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.
If there’s a will, there’s Wilyer — Wilyer Abreu thread
|
Post by julyanmorley on May 9, 2024 14:24:22 GMT -5
Using the top 100 lists is kinda problematic, but guys really need to be high level prospects to be affected by service time manipulation. Doing it turns them into a super two, which makes them a lot more expensive pre-free agency. And if the guy is debuting at age 24 or 25, then their first FA year you're trying to steal is in their 30s and unlikely to rate to be worth a lot. It's not really worth bothering unless you're dealing with a 21 year old that could realistically be putting up 4 WAR seasons
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on May 9, 2024 14:26:09 GMT -5
Wow that’s crazy arbitrary and if anything you’d think rewarding a team for exceeding all expectations developing talent makes more sense. The point is to keep teams from holding down top prospects to game service time and team control, not to reward player development. Through that lens it makes plenty of sense, imo. Would be nice to have a better mechanism to establish the list though. Counterpoint though.....if you're a good enough baseball player to win ROY, aren't you good enough to want to manipulate service time (add gain extra team control)?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 9, 2024 14:31:36 GMT -5
The point is to keep teams from holding down top prospects to game service time and team control, not to reward player development. Through that lens it makes plenty of sense, imo. Would be nice to have a better mechanism to establish the list though. Counterpoint though.....if you're a good enough baseball player to win ROY, aren't you good enough to want to manipulate service time (add gain extra team control)? Well, I think we all (including me) forget that if a guy wins ROY or comes in second, he gets the full year of service time. That's the key thing to guard against manipulation of any player. The pick incentive is extra incentive for top guys. Given how hard it is to win ROY (or finish high enough in MVP voting), a team might be inclined to take its chances on a top guy not winning.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on May 9, 2024 14:36:20 GMT -5
Counterpoint though.....if you're a good enough baseball player to win ROY, aren't you good enough to want to manipulate service time (add gain extra team control)? Well, I think we all (including me) forget that if a guy wins ROY or comes in second, he gets the full year of service time. That's the key thing to guard against manipulation of any player. The pick incentive is extra incentive for top guys. Given how hard it is to win ROY (or finish high enough in MVP voting), a team might be inclined to take its chances on a top guy not winning. Another thing that I think is also worth considering is that the service time considerations are not limited to the year in which that prospect is playing as a rookie, it's what the market for that player will look like at the end of their arb years. Manipulating service time with a guy like Mason Miller probably isn't going to be that worthwhile, you're not going to look to sign him to a megadeal for big years or big money. Same with a guy like Abreu, to a certain extent. But a prospect like, say, Jackson Holliday, who is in theory looking at a massive payday down the road, you're more incentivized to maximize savings wherever you can. Long story short I think the system is perfectly fine as is.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on May 9, 2024 20:38:01 GMT -5
The system won’t be perfect, it was collectively bargained. It’s better than what was there before, but certainly has its flaws.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on May 29, 2024 9:52:07 GMT -5
Abreu is still keeping his Rookie of the Year case strong. Mason Miller though is in the driver’s seat. Though, being a closer a bad outing or two could really harm his case.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on May 29, 2024 12:47:07 GMT -5
Abreu is still keeping his Rookie of the Year case strong. Mason Miller though is in the driver’s seat. Though, being a closer a bad outing or two could really harm his case. not sure I would consider a closer over an everyday player, no matter how good the player / season is. It would be as calamitous as Mo Rivera being the only unamimous HOF vote, a stain on baseball history that can never be washed away.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,633
|
Post by cdj on May 29, 2024 12:48:55 GMT -5
Mason Miller is obviously filthy but at the end of the day he’s a closer for one of the leagues worst teams, he’s not nearly as valuable as Abreu has been
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on May 29, 2024 13:17:28 GMT -5
If you look at the history of Rookie of the Year winners, it's mostly a bunch of guys who went on to have really good careers. Except every now and then it's a relief pitcher who no one ever thinks about anymore (Neftali Feliz, Huston Street, Kazuhiro Sasaki, Scott Williamson, and the ultimate rando, Andrew Bailey). Be that a lesson to the voters.
*By the way, what was up with that 2000 Sasaki ROY? He had a 3.16 ERA and 4.30 FIP as a reliever that season, which placed him 4th and 8th, respectively, among rookie relievers in the AL. Good for all of 0.6 WAR.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on May 29, 2024 13:19:57 GMT -5
I don't think I agree, what Miller is doing as a reliever is so dominant I think it's fair to rank him ahead of Abreu (though it's close). Miller's WAR is close despite being a reliever, his WPA is way higher, and I do think it should matter for award conversations how a player performed in higher leverage moments - even if that isn't predictive of future performance. In the biggest moments, generally, Abreu has been terrible and Miller has been good.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on May 29, 2024 13:47:36 GMT -5
Mason Miller is obviously filthy but at the end of the day he’s a closer for one of the leagues worst teams, he’s not nearly as valuable as Abreu has been This I have to approach from a SPECTACLE point of view. Abreu is a really good player on a pedestrian team and Miller is a great player on a bad team. So yeah, rationally Abreu is the leader here, but Miller is bananas. You stop what you're doing to watch him. He's striking out damn near 2 dudes per inning. He has a 0.09 FIP. He's a rockstar in a game that's growing more and more boring, you need to reward the showmen.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,633
|
Post by cdj on May 29, 2024 13:52:29 GMT -5
Is there technically ever a high lev situation if there are like 12 fans in the stadium?
I get the Miller love though, I really do. If you had to pick a pitcher to throw 1 inning with your life on the line then you’d probably have to pick him at this point
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 29, 2024 14:39:51 GMT -5
If you look at the history of Rookie of the Year winners, it's mostly a bunch of guys who went on to have really good careers. Except every now and then it's a relief pitcher who no one ever thinks about anymore (Neftali Feliz, Huston Street, Kazuhiro Sasaki, Scott Williamson, and the ultimate rando, Andrew Bailey). Be that a lesson to the voters. *By the way, what was up with that 2000 Sasaki ROY? He had a 3.16 ERA and 4.30 FIP as a reliever that season, which placed him 4th and 8th, respectively, among rookie relievers in the AL. Good for all of 0.6 WAR.
www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_2000.shtml#AL_ROY_votingREALLY mediocre year for rookies - probably the best case was for Zito, who came up in late July, or maybe Mark Redman who was a midrotation starter on a last-place Twins team. Not totally crazy that they just chose the most prominent guy from such a lackluster group. Also, watch yourself with any Scott Williamson slander.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on May 29, 2024 16:34:03 GMT -5
If you look at the history of Rookie of the Year winners, it's mostly a bunch of guys who went on to have really good careers. Except every now and then it's a relief pitcher who no one ever thinks about anymore (Neftali Feliz, Huston Street, Kazuhiro Sasaki, Scott Williamson, and the ultimate rando, Andrew Bailey). Be that a lesson to the voters.
*By the way, what was up with that 2000 Sasaki ROY? He had a 3.16 ERA and 4.30 FIP as a reliever that season, which placed him 4th and 8th, respectively, among rookie relievers in the AL. Good for all of 0.6 WAR.
What exactly is the lesson here? The award should be about rewarding the season that was had, not what their rest of career prospects are like.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on May 29, 2024 16:44:09 GMT -5
If you look at the history of Rookie of the Year winners, it's mostly a bunch of guys who went on to have really good careers. Except every now and then it's a relief pitcher who no one ever thinks about anymore (Neftali Feliz, Huston Street, Kazuhiro Sasaki, Scott Williamson, and the ultimate rando, Andrew Bailey). Be that a lesson to the voters.
*By the way, what was up with that 2000 Sasaki ROY? He had a 3.16 ERA and 4.30 FIP as a reliever that season, which placed him 4th and 8th, respectively, among rookie relievers in the AL. Good for all of 0.6 WAR.
What exactly is the lesson here? The award should be about rewarding the season that was had, not what their rest of career prospects are like. The lesson is that it's just not that impressive to run some good numbers in 60 innings of relief pitching. Random guys do it every year. A position player or starting pitcher has accomplished something more impressive by having a strong rookie season - which is why ROY's in those categories tend to have more impressive careers going forward. (Also, like I pointed out, someone like Sasaki wasn't even the most impressive rookie reliever; the voters were obviously just impressed by how many 9th inning 1- to 3-run leads he managed to preserve.)
I will admit that Miller is having a more impressive season so far than any of the relievers who won it in the past. He basically landed in the majors as a fully-formed 2022 Edwin Diaz, and if he keeps it up all season that'll be pretty amazing. But if Abreu also keeps it up and has a 5 WAR season? I'd easily give it to Abreu.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on May 29, 2024 17:06:01 GMT -5
Mason Miller isn't just having a nice short sample size statistical run, he has approximately the nastiest stuff ever. I'm cool with him getting the flowers.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 29, 2024 17:26:16 GMT -5
What's got to be a killer for hitters is not just the devastating arsenal, but the fact that he can and does paint the black in on your hands at 102mph. The command of those pitches is the stuff of FO baseball dreams.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 29, 2024 20:32:39 GMT -5
What exactly is the lesson here? The award should be about rewarding the season that was had, not what their rest of career prospects are like. The lesson is that it's just not that impressive to run some good numbers in 60 innings of relief pitching. Random guys do it every year. A position player or starting pitcher has accomplished something more impressive by having a strong rookie season - which is why ROY's in those categories tend to have more impressive careers going forward. (Also, like I pointed out, someone like Sasaki wasn't even the most impressive rookie reliever; the voters were obviously just impressed by how many 9th inning 1- to 3-run leads he managed to preserve.)
I will admit that Miller is having a more impressive season so far than any of the relievers who won it in the past. He basically landed in the majors as a fully-formed 2022 Edwin Diaz, and if he keeps it up all season that'll be pretty amazing. But if Abreu also keeps it up and has a 5 WAR season? I'd easily give it to Abreu.
It's a comparative award in a single season based on a very specific pool of qualifiers. Sometimes you're going to have a good pool and sometimes you have a bad one. If you want to go in and try to make a point that in all of those years there was a more deserving "regular" then go for it but my guess is that in a lot of those years (but probably not all) there wasn't a lot to choose from. Like picking randomly, Williamson led NL rookies on BWAR. So did Bailey. I doubt any reliever ever beat out some shortstop hitting .300/.400/.500 or anything.
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on May 29, 2024 20:43:51 GMT -5
If you look at the history of Rookie of the Year winners, it's mostly a bunch of guys who went on to have really good careers. Except every now and then it's a relief pitcher who no one ever thinks about anymore (Neftali Feliz, Huston Street, Kazuhiro Sasaki, Scott Williamson, and the ultimate rando, Andrew Bailey). Be that a lesson to the voters.
*By the way, what was up with that 2000 Sasaki ROY? He had a 3.16 ERA and 4.30 FIP as a reliever that season, which placed him 4th and 8th, respectively, among rookie relievers in the AL. Good for all of 0.6 WAR.
Marty Cordova wasn’t a closer; he was a starting position player who proceeded to compile 2.9 fWAR total across the remaining eight years of his career. That’s really something, by the way - he got over 3200 PA and compiled 2.9 WAR with it - impressive in its own dumb way.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on May 29, 2024 22:45:18 GMT -5
The lesson is that it's just not that impressive to run some good numbers in 60 innings of relief pitching. Random guys do it every year. A position player or starting pitcher has accomplished something more impressive by having a strong rookie season - which is why ROY's in those categories tend to have more impressive careers going forward. (Also, like I pointed out, someone like Sasaki wasn't even the most impressive rookie reliever; the voters were obviously just impressed by how many 9th inning 1- to 3-run leads he managed to preserve.)
I will admit that Miller is having a more impressive season so far than any of the relievers who won it in the past. He basically landed in the majors as a fully-formed 2022 Edwin Diaz, and if he keeps it up all season that'll be pretty amazing. But if Abreu also keeps it up and has a 5 WAR season? I'd easily give it to Abreu.
It's a comparative award in a single season based on a very specific pool of qualifiers. Sometimes you're going to have a good pool and sometimes you have a bad one. If you want to go in and try to make a point that in all of those years there was a more deserving "regular" then go for it but my guess is that in a lot of those years (but probably not all) there wasn't a lot to choose from. Like picking randomly, Williamson led NL rookies on BWAR. So did Bailey. I doubt any reliever ever beat out some shortstop hitting .300/.400/.500 or anything. Fair enough. But the point was that if you look back at past ROYs, most of them went on to have good careers... and then there were several relievers.
On the one hand, maybe Miller's on a totally different level. He certainly has been so far; we'll see if he keeps it up all year. On the other hand, between Abreu, Cowser, Gil, even Schneider, this doesn't look like one of those weak rookie classes.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on May 29, 2024 22:49:09 GMT -5
The lesson is that it's just not that impressive to run some good numbers in 60 innings of relief pitching. Random guys do it every year. A position player or starting pitcher has accomplished something more impressive by having a strong rookie season - which is why ROY's in those categories tend to have more impressive careers going forward. (Also, like I pointed out, someone like Sasaki wasn't even the most impressive rookie reliever; the voters were obviously just impressed by how many 9th inning 1- to 3-run leads he managed to preserve.)
I will admit that Miller is having a more impressive season so far than any of the relievers who won it in the past. He basically landed in the majors as a fully-formed 2022 Edwin Diaz, and if he keeps it up all season that'll be pretty amazing. But if Abreu also keeps it up and has a 5 WAR season? I'd easily give it to Abreu.
It's a comparative award in a single season based on a very specific pool of qualifiers. Sometimes you're going to have a good pool and sometimes you have a bad one. If you want to go in and try to make a point that in all of those years there was a more deserving "regular" then go for it but my guess is that in a lot of those years (but probably not all) there wasn't a lot to choose from. Like picking randomly, Williamson led NL rookies on BWAR. So did Bailey. I doubt any reliever ever beat out some shortstop hitting .300/.400/.500 or anything. Mason Miller is having a dynamic season for a rookie closer. The last one that I recall being this dominant was Kimbrel (a ROY winner). This is a year where even Abreu, who has been very good is not having an overly dynamic season. This award is the one regular season award closers can and do regularly win now that writers no longer consider them for Cy Youngs or MVPs. If Mason Miller was performing this well a highly hyped position player came up and dominated, yeah he probably wouldn’t win it, but he is having such a dominant season that he could still win it many years.
|
|
|
Post by kevfc89 on May 29, 2024 23:05:39 GMT -5
It's a comparative award in a single season based on a very specific pool of qualifiers. Sometimes you're going to have a good pool and sometimes you have a bad one. If you want to go in and try to make a point that in all of those years there was a more deserving "regular" then go for it but my guess is that in a lot of those years (but probably not all) there wasn't a lot to choose from. Like picking randomly, Williamson led NL rookies on BWAR. So did Bailey. I doubt any reliever ever beat out some shortstop hitting .300/.400/.500 or anything. Fair enough. But the point was that if you look back at past ROYs, most of them went on to have good careers... and then there were several relievers.
On the one hand, maybe Miller's on a totally different level. He certainly has been so far; we'll see if he keeps it up all year. On the other hand, between Abreu, Cowser, Gil, even Schneider, this doesn't look like one of those weak rookie classes. Annoying how well Luis Gil is pitching, really the entire Yankees pitching staff. Somehow they haven't missed Cole at all. I'll check after it updates tomorrow, but Gil might have even surpassed Abreu in fWAR after another superb start tonight.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 30, 2024 6:41:04 GMT -5
It's a comparative award in a single season based on a very specific pool of qualifiers. Sometimes you're going to have a good pool and sometimes you have a bad one. If you want to go in and try to make a point that in all of those years there was a more deserving "regular" then go for it but my guess is that in a lot of those years (but probably not all) there wasn't a lot to choose from. Like picking randomly, Williamson led NL rookies on BWAR. So did Bailey. I doubt any reliever ever beat out some shortstop hitting .300/.400/.500 or anything. Fair enough. But the point was that if you look back at past ROYs, most of them went on to have good careers... and then there were several relievers. On the one hand, maybe Miller's on a totally different level. He certainly has been so far; we'll see if he keeps it up all year. On the other hand, between Abreu, Cowser, Gil, even Schneider, this doesn't look like one of those weak rookie classes. I'm not sure that point is even true though. I think you're underestimating how good guys like Street, Sasaki and Bailey were for a period, plus Kimbrel who is going to be a HOF candidate at worst. Then there's guys like Chris Coghlan, Geovany Soto, the aforementioned Cordova, Red Sox scout Bob Hamlin, etc. If anything, I am surprised by how GOOD so many of these guys wind up being.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on May 30, 2024 8:24:24 GMT -5
Mason Miller for Wilyer Abreu, straight up: Who hangs up?
I know it's an award for one season of performance but they both have essentially the same contract and amount of control. Just one way to look at it. You can argue that it's a bad analogy because of year-to-year differences in consistency between RPs vs position players and how WAR works for RPs vs position players but when you reach a certain level, those issues kind of go away for RPs.
Love Wilyer but I know my answer.
|
|
0ap0
Veteran
Posts: 486
Member is Online
|
Post by 0ap0 on May 30, 2024 8:30:50 GMT -5
Mason Miller is obviously filthy but at the end of the day he’s a closer for one of the leagues worst teams, he’s not nearly as valuable as Abreu has been People who would be doing something else will watch an As game to see Mason Miller. That's a hell of a valuable player.
|
|
|