|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 8, 2015 13:45:04 GMT -5
It is really amazing how bad guys like Heyman and Rosenthal are at understanding value in baseball without having it spoon fed to them by some assistant GM.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 7, 2015 21:45:41 GMT -5
Not sure where to put general offseason news, but this is pretty important - Tim Britton @timbritton 5m5 minutes ago Dombrowski said it looks like Vazquez should be ready for Opening Day. I'd do Swihart, Owens (or Buccholz and we eat some money) and Espinoza for Fernandez. |
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 6, 2015 22:02:39 GMT -5
Would have been fun to think about a few weeks ago. We'd have to leave our system barren to land a guy like that at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 6, 2015 21:46:16 GMT -5
It doesn't have zero value. But saying, "We're acquiring an ace, period. I want your thoughts on what's the better way to do it" does not mean that the analytics people were in favor of this move.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 6, 2015 21:34:31 GMT -5
■ Kennedy looked at the team’s revenues and financial health to determine whether it could afford the commitment. ■ Director of pitching analysis Brian Bannister examined the pitch mixes and deliveries of potentially available pitchers and compared them to pitchers who sustained dominance into their 30s in an effort to identify the available pitchers who represented the best age-defying bets. ■ Director of major league operations Zack Scott and the Sox’ analytics team led a study comparing the cost of trading for an ace (which required affixing a dollar figure to prospects and making performance projections) to signing one, delivering a memo to Dombrowski and Hazen toward the end of the World Series that Dombrowski then presented to the owners a couple of days later. ■ At a meeting of the top members of the baseball operations staff and the team’s pro scouts in Scottsdale, Ariz., in late October, Dombrowski sought the feedback of his evaluators about preferred offseason targets. In an unusually deep year for free agent pitchers, with options such as Johnny Cueto, Jordan Zimmermann, John Lackey, Jeff Samardzija, and Hisashi Iwakuma available, two names stood out: Price and Zack Greinke, who had the right to opt out of his six-year, $147 million deal with the Dodgers. Boy, it really took a lot of analysis to determine that David Price and Zack Greinke were the two best pitchers available in free agency. Come on, Alex. |
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 6, 2015 21:29:23 GMT -5
Right. Let's ask Wally the Green Monster next. You seem pretty unhappy about the signing of David Price. Why? What should they have done instead? My last few posts in this thread, including the one you quoted, have nothing to do with whether or not it's a good signing. On top of that my posts before that already answered the question you pose. I'm sorry it bothers you that I'm not waving my pom poms over this move or David Price's personality. |
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 6, 2015 10:31:43 GMT -5
Right. Let's ask Wally the Green Monster next.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 5, 2015 10:02:08 GMT -5
I dunno, I tend to favor the side that doesn't say things like, "Hispanic players are disrespecting the game with their 'flair' and should assimilate", but that's just me.
Not that that was necessarily Price's argument. He was just a hypocritical sore loser. Maybe he's learned from it, I guess we'll see. But it would be fun to compare the 2013 ALDS thread to this one.
Sorry, I don't mean to come off as so negative. I don't hate Price or think he's a bad human being. And his niece is adorable.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 5, 2015 9:32:32 GMT -5
No, I wouldn't. Price is an annoying baby and I don't feel different because he had a few prepared quips in a press conference. I disliked John Lackey before they signed him, when they signed him, and after everyone started to dislike him for his bad performance, just like they will with Price in a split second if/when he has a down year.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 2, 2015 7:16:40 GMT -5
I don't understand this. The Cardinals had him for 7/187? Wasn't it pretty much unanimous that Price was going to get 200m plus?
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 1, 2015 18:48:45 GMT -5
Can't wait for next offseason when we're debating how much we'd have to eat of the remaining 190m to dump him.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Dec 1, 2015 18:33:59 GMT -5
If you think they're not gonna re-sign him after the opt-out you must also be assuming we have a new GM by that point. And I'm of the mind that we may.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 25, 2015 22:16:31 GMT -5
Gammons did not say that. He quoted an anonymous NL GM who "speculated" that the Red Sox will do that. Not that Dombrowski overpaying, either in money or players, would be a shock to anyone at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 25, 2015 15:37:29 GMT -5
Well, not exactly, but you're right that Price is not unique (which is sort of the point).
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 25, 2015 15:23:16 GMT -5
I put the over under at 2 years before Price's contract is one of the top five worst in baseball.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 25, 2015 15:16:55 GMT -5
A GMs job is to weigh many things and build a team, in this case a Championship team. He needs to use the assets he had and fit the pieces of the puzzle together both longterm and short term. Assets need to be used in one way or another and the pieces need to fit together in real life. JIM YOU CAN TYPE IN ALL CAPS BUT WE STILL WONT AGREE. We feel bullpen pieces (I don't like the term closers anymore) are way undervalued by the flawed statistics you put all your stock into. Even your own people are starting to realize there is something to this but you still dismiss it as being insignificant or not there. "Well even if you adjust for 1.7 wins its still not close". Well maybe people needs to start to realize you can't tuck the full impact of a player into one number. Especially across positions. "But they have positional and park adjustments". Right because they are born from the laws of the universe. I know it's simpler and more convenient to add up numbers and get your answer for what's right and what's going to happen but it's not necessarily reality. I'm sold. Hell, I'm starting to think we should call AJ Preller back up and try to give him Devers or Espinoza too. I'm not sure we gave up enough. |
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 24, 2015 13:28:56 GMT -5
At this point the defenders of this trade have nothing left but the *sticks fingers in ears and goes lalalala* strategy.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 22, 2015 17:50:49 GMT -5
It's also convenient how you downgrade Owens but somehow put all this value on Margot and Guerra. If Owens were still eligible he'd rank ahead of both those guys easily. He was a top 25 prospect who barely lost his eligibility. He also answers more questions than he left unanswered last year. People should be feeling better about Owens now than at this point last year. The fact you'd value Margot and Guerra over him hints that you may always over-value prospects with the dream scenario attached to them. Owens was 47 on BA's Midseason list (20 spots behind Margot). Then he put up a 5.00 xFIP over 63 MLB innings. So, no. Your assessment of him and me is incorrect. And Guerra was replacing Shaw in my scenario. Care to make the case for Shaw there? |
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 22, 2015 17:38:24 GMT -5
Stewart's not even right (shocking). If you swap Margot for another filler piece that's a decent deal. Still be giving up 4 players.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 21, 2015 10:30:22 GMT -5
- if a trade is made for Fernandez, that doesn't necessarily mean he will be gutting the system either. Let's see what's given up first in that scenario. I proposed a trade of Vasquez, Owens, Shaw and Kopech and broke down why it may work. That still preserves the current MLB team and the big time future prospects, but makes some sense for the Marlins. So, a catcher coming off of Tommy John surgery who gets the vast majority of his value from defense and has no offensive track record, an unproven starter with middle of the rotation upside, a guy who might be a 4A player, and an A ball lottery ticket. That makes sense for the Marlins if their goal is to for the Red Sox to win a World Series. Now, if you said Swihart, Margot, Guerra and Kopech....oh, wait, nevermind. |
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 18, 2015 22:21:41 GMT -5
And I'm not looking forward to every trade causing people to pretend like Margot and Guerra had no value to any team other than the San Diego Padres.
By the way, I haven't seen any of the specifics you mention reported anywhere (Dombrowski talking to Cleveland, Cleveland wanting a "proven hitter". A link would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 18, 2015 21:44:51 GMT -5
I'm not trying to be obnoxious here, but it's now being reported by Morosi that the Indians are in talks with multiple teams about trading a starting pitcher. Dombrowksi looks like a fool and that trade looks worse by the day. Well, consider that the Red Sox have enough assets that they could absolutely still be in on that if they wanted. I'm going to wait until we know what the deal is before adding that to the stack. Of course, and that's still preferable to me than signing Price or Cueto, but what kind of shape would our system be in after such a trade? And again, two days ago there were several people on here defending the Kimbrel trade by claiming no good starting pitchers were available via trade, including specifically the Indians ("Why would they trade those guys?"). In fairness to them, our GM said as much, which is why I think he's going to look silly before this offseason is over. |
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 18, 2015 16:48:42 GMT -5
I'm not trying to be obnoxious here, but it's now being reported by Morosi that the Indians are in talks with multiple teams about trading a starting pitcher. Dombrowksi looks like a fool and that trade looks worse by the day.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 18, 2015 11:48:35 GMT -5
I guess theoretically it could be worse if Kimbrel wasn't such a great pitcher, but I still voted 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 17, 2015 17:51:18 GMT -5
The funny thing about that tweet is it doesn't actually refute what the other report said.
|
|
