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.
|
Post by dirtywaterinla on Jul 23, 2024 13:05:45 GMT -5
It's remarkable how many poor decisions are the result of applying the wrong metaphor - like one that implies a binary decision in a situation that is not binary. What if, instead of "picking a lane," Breslow were to:
- "balance" present and future value? - "hold" the hand he was dealt rather than "raise" or "fold"? - "have his cake and eat it too" by improving the team now and in the future, like they did in 2022? - "chart a middle course" to avoid dangers on both sides?
You don't have to pick a lane as a baseball GM or while you're driving, but both result in unpleasant results. Seems like an appropriate metaphor to me. Besides, the players they'd trade away and the team's needs overlap too much: - They have two relief arms they could trade: Martin and Jansen. They need a relief arm. - They have O'Neil they could trade. They need a right handed bat. - They have Pivetta they could trade. They need starting pitching. If you trade away one you have to acquire two to get any better. It would be one thing if they sold from a surplus to fill a deficiency, like trading Abreu for a starting pitcher, but that doesn't seem to be the scenario people are suggesting. I’ve brought up Abreu as a trade piece for a SP, but the question remains what type of SP could you get for him? Trading him for someone like Eflin would be an overpay. Even trading him for Crochet feels a bit misaligned too, though I’d must admit I might be pivoting back to him as a sort of elite bulk guy to manage his innings the rest of the season. Using him as a centerpiece for Skubal makes sense but we all know the O’s have that one on lock if they pull the trigger. All said, I think the biggest problem is lack of available controllable SP talent that you can get return for him.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 23, 2024 13:09:19 GMT -5
It's remarkable how many poor decisions are the result of applying the wrong metaphor - like one that implies a binary decision in a situation that is not binary. What if, instead of "picking a lane," Breslow were to:
- "balance" present and future value? - "hold" the hand he was dealt rather than "raise" or "fold"? - "have his cake and eat it too" by improving the team now and in the future, like they did in 2022? - "chart a middle course" to avoid dangers on both sides?
You don't have to pick a lane as a baseball GM or while you're driving, but both result in unpleasant results. Seems like an appropriate metaphor to me. Besides, the players they'd trade away and the team's needs overlap too much:- They have two relief arms they could trade: Martin and Jansen. They need a relief arm. - They have O'Neil they could trade. They need a right handed bat. - They have Pivetta they could trade. They need starting pitching. If you trade away one you have to acquire two to get any better. It would be one thing if they sold from a surplus to fill a deficiency, like trading Abreu for a starting pitcher, but that doesn't seem to be the scenario people are suggesting. They could trade from areas of surplus to bolster areas of weakness. Abreu and Valdez - ironically - make a fair amount of sense as guys on the current roster to sell while bolstering the roster elsewhere.
Of course the other option would be to just stand pat or make only minor moves, something that is totally normal for teams on the cusp of contention to do.
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on Jul 23, 2024 13:11:54 GMT -5
Yeah, I mean, I buy Breslow’s public facing comment that playoff odds are a snapshot in time. I’d rather be two games up than two games down, of course. The fact that the odds swing so dramatically over the course of just a few days, multiple times within a season, suggests to me that they are more of a descriptive “what happened” metric than a predictive “what’s going to happen” metric. I dunno, if they go from a 90 win pace to an 87 win pace over four games and that drops their playoff odds by ~20%, that seems intuitively right to me. To grossly oversimplify things in order to suit my argument: if I flipped a coin heads nine times out of ten, I may have been flipping the coin at a 90% heads rate, but that’s what happened so far - it doesn’t mean the probability of flipping the coin heads was ever 90%. I still have a 1 in 2 shot at heads, even after tails came up the past four times in a row. The probability was exactly the same in both samples. Playoff odds are extrapolating a very educated guess about a team’s “true” talent level across observed results, through yet to be observed results. While it is true that the game results that have already happened are set in stone, we don’t actually know what the team’s true talent level is, and we are making the assumption that that is a static threshold. If odds move 20% based on 2.5% of the season, it’s capturing variance around a baseline that we are ultimately making educated guesses about, as well as assuming that’s a static threshold for here players aren’t improving or declining, healthy or less than 100%, over the course or six months. We treat dramatic changes in AVG, ERA, SLG, etc across four games as variance in a very small sample. Is there a basis for declining to treat playoff odds that way?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 23, 2024 13:26:25 GMT -5
I dunno, if they go from a 90 win pace to an 87 win pace over four games and that drops their playoff odds by ~20%, that seems intuitively right to me. To grossly oversimplify things in order to suit my argument: if I flipped a coin heads nine times out of ten, I may have been flipping the coin at a 90% heads rate, but that’s what happened so far - it doesn’t mean the probability of flipping the coin heads was ever 90%. I still have a 1 in 2 shot at heads, even after tails came up the past four times in a row. The probability was exactly the same in both samples. Playoff odds are extrapolating a very educated guess about a team’s “true” talent level across observed results, through yet to be observed results. While it is true that the game results that have already happened are set in stone, we don’t actually know what the team’s true talent level is, and we are making the assumption that that is a static threshold. If odds move 20% based on 2.5% of the season, it’s capturing variance around a baseline that we are ultimately making educated guesses about, as well as assuming that’s a static threshold for here players aren’t improving or declining, healthy or less than 100%, over the course or six months. We treat dramatic changes in AVG, ERA, SLG, etc across four games as variance in a very small sample. Is there a basis for declining to treat playoff odds that way? I don't follow. I agree with your coin flip analogy, but that was exactly the point I was trying to make. The playoff odds don't change over 4 games because the team's projected future performance changes significantly; the odds change because the team lost 4 games and now they project for fewer total wins as a result.
Concretely: fangraphs at the all-star break projected the Red Sox to have a .489 win% the rest of the way and finish at 85-76. Now they project them to have a .489 win% the rest of the way but finish at 83-78. The only difference is that they went 0-4 over the lsat four games when they "should" have gone 2-2.
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Jul 23, 2024 13:26:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dirtywaterinla on Jul 23, 2024 13:33:27 GMT -5
Same. This is possibly the best best low, highest payoff move he could make.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 23, 2024 13:40:25 GMT -5
Detmers’ under-the-hood numbers before being sent to AAA were… fine? It seemed like they were just giving him a reset at AAA - what exactly is he still doing down there.
(I realize the answer may be “because they’re the Angels”)
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 23, 2024 13:46:24 GMT -5
There’s probably something going on there whether it’s arm issues or personal problems. He shouldn’t be getting wrecked in AAA
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,497
|
Post by nomar on Jul 23, 2024 14:12:58 GMT -5
JP Crawford heading to the IL with a fractured finger. I think Hamilton is someone who could interest the Mariners and his value has never been higher. The Mariners’ depth of arms makes the two teams a potential match
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 23, 2024 14:25:45 GMT -5
I have no idea what Hamilton is worth, but getting a healthy haul for him would sure clean up some roster issues
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,639
|
Post by cdj on Jul 23, 2024 14:28:24 GMT -5
Something like bringing in Detmers and Ward while shipping out TON in a separate deal might be intriguing
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Jul 23, 2024 14:37:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Jul 23, 2024 14:43:36 GMT -5
Is this team, as currently constructed, good enough to get a wildcard?
If NO, then they aren't worth investing in. At inflated prices buyers are going to pay.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Jul 23, 2024 14:45:24 GMT -5
Among other things. Jansen turning back into Jansen. The bullpen in tatters. Houck being bad three times in a row (including the AS Game) and possible arm fatigue? Casas being out for the year (I hope. No way they should risk it). Sell from the 26 man. See what Yorke and Campbell can do in September.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,497
|
Post by nomar on Jul 23, 2024 14:47:29 GMT -5
Rengifo is beating his xwOBA by 50 points and has a 55% GB Rate. Please don’t waste assets on him.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Jul 23, 2024 14:55:51 GMT -5
Rengifo is beating his xwOBA by 50 points and has a 55% GB Rate. Please don’t waste assets on him. The system is loaded with position player prospects who are near. Also Story is coming back. My hope is they throw the whole bank at Corbin Burnes in the off season. The guy is good every year. In fact he's usually great. He's 29 and a horse who seems to have a rubber arm and he's a free agent. I'd rather have him than any other pitcher in MLB.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 23, 2024 15:14:23 GMT -5
To grossly oversimplify things in order to suit my argument: if I flipped a coin heads nine times out of ten, I may have been flipping the coin at a 90% heads rate, but that’s what happened so far - it doesn’t mean the probability of flipping the coin heads was ever 90%. I still have a 1 in 2 shot at heads, even after tails came up the past four times in a row. The probability was exactly the same in both samples. Playoff odds are extrapolating a very educated guess about a team’s “true” talent level across observed results, through yet to be observed results. While it is true that the game results that have already happened are set in stone, we don’t actually know what the team’s true talent level is, and we are making the assumption that that is a static threshold. If odds move 20% based on 2.5% of the season, it’s capturing variance around a baseline that we are ultimately making educated guesses about, as well as assuming that’s a static threshold for here players aren’t improving or declining, healthy or less than 100%, over the course or six months. We treat dramatic changes in AVG, ERA, SLG, etc across four games as variance in a very small sample. Is there a basis for declining to treat playoff odds that way? I don't follow. I agree with your coin flip analogy, but that was exactly the point I was trying to make. The playoff odds don't change over 4 games because the team's projected future performance changes significantly; the odds change because the team lost 4 games and now they project for fewer total wins as a result.
Concretely: fangraphs at the all-star break projected the Red Sox to have a .489 win% the rest of the way and finish at 85-76. Now they project them to have a .489 win% the rest of the way but finish at 83-78. The only difference is that they went 0-4 over the lsat four games when they "should" have gone 2-2.
Yeah exactly the last sentence here. The odds are the last playoff team makes it by like 1-2 games. They just lost two games they were expected to win (in the abstract you’d expect they win ~2 of every 4). It totally follows that that would have a major impact on their playoff odds when they’re a bubble team.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxpride34 on Jul 23, 2024 15:43:06 GMT -5
Something like bringing in Detmers and Ward while shipping out TON in a separate deal might be intriguing I would be fine with bringing in Detmers but more so in a scenario where you add multiple pitchers and trade Pivetta. That being said, I'd much rather Detmers than Paxton. The last thing this team needs is more old roster filler players. I'd be fine with trading Jansen as well. I'd be curious to see if a Jansen + yoshida deal with the dodgers could be possibility. On a side note, with all of the issues in the pen right now, it really further emphasizes how badly they screwed up with Whitlock. Having him back there providing multiple shutdown would be huge right now. Instead theres still a hole in the rotation and we don't have him in the pen. Got an absolute gift getting him in the rule 5 draft and flushed it down the toilet.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywaterinla on Jul 23, 2024 16:28:54 GMT -5
Something like bringing in Detmers and Ward while shipping out TON in a separate deal might be intriguing I would be fine with bringing in Detmers but more so in a scenario where you add multiple pitchers and trade Pivetta. That being said, I'd much rather Detmers than Paxton. The last thing this team needs is more old roster filler players. I'd be fine with trading Jansen as well. I'd be curious to see if a Jansen + yoshida deal with the dodgers could be possibility. On a side note, with all of the issues in the pen right now, it really further emphasizes how badly they screwed up with Whitlock. Having him back there providing multiple shutdown would be huge right now. Instead theres still a hole in the rotation and we don't have him in the pen. Got an absolute gift getting him in the rule 5 draft and flushed it down the toilet. Any deal that would include Yoshida would essentially negate whatever value you’d get out of Jansen or anyone else you’d be trading alongside him. He’s not going anywhere until the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by keninten on Jul 23, 2024 16:35:56 GMT -5
Something like bringing in Detmers and Ward while shipping out TON in a separate deal might be intriguing I would be fine with bringing in Detmers but more so in a scenario where you add multiple pitchers and trade Pivetta. That being said, I'd much rather Detmers than Paxton. The last thing this team needs is more old roster filler players. I'd be fine with trading Jansen as well. I'd be curious to see if a Jansen + yoshida deal with the dodgers could be possibility. On a side note, with all of the issues in the pen right now, it really further emphasizes how badly they screwed up with Whitlock. Having him back there providing multiple shutdown would be huge right now. Instead theres still a hole in the rotation and we don't have him in the pen. Got an absolute gift getting him in the rule 5 draft and flushed it down the toilet. Would Yoshida take AB from Ohtani?
|
|
shagworthy
Veteran
My neckbeard game is on point.
Posts: 1,839
|
Post by shagworthy on Jul 23, 2024 16:59:09 GMT -5
If I had to place a bet on the deadline I think it will mirror the offseason, we'll claim to be in on a bunch of guys but opine that none of the deals made sense so we stood pat.
Just reading through the comments, it's clear this is a prospect board because even amongst us, so many are so allergic to dealing any of our prospects(Not named Teel, Anthony, or Meyer) for anything that isn't a mid-to-top current major leaguer, which in all honesty isn't realistic. We have a log-jam of kids all vying for the same positions, one way or another they are going to have to weed that out, either by getting something to address weaknesses in our farm system or a back end player on the big club.
I think a lot of the redundant names are more likely to be moved in the offseason because the deadline is usually about the MLB club, whereas the offseason they can focus more on the whole organization holistically.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywaterinla on Jul 23, 2024 18:57:00 GMT -5
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 23, 2024 19:07:48 GMT -5
-Twins have financial issues -Royals don’t have much to trade (28th ranked farm system coming into the year) -Mariners just lost Julio and JP Crawford to injury Man if we could just win a couple games here…
|
|
|
Post by dirtywaterinla on Jul 23, 2024 19:42:48 GMT -5
-Twins have financial issues -Royals don’t have much to trade (28th ranked farm system coming into the year) -Mariners just lost Julio and JP Crawford to injury Man if we could just win a couple games here… One would hope (rightfully expect) that this is part of the team’s calculus.
|
|
|
Post by geostorm on Jul 23, 2024 20:22:46 GMT -5
Taking this report at face value, who would be best fit(s) should CIN be open to trading RPs
|
|
|