A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Good point. I have to think he may have gotten about the same as now through arb.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, I'm saying to use any one stat as gospel, be it WHIP, ERA, or any/all leverage situations can be highly misleading. But comparing Bard to high/low leverage is telling.

    If you look at one area with a player, your perception is based on that one area. In the same fashion, I also feel it's short-sighted to see a pitcher's numbers w/o looking at the pitcher/catcher equation.
    In Bard's case, his numbers with/without Salty show a great disparity. As do his home/away numbers... But all are SSS.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    His career numbers are a larger sample size than this season. Both are too small to judge by, but all relievers go through tough spots.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    Good point. I have to think he may have gotten about the same as now through arb.
    Posted by moonslav59

    Of course David Ortiz was at an age when he could have been looking for one last multiyear contract, so he may have declined an offer of arbitration.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I think he was disappointed the Sox didn't give him a multi-year deal, but it's hard to know if he would take the chance someone else would offer more.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    And may I add that "high leverage" can be misleading. Bard has been used a lot with inherited runners and one time this year did he allow them to score. Mixed bag during a tough patch.

    Fellas, on another topic may I suggest that we are in need of some new material. Perhaps a few concessions might get us to move on:

    Harness, we all give in the RS would have been the greatest pitching staff perhaps of all time surrendering under 500 runs if only Tek had been able to and allowed to catch 162 games (oh except for when Wakefield pitches in which case anybody even Dustin Brown should catch him).

    Boom, never mind what I just said to Harness. If the RS kept VMart and let him play 162 games between catcher and DH they would have scored a 1000 runs this year and who cares about Adrian Gonzalez, David Ortiz or CERA.

    I am being engaging in a bit acerbic wit while trying to say you all should agree to disagree.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    I think he was disappointed the Sox didn't give him a multi-year deal, but it's hard to know if he would take the chance someone else would offer more.
    Posted by moonslav59
    Hard to say. His agent advised him to extend when playing out his contract could have been bigger bucks so I am not sure the advise he would have gotten wouldn't have been to accept the arbitration. It was at any rate a gae of chicken that I think Epstein wasn't in the mood to play with the other things he had on his plate.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I don't want to get into CERA because I think that subject has had plenty of coverage here and I've tried to be polite enough to not criticize it much but it's 90% horse manure. That's why I avoid the subject. I don't want to argue about things. I try to be polite. That's why I avoid the subject. Go to any other forum, and I do mean any, and you guys will hear catcall after catcall on the subject. It has been debunked over and over. That's the truth.

    It has some validity for sure, of course. Is it worth .5-1.5 runs almost ever. No. Unquestionably no.

    Lackey is even worse this year so I guess that means Salty has bad CERA! HEH EVERYBODY....SALTY HA BAD CERA! That is what it sounds like sometimes. With little in terms of hard data other than the catcher/pitcher combination didn't work out well during that specific time frame. Buchholz puts up around a 2.5 ERA for a year with the same guy but that is largely irrelevant. We are talking about coincidences here quite often. A pitcher has a bad year so the catcher gets blamed. The starting catcher ( often Victor ) plays against the toughest competition for years with Cleveland, facing harder lineups than the back up guys, and his numbers are affected. Is that difficlut to understand? Of course not. The starter plays against the tougher competition normally, of course. The starter usually gets rested against the slouch teams.
     
    It's 90% horse pucky and there is no question in my mind at least, that I would rather have Victor as the primary catcher on this team than Salty. Hello! Of course almost anyone would if they look at the data in a logical fashion. If that doesn't support someone's baseball world view that's not my problem.

    I want to be friendly but how often do I have to piddle around a subject and then get criticized for trying to be polite when it is bull pucky? Go to any other forum and try the same argument. It will be at least 70-80% catcalls.

    The top statisticians see some relevance. Scioscia seems some relevance. Is it always the catchers fault. Of course not. Is it a large, scientifically quantifiable data point. No it isn't. Even with large sample sizes. It is an over rated stat. A statistically unreliable sta.

    Theo wanted the 2 picks for Martinez, and he wants players in their prime. He did make an offer though even still. Ownership basically told Theo to bring Ortiz back, as he alluded to several times in the Ortiz press conference. That put the kibosh on Victor. They rolled the dice on Salty, as the upside was / is still huge. Is it working so far, probably not. Even after Salty's recent hot streak he's still hitting .224 with and OPS of .671. Martinez is hitting .298 or .74 higher folks. With an OPS of .841 or .170 higher. That is huge. CERA impact is not normally anywhere near that. Victor was, is, and shall be going forward for a long time IMO the better catching solution. Is Salty's defense worth that level of plus 20% offensive discrepancy? NWIH. We are talking about Salty of the recent YIPS problem. The guy let go for a song by a team which actually needed a catcher. He has the same -6 total zone rating at catcher that Victor has. And the trend lines on his hitting at the mlb level are negative.

    If Detroit didn't already have a top catcher, Victor would be their starter right now. If a lot of teams could have afforded him, they would also love to have Victor on their team.

    This decision, in hindsight, has been a no brainer. Consider the most recent fangraphs catcher ratings:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/index.php/catcher-rankings-updated-2/

    I don't want to argue about it but I'm not citing 11 game sample sizes here as if they are relevant. The salient data is pretty clear at least as of this momnet in time, and I see no reason why the trend lines are going to change anytime soon.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I've admitted that my call on Ortiz appears to have in hindsight been wrong. I saw a guy who couldn't get around on a 93 mph fastball just 2 years ago. Now he is superman again. That was a tough one to call for obvious reasons.
     
    I got it wrong though and I admit it. The ones I got right are:

    - Beltre is still a major player in this league, offensively and defensively
    - Ellsbury is having a career year so far
    - Lowrie was projected at minimum to be a solid mlb utility guy 3 years ago
    - Buchholz was projected to be a top of the rotation guy waiting to happen
    - Adrian was projected to start slow in terms of power but hit a ton of doubles and be a force in this lineup with improved numbers over his San Diego days
    - Martinez was projected to be one of the most valuable catchers in the league
    - Rizzo was projected to be a better prospect over all than Kelly and I even questioned the value of the Adrian trade given the minor league talent we had to give up when guys like Beltre were readily available to both improve our defense and cost a lot less, while still maintaining solid offensive performance over the term of his deal.
    - I could go on but I'm just talking about recent stuff here. I projected Matsuzaka as being better this year but was wrong on that one. I projected Reddick as being better 2 years ago but he is emerging now. I projected Bowden as being a decent relief pitcher at some point. I projected Iglesias as being our #1 prospect within a year and he ended up # 2 in that same time frame. Overall my recent projections here have been very much on target.
     
    Adrian is a near perfect fit now for this team. The offensive force we need going forward. I wanted him bad before we signed Beltre but now our defense is worse on the left side infield and we gave up a lot for the guy in cash and talent when other less expensive alternatives were available. The Adrian Gonzalez trade is probably a plus now, since Beltre is gone, but at the time Beltre was a viable option and worthy of consideration. I'm not sure this team wins more games with Gonzalez over Beltre over the next 4-5 years when we factor in all the impact from the lost cash, lost defense and the loss of some of our very best prospects. These sorts of deals look great until the Justin MAsterson type prospects start emerging as top players in this league. The jury is still out on that deal and will be for a long time. As great as Adrian Gonzalez is, and no one here rates him higher than I do, that deal could still be a negative for us long term as compared to the alternatives and other lost opportunities ( like maybe signing Fielder as our next DH ).
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    If Fielder signs with the Yanks after this year, what are we going to do then? Watch him hit 50 plus HR in Yankee stadium?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom beyond the two picks which is always a nice concellation prize, I believe there were other issues. The CERA was not as prominent in his mind as it is in others here IMHO. It did not do Boras a lot of good in swaying the RS in 2008 when it was all he had left to sell Tek with and I don't think it was THE determining factor in the RS setting a low valuation on VMart.

    Victor Martinez primary value was as a hitting catcher. Hitting deterorates much faster for guys who catch regularly. Much faster. Have him catch 100 plus games a year and by the time he is ready to be a DH there isn't much offense left. So the offers were limited in $$$ and years. In the short term (2011) the RS didn't need a DH.

    I don't buy that the RS weren't interested in VMart but I do think they saw a lot of risk to any contract that would have him doing a lot of catching and not a lot of interest in a $13M DH with an .800 OPS.

    In a should have - could have scenario when it comes to catcher position as unpopular as this is to say the RS should not have gone with Salty and a 39 year old back-up catcher, no matter how good his game calling skills and how well deserved his respect in and outside of the clubhouse is. Hopefully this tandem works out because it was a big gamble that it would work.

    Talk yourself on CERA until you are blue in the face it will only bring back more I think. I get lost when evidence is quoted like Lester ERA was under 2 with Tek as though that was sustainable over 32 starts. If numbers look like they defy reason IMO, it is unreasonable to quote them as fact. But some very well respected and interesting posters have adopted that position and your politeness is the best tact probably.  791 and some others with a real strong command of numbers have tried and the postion is entrenched.

    That said there were some very valid reasons beyond CERA for the RS to be conservative in what they'd do with Martinez, if some find validation in that so be it. But it was IMO the fact that offense declines very quickly in a catchers 30's and the appeal to VMart for the RS was that offense at that position.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    If Fielder signs with the Yanks after this year, what are we going to do then? Watch him hit 50 plus HR in Yankee stadium?
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom
    That and get into some real bad fist fights with Colon and Sabathia in the buffet line. Wink
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom time will tell but I am totally convinced over 4 years that Gonzalez will be a far more productive player than Beltre. Age is on his side and a much better swing is on A-Gon's side too.

    While Beltre's glamor numbers (HR and RBI) are quite good his BA is down, he still doesn't walk a lot and his OPS is at his career average which is way south of A-Gon's. Also it notable that 8 of Beltre's HRs are in Texas which is a launching pad compared to Boston. I always felt if the A-Rod-Manny deal went through Manny would have hit 50 HRs a year there for 3 years.

    IMO the older Beltre gets he won't stop swinging from 1 knee, he'll just stop getting the ball squared up. Watching the two guys hit there is no comparison at least IMO.

    But keeping our 2 guys and getting healthy plus not gambling on a 38 year old Mike Cameron being an every day CF would have put together a pretty good team together. No argument there IMO.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Of course, Boom. You are too polite to get into a CERA discussion. Then you call it 90% horse manure and devote the rest of that long thread to it.
    You never took the time to contribute to a thread dedicated to it. You never bothered to even read it. Yet you think seeing one side of it is all there is.

    Whatever you say.

    791 ran from that thread just before his criteria was about to be exposed. Any time I call him out on it - on his promise to show his alternative mode of measurement, he runs.

    Let's just say it's all pure coincidence: year after year after year.
    And let's just say the Redsox passed on a .300 hitting catcher with power in favor of Salty - and then go and spend 140 mil on CC. Why, because catchers have nothing to do with pitching. Right? They are so dumb. They have nothing to show for their tenure owning this club. What fools they be!

    And I'm sure their insulting mock two-year offer to VMART made during 2010 was done because they didn't like his arrogant manor or his dogging it all the time.Undecided

    And let's just say the Tigers enjoy seeing a .300 hitter occupying the DH spot, or perhaps it's his brilliant play at first base. Who wants a stud hitter catching, freeing up other positions.

    Why would any GM want him? After all, there's such an abundance of good-hitting ones out there.

    And Scioscia musta been on cocaine to use Mathis so much behind the plate. Maybe he saw his career.199 BA upside down!

    Why, this all makes so much sense...
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II



    I'll say this Boom.  You sure have balls.

    Expect the war of the worlds about your CERA comments.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    If Detroit didn't already have a top catcher, Victor would be their starter right now.

    I have to disagree on this one, Baltimore wanted him for a DH/1B/C role.  Cleveland didn't see him as a 140 game starter.  I think if teams saw him as a full-time catcher he would have been paid more by someone. 

    Hopefully this tandem works out because it was a big gamble that it would work.

    I would describe the tandem as a low risk/cost move, and if change is needed a slightly below average replacement would not be expensive.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    How about those posters who chirped for Adam Dunn the past two seasons - seems the wrong Sox to acquire him were the right Sox to acquire him.

    Batting .186 and on his way to a 203 strike-out season.  If this keeps up he will end up with 16 homers on the season!

    Wow and wooooh (sigh of relief).
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boomer, you said 'If Detroit didn't already have a top catcher, Victor would be their starter right now.'

    That's the stumbling block of your argument right there.  Detroit did already have a top catcher when they acquired Victor.  The team that acquired him didn't have a need for a #1 catcher.  They projected him as a DH who could catch about 20% of the time.  




     
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I'm surprised at how badly Dunn is doing for the White Sox.  Maybe it's the change of leagues, maybe it's the change to DH.  Some guys really seem to struggle with being a DH.  Posada has made it obvious how much he hates it and his numbers at DH are also terrible.

    Some guys are just cut out for it.  Like Victor. :)
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I was one who liked Dunn, but I didn't think he'd get that much. The deal he signed 2 years ago was a steal.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I would guess he should rebound (might be next year however).  I have not looked at their outfield but maybe he can log some time out there...  I know if I were fortunate enough to play in the MLB I would want to be in the field too.

    It was either Dunn or Ortiz here and frankly I'd rather have Ortiz (as he has been amazing this season and he has brought us much reward over the years).
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    I would guess he should rebound (might be next year however).  I have not looked at their outfield but maybe he can log some time out there...  I know if I were fortunate enough to play in the MLB I would want to be in the field too. It was either Dunn or Ortiz here and frankly I'd rather have Ortiz (as he has been amazing this season and he has brought us much reward over the years).
    Posted by BurritoT
    While it sounds easy enough, history has shown that being a DH is not an easy task for many players.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    If Detroit didn't already have a top catcher, Victor would be their starter right now. I have to disagree on this one, Baltimore wanted him for a DH/1B/C role.  Cleveland didn't see him as a 140 game starter.  I think if teams saw him as a full-time catcher he would have been paid more by someone.  Hopefully this tandem works out because it was a big gamble that it would work. I would describe the tandem as a low risk/cost move, and if change is needed a slightly below average replacement would not be expensive.
    Posted by tom-uk
    Where I disagree is the idea that a slightly below average replacement will be easy to find. It isn't that salary, it is the supply during the course of a season that would turn out to be problematic. Now if you happen to think that a guy like Kevin Cash is only slightly below average, a few of those hit the waiver wire every year and could be had off of somebody elses AAA roster for a price, a price in propsects that would be greater than the players true value.

    The other thing that gets batted around a lot is the idea that great hitting catchers would get paid more for their hitting than they would at another position due to suplly and demand. And on the surface, knowing the laws of supply and demand that makes sense. But historically catchers are paid the same or less in annual $$$ and tend to get shorter years in their contracts. Contracts that deviate are few and far between. This is because of rapid decline and extreme risk of injury. Just this season we have the two most promising young catchers in the game on the DL (Possey and Mauer), Cleveland's Santana spent much of last season on the DL so the temptation to move these guys to other positions will always be there and as long as they do catch, contract offers will be tempered by the position they play.

    Now I won't argue that without his bat VMart is not a catcher whose other skills would attract great interest or a high salary. It was his bat. So if you are going to sign that catcher at 32 you will want to move him because you are paying for the bat.

    It doesn't validate CERA and certainly not in the way it is applied as an absolute measurement IMO. I could be all wet and CERA as Harness presents it exists but there are other solid reasons that VMart's off season went down as it did. And it is very, very possible 791 disappeared from last year's epic thread because there was no longer anything to be gained in further discussion as the positions are pretty entrenched.


     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    My point was clear. Victor was a much better catching solution than Salty. He is this year, probably will be next year and beyond. He's 32 years old and a lot better hitter. Any amount of CERA impact is not going to warrant going with Salty this year. The Salty move was a low cost gamble, thinking we had enough hitting to compensate for whatever he was able to give us in terms of offense. That may well prove to be true and he may have enough upside to warrant the risk. At the same time, he has a career BA of .271 IN THE MINORS, and a career BA of .245 in MLB, and he is trending DOWNWARD.

    I support bringing Salty in but he would be in AAA ball, trying to improve upon last year's .248 average in AAA ball in 274 AB. We have prospects in the farm already capable of doing better than that.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    Boomer, you said 'If Detroit didn't already have a top catcher, Victor would be their starter right now.' That's the stumbling block of your argument right there.  Detroit did already have a top catcher when they acquired Victor.  The team that acquired him didn't have a need for a #1 catcher.  They projected him as a DH who could catch about 20% of the time.    
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut


    And he was worth that much to them as primarily a DH. What would be be worth if they didn't already have a primary catcher?

    Victor was a bargain. We should have kept him. If Crawford was worth twice as much, per year, I would have kept Victor instead.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share