to early season wins than mid-season wins (when the win/loss record has normalized some)?
What if they start 0-6 vs 2-4, or 1-6 vs 3-4? Is there performance-affecting pressure felt in the clubhouse that has been alleviated for other players due to Duval's great start?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 8, 2023 13:51:16 GMT -5
I honestly do not understand why my money example is disanalogous. I don't share your intuitions that a player's 10 rbi game wouldn't outweigh 4 0 rbi games, or that having a 1 win game followed by 10 sub-replacement level games wouldn't pencil out as replacement level. So I'll just leave it at that.
To jlebowski's point: Betts was paid to be worth $60 million or whatever. But as part of a 13-year contract that's also paying him to be like a $5 million player when he's 39. It all evens out to a $30 million AAV.
Not analogous because each day’s income reflects on the previous day’s in a way run production does not. Once a game is lost, an RBI tomorrow doesn’t make up for yesterday’s deficit. Taken to absurdity: a guy who drives in 200 runs opening day in a 200-0 rout has a massive head start on his numbers. But if he has zero RBIs for the remainder of the year, he’s a massive practical negative, even if he ends the year with impressive or even average statistics. Put differently: no one can be “worth a season” in a few games, no matter how good those games are, because 7 games is just 7 games. If Duvall were below average for 155 games but these big numbers propped him up, I’d still call it a bad season. Again, I’m talking hypothetically. I don’t expect him to turn into a pumpkin. But no one justifies a contract seven games into a season. Well then this player would have a terrible WPA! If *your own preferred metric* is RBIs, then this player looks good. But you're using this hypothetical to criticize a measure of performance that would *accurately* reflect that this would be a very sub-optimal season!
Another hypothetical: if Duvall had great games on May 15th, June 15th, July 15th, and August 15th, rather than having them on April 1st, April 2nd, April 3rd, and April 6th, would that somehow be more valuable to the team because the value was spread out throughout the season? That's what you seem to be implying. But obviously each game counts the same in the standings.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 8, 2023 14:26:35 GMT -5
Not analogous because each day’s income reflects on the previous day’s in a way run production does not. Once a game is lost, an RBI tomorrow doesn’t make up for yesterday’s deficit. Taken to absurdity: a guy who drives in 200 runs opening day in a 200-0 rout has a massive head start on his numbers. But if he has zero RBIs for the remainder of the year, he’s a massive practical negative, even if he ends the year with impressive or even average statistics. Put differently: no one can be “worth a season” in a few games, no matter how good those games are, because 7 games is just 7 games. If Duvall were below average for 155 games but these big numbers propped him up, I’d still call it a bad season. Again, I’m talking hypothetically. I don’t expect him to turn into a pumpkin. But no one justifies a contract seven games into a season. Well then this player would have a terrible WPA! If *your own preferred metric* is RBIs, then this player looks good. But you're using this hypothetical to criticize a measure of performance that would *accurately* reflect that this would be a very sub-optimal season!
Another hypothetical: if Duvall had great games on May 15th, June 15th, July 15th, and August 15th, rather than having them on April 1st, April 2nd, April 3rd, and April 6th, would that somehow be more valuable to the team because the value was spread out throughout the season? That's what you seem to be implying. But obviously each game counts the same in the standings.
No that would be the same. I don’t see what I’m saying as being confusing or even controversial. No matter how good a short span is, it cannot make a season’s value.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 8, 2023 14:30:11 GMT -5
Well then this player would have a terrible WPA! If *your own preferred metric* is RBIs, then this player looks good. But you're using this hypothetical to criticize a measure of performance that would *accurately* reflect that this would be a very sub-optimal season!
Another hypothetical: if Duvall had great games on May 15th, June 15th, July 15th, and August 15th, rather than having them on April 1st, April 2nd, April 3rd, and April 6th, would that somehow be more valuable to the team because the value was spread out throughout the season? That's what you seem to be implying. But obviously each game counts the same in the standings.
No that would be the same. I don’t see what I’m saying as being confusing or even controversial. No matter how good a short span is, it cannot make a season’s value. I think the issue is that the point is meaningless. If Duvall never does another thing to help the Red Sox win games and he keeps playing then his WPA will decline, it’s not a strictly increasing metric.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 8, 2023 14:32:00 GMT -5
No that would be the same. I don’t see what I’m saying as being confusing or even controversial. No matter how good a short span is, it cannot make a season’s value. I think the issue is that the point is meaningless. If Duvall never does another thing to help the Red Sox win games and he keeps playing then his WPA will decline, it’s not a strictly increasing metric. Then discussion of how close he is to being full value of his contract or those variable stats is also meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Apr 8, 2023 14:41:17 GMT -5
I think the issue is that the point is meaningless. If Duvall never does another thing to help the Red Sox win games and he keeps playing then his WPA will decline, it’s not a strictly increasing metric. Then discussion of how close he is to being full value of his contract or those variable stats is also meaningless. I guess I thought that this part was implicit. WAR can go down too. It’s also incredibly unlikely that he never contributes positive value again. If he hits a double in a close game he’s added expected win value. The point is if the rest of it equals out, if his positive contributions equal the negative ones the rest of the way, the surplus of positive value he’s added already is enough to be worth his contract. But of course he has to do more positive things or the negative ones will outweigh the pluses.
|
|
shagworthy
Veteran
My neckbeard game is on point.
Posts: 1,624
|
Post by shagworthy on Apr 8, 2023 14:46:45 GMT -5
Meanwhile here, I'm just happy he's hitting the crap out of the ball and taking pitches. It's too early to evaluate the merit of his signing based on his production, lets just live in the moment and enjoy ourselves until he gives us a reason not to... He's been a bright spot so far and I'll take it.
|
|
|
Post by crossedsabres8 on Apr 8, 2023 17:53:09 GMT -5
I honestly do not understand why my money example is disanalogous. I don't share your intuitions that a player's 10 rbi game wouldn't outweigh 4 0 rbi games, or that having a 1 win game followed by 10 sub-replacement level games wouldn't pencil out as replacement level. So I'll just leave it at that.
To jlebowski's point: Betts was paid to be worth $60 million or whatever. But as part of a 13-year contract that's also paying him to be like a $5 million player when he's 39. It all evens out to a $30 million AAV.
Not analogous because each day’s income reflects on the previous day’s in a way run production does not. Once a game is lost, an RBI tomorrow doesn’t make up for yesterday’s deficit. Taken to absurdity: a guy who drives in 200 runs opening day in a 200-0 rout has a massive head start on his numbers. But if he has zero RBIs for the remainder of the year, he’s a massive practical negative, even if he ends the year with impressive or even average statistics. Put differently: no one can be “worth a season” in a few games, no matter how good those games are, because 7 games is just 7 games. If Duvall were below average for 155 games but these big numbers propped him up, I’d still call it a bad season. Again, I’m talking hypothetically. I don’t expect him to turn into a pumpkin. But no one justifies a contract seven games into a season. This is ironically a much worse example than the income example because driving runs in when you're up by 10+ runs is not helping your team win the way Duvall did in game 2 when he had an insane WPA and almost singlehandedly won them the game. Income doesn't have the same level of diminishing returns. The interesting hypothetical here would be to ask if you would pay $7M or so for a guy to play 7 games and contribute 1.5 WPA. I would say, yes.
|
|
|
Post by Foulke_In_Athol on Apr 8, 2023 18:32:36 GMT -5
Geez this is a totally mind numbing discussion. It's like the "it's too hard" / "No it's too high" argument from Major League."
Please, he's just in a good stretch, don't over think it.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 8, 2023 19:16:29 GMT -5
Meanwhile here, I'm just happy he's hitting the crap out of the ball and taking pitches. It's too early to evaluate the merit of his signing based on his production, lets just live in the moment and enjoy ourselves until he gives us a reason not to... He's been a bright spot so far and I'll take it. Baba Ram Dass has your back here...
|
|
|
Post by christianarroyossock on Apr 8, 2023 23:27:33 GMT -5
I honestly do not understand why my money example is disanalogous. I don't share your intuitions that a player's 10 rbi game wouldn't outweigh 4 0 rbi games, or that having a 1 win game followed by 10 sub-replacement level games wouldn't pencil out as replacement level. So I'll just leave it at that.
To jlebowski's point: Betts was paid to be worth $60 million or whatever. But as part of a 13-year contract that's also paying him to be like a $5 million player when he's 39. It all evens out to a $30 million AAV.
Not analogous because each day’s income reflects on the previous day’s in a way run production does not. Once a game is lost, an RBI tomorrow doesn’t make up for yesterday’s deficit. Taken to absurdity: a guy who drives in 200 runs opening day in a 200-0 rout has a massive head start on his numbers. But if he has zero RBIs for the remainder of the year, he’s a massive practical negative, even if he ends the year with impressive or even average statistics. Put differently: no one can be “worth a season” in a few games, no matter how good those games are, because 7 games is just 7 games. If Duvall were below average for 155 games but these big numbers propped him up, I’d still call it a bad season. Again, I’m talking hypothetically. I don’t expect him to turn into a pumpkin. But no one justifies a contract seven games into a season. The whole point of WPA is that it takes this into account. Duvall is not preforming only when it doesn’t matter, he is winning us baseball games which is exactly what WPA shows. If he had jacked 7 homers in one game that we were already leading in then your analogy makes sense, but that’s not the case.
|
|
|