Peraza [Archive] - Chop Country

Tapate50

08-23-2016, 08:18 AM

Hard to believe we gave up the two most talented players in this deal, and got absolutely zero in return except the ability to pay Matt Kemps depleted salary for three years.

Is this the worst deal of last year, by any team? Including the Dbacks trade of Swanson and Inciarte?

I was pretty convinced that Peraza was not the player we all thought he was when dealt, but hes having a decent time of it. Nothing crazy, but a serviceable player in spots.

mfree80

08-23-2016, 08:22 AM

Chico

08-23-2016, 08:29 AM

dak

08-23-2016, 08:31 AM

Glad to see him doing fairly well. Have been able to watch him play for the Reds a few times this year and saw him hit the home run over the weekend. The biggest surprise to me is that he doesn't look that great defensively with the eye test. He's a very fast man and by no means a disaster defensively, but just doesn't seem that fluid. I personally still see him as a utility type . . . perhaps a pretty good one.

yeezus

08-23-2016, 08:32 AM

Peraza has a negative WAR so far this year and wasn't exactly good in the minors. The trade obviously wasn't good and we could've gotten more, but Peraza isn't good.

Tapate50

08-23-2016, 08:34 AM

I defended the trade, because I wasn't big on Peraza or Wood. I'm still not. I also thought it was a cheap way to get RH power. But, Yes this is the worse deal of the Hart/Coppy tenure.

We did get Joey Wentz and Paco Rodriguez out of it, but we could've gotten more for those two looking back.

That was my position as well. I liked Bird's potential also, but I don't think we could have done worse if we picked names out of a hat.

nsacpi

08-23-2016, 08:35 AM

Horsehide Harry

08-23-2016, 08:37 AM

yeezus

08-23-2016, 08:38 AM

thewupk

08-23-2016, 08:41 AM

Southcack77

08-23-2016, 09:01 AM

Peraza had a phenomenal age 20 season split between high A and AA. His age 21 season was disappointing by comparison. He is now hitting .301/.333/.379 in his age 22 season.

If we consider how young he has been for various levels, we would have more of an appreciation for his upside potential.

Of course, we also have Albies (currently in his age 19 season) who has somewhat overshadowed Peraza. It would have really been great if we had kept both of them.

His numbers reflect what the minors numbers showed. Doesn't walk at all. doesn't hit for power. Has 4 xbh in majors. High BABIP contact hitter perhaps sustainable because of speed but the book isn't written.

Albies seems to be a better version and they thought they were getting good value for a guy they didn't love.

Turns out they got a draft pick and whatever contribution Rodriguez ends up making. Maybe bird can be a reliever. Don't know.

50PoundHead

08-23-2016, 09:12 AM

Holy small sample size Batman.

gilesfan

08-23-2016, 09:16 AM

Peraza is a good utility player or possible starting SS/2B assuming defense is adequate. Terrible trade, but Peraza isn't a huge loss unless he can play great defense and end up as an Andrus type.

nsacpi

08-23-2016, 09:29 AM

His numbers reflect what the minors numbers showed. Doesn't walk at all. doesn't hit for power. Has 4 xbh in majors. High BABIP contact hitter perhaps sustainable because of speed but the book isn't written.

Albies seems to be a better version and they thought they were getting good value for a guy they didn't love.

Turns out they got a draft pick and whatever contribution Rodriguez ends up making. Maybe bird can be a reliever. Don't know.

Yeah. Albies walks more and has more power. Along with a favorable age differential that makes him a better prospect than Peraza.

I think Peraza's high BABIP will compensate for the lack of walks to some extent. If you are a low strikeout hitter, the effect of a high BABIP gets amplified. Plus his age means that he has some room for growth. He could get a little better at lots of things (defense, walks, etc) or might get a lot better at one thing. That's the upside.

yeezus

08-23-2016, 09:32 AM

Peraza is at best a utility guy and Wood is a RP, IMO. As I said, definitely could've received more for the two at the time, but at least neither of these guys look like studs.

yeezus

08-23-2016, 09:37 AM

Before Peraza was traded, I was wondering why he was consistently ranked way higher than Jose Ramirez (who wasn't ranked really anywhere). They had similar numbers (Ramirez even better sometimes). I suppose the almost two years of age made the big difference, but Ramirez was up and played well overall in 2014. His ISO had been pretty consistently better, so I don't think Peraza has that potential pop that Ramirez has shown this year.

thewupk

08-23-2016, 09:51 AM

Peraza is at best a utility guy and Wood is a RP, IMO. As I said, definitely could've received more for the two at the time, but at least neither of these guys look like studs.

That trade just compounds upon itself on how bad it is. We gave up Peraza and Wood at the height of their value for the chance to pay Kemp 3/54. It was a horrible trade that hasn't gotten any better. We should have gotten a useful piece for trading what we did.

Preacher

08-23-2016, 09:53 AM

That trade just compounds upon itself on how bad it is. We gave up Peraza and Wood at the height of their value for the chance to pay Kemp 3/54. It was a horrible trade that hasn't gotten any better. We should have gotten a useful piece for trading what we did.

Is Joey Wentz not a useful piece? Not trying to defend the trade, but Wentz could end up being the best player moved in that deal.

nsacpi

08-23-2016, 09:55 AM

Is Joey Wentz not a useful piece? Not trying to defend the trade, but Wentz could end up being the best player moved in that deal.

I've always thought that when a trade involves a draft pick, that the best way to evaluate that part is the expected value of the pick not the best or worst case scenario.

thewupk

08-23-2016, 10:00 AM

Is Joey Wentz not a useful piece? Not trying to defend the trade, but Wentz could end up being the best player moved in that deal.

Wentz wasn't traded for. He was simply drafted with that pick that we picked up. That's like complaining about the Kotchman/Tex trade because the pick the Angels got for Tex was used for Trout. Fact is the Braves wasted the vale of a 20ish prospect and a good controllable lefty starter and got nothing significant in return. They gambled on HO and got burned horribly.

yeezus

08-23-2016, 10:04 AM

Wentz wasn't traded for. He was simply drafted with that pick that we picked up. That's like complaining about the Kotchman/Tex trade because the pick the Angels got for Tex was used for Trout. Fact is the Braves wasted the vale of a 20ish prospect and a good controllable lefty starter and got nothing significant in return. They gambled on HO and got burned horribly.

Meh, not exactly. We explicitly traded for the Wentz pick; LAA just got the pick when Tex walked. The Trout pick didn't get taken away from Atlanta the way the Wentz pick was taken from the Dodgers. I'd say they're pretty different.

thewupk

08-23-2016, 10:13 AM

Meh, not exactly. We explicitly traded for the Wentz pick; LAA just got the pick when Tex walked. The Trout pick didn't get taken away from Atlanta the way the Wentz pick was taken from the Dodgers. I'd say they're pretty different.

I would say the draft pick did get taken away from the Braves. Because they knew there was going to be one attached to Tex going somewhere else in FA.

Preacher

08-23-2016, 10:15 AM

I've always thought that when a trade involves a draft pick, that the best way to evaluate that part is the expected value of the pick not the best or worst case scenario.

Why not actually look at who we acquired, we traded for a pick that became Joey Wentz.

We don't look back and evaluate the trade based on Hector Olivera's expected value, we evaluate it based on the fact that he was even worse than imagined and had off-field issues.

Preacher

08-23-2016, 10:17 AM

Wentz wasn't traded for. He was simply drafted with that pick that we picked up. That's like complaining about the Kotchman/Tex trade because the pick the Angels got for Tex was used for Trout. Fact is the Braves wasted the vale of a 20ish prospect and a good controllable lefty starter and got nothing significant in return. They gambled on HO and got burned horribly.

Nobody is arguing that it was a good deal.

You said "We should have gotten a useful piece for trading what we did."

I'd simply argue that Joey Wentz is a pretty damn useful piece. If you want to argue that we only acquired the pick and not Joey Wentz..... fine..... but you're really getting into semantics there.

weso1

08-23-2016, 10:20 AM

Not a good trade. But certainly not anywhere near the Swanson deal.

It's like Coppy got blind drunk and fell in love with an old road whore at the bar and all his friends watched him get pulled upstairs. Even though she was relatively cheap and it turned out that there was no long term effects of the gift that kept on giving, it's not something you want to discuss ever again.

Yeah, you could argue it's the 2nd worst trade in the past couple of years, but it's still light years behind the crap sandwich of a trade the Dbacks made. Hell, I think Inciarte might put up more WAR in his career by himself than the entire group of players we sent to the Dodgers.

Chico

08-23-2016, 10:21 AM

The pick is how the trade got started...or re-started. That's what Coppy wanted more than anything and where he went wrong. I think the Dodgers realized how much he wanted the pick.

thewupk

08-23-2016, 10:23 AM

Nobody is arguing that it was a good deal.

You said "We should have gotten a useful piece for trading what we did."

I'd simply argue that Joey Wentz is a pretty damn useful piece. If you want to argue that we only acquired the pick and not Joey Wentz..... fine..... but you're really getting into semantics there.

And I would say let's wait before a handful of starts to claim Joey Wentz is a damn useful piece. The Braves are currently rebuilding. Wood and Peraza should of been traded for someone a year or two out that could have fit a position of need. Even if HO worked out he was a win now move.

nsacpi

08-23-2016, 10:23 AM

Why not actually look at who we acquired, we traded for a pick that became Joey Wentz.

We don't look back and evaluate the trade based on Hector Olivera's expected value, we evaluate it based on the fact that he was even worse than imagined and had off-field issues.

Fair enough. Lets see how Wentz turns out.

bravesfanMatt

08-23-2016, 10:35 AM

And I would say let's wait before a handful of starts to claim Joey Wentz is a damn useful piece. The Braves are currently rebuilding. Wood and Peraza should of been traded for someone a year or two out that could have fit a position of need. Even if HO worked out he was a win now move.

this is my take as well. Many people evaluate that trade as Wood and Jose had more value at the time of the trade but HO BECAME a dumpster fire and then Kemp compounded. However, we need to keep apples to apples.. we can't say judge the trade on what Jose and Alex at time of trade and not the same for HO. HO was valuable.. he hit well in the minors (SSS) with Dodgers, Paco didn't need TJS and we got a pick.

But to your point.. the HO target was a bad move. the blurry line between competing and rebuilding is sometimes a head scratcher.

Preacher

08-23-2016, 10:39 AM

And I would say let's wait before a handful of starts to claim Joey Wentz is a damn useful piece. The Braves are currently rebuilding. Wood and Peraza should of been traded for someone a year or two out that could have fit a position of need. Even if HO worked out he was a win now move.

You don't have to wait a handful of starts to call Joey Wentz a useful piece.

He's obviously not useful to the MLB club right now, but he's clearly a useful piece in the bigger picture, we could trade him right now for something if we really wanted to. A lot of his value is obviously tied into his upside and if he's able to reach that upside, but he's clearly a useful piece that was acquired in that trade. To deny that is just being stubborn.

thewupk

08-23-2016, 10:48 AM

You don't have to wait a handful of starts to call Joey Wentz a useful piece.

He's obviously not useful to the MLB club right now, but he's clearly a useful piece in the bigger picture, we could trade him right now for something if we really wanted to. A lot of his value is obviously tied into his upside and if he's able to reach that upside, but he's clearly a useful piece that was acquired in that trade. To deny that is just being stubborn.

He has value just as anybody else we would have acquired at that spot. But at this point it's still a lottery ticket.

Chico

08-23-2016, 11:23 AM

You don't have to wait a handful of starts to call Joey Wentz a useful piece.

He's obviously not useful to the MLB club right now, but he's clearly a useful piece in the bigger picture, we could trade him right now for something if we really wanted to. A lot of his value is obviously tied into his upside and if he's able to reach that upside, but he's clearly a useful piece that was acquired in that trade. To deny that is just being stubborn.

Yes, he definitely has value right now. There would be 29 teams interested in acquiring him this winter if we decided to put him on the block.

gilesfan

08-23-2016, 11:35 AM

this is my take as well. Many people evaluate that trade as Wood and Jose had more value at the time of the trade but HO BECAME a dumpster fire and then Kemp compounded. However, we need to keep apples to apples.. we can't say judge the trade on what Jose and Alex at time of trade and not the same for HO. HO was valuable.. he hit well in the minors (SSS) with Dodgers, Paco didn't need TJS and we got a pick.

But to your point.. the HO target was a bad move. the blurry line between competing and rebuilding is sometimes a head scratcher.

Anyone with half a brain that wasn't a braves blind homer on this board knew the addition of HO was a bad one. Go read the thread, it's not like it is a shock that HO didn't work out. He wasn't even hitting all that well in the minors as a 30 year old that was supposed to be ready.

bravesfanMatt

08-23-2016, 11:48 AM

Anyone with half a brain that wasn't a braves blind homer on this board knew the addition of HO was a bad one. Go read the thread, it's not like it is a shock that HO didn't work out. He wasn't even hitting all that well in the minors as a 30 year old that was supposed to be ready.

which is exactly what I said. But many have judged this trade on what has happened since, but only for HO. Wood and Jose always goes back to the same argument 'There value at the time of the trade'... You can't say that and not look at HO value (regardless of how he fit for the Braves) at the time of the trade. I didn't like the trade because he didn't fit our time frame.. but at the time of the trade, he had value as well.

Also, you can do the research, but HO was hitting over .300 and OPSing over .800 in the Dodgers minor league system. in AAA Okl. he had a .968 OPS (only 31 abs) and a .855 in AA..

Russ2dollas

08-23-2016, 11:50 AM

Anyone with half a brain that wasn't a braves blind homer on this board knew the addition of HO was a bad one. Go read the thread, it's not like it is a shock that HO didn't work out. He wasn't even hitting all that well in the minors as a 30 year old that was supposed to be ready.

agree 100%.

The only thing I'd add is that the Braves have had super awful luck and/or super awful evaluation on some big moves lately. Lots of teams spend too much on free agents and have them disappoint late or even disappoint early. I'm talking about a situation like D Lowe where he was good for 2/4 years. But we've just had a string of guys that were AWFUL from day 1.
KK
Uggla-had some moments
BJ
Olivera
Aybar

gilesfan

08-23-2016, 12:14 PM

which is exactly what I said. But many have judged this trade on what has happened since, but only for HO. Wood and Jose always goes back to the same argument 'There value at the time of the trade'... You can't say that and not look at HO value (regardless of how he fit for the Braves) at the time of the trade. I didn't like the trade because he didn't fit our time frame.. but at the time of the trade, he had value as well.

Also, you can do the research, but HO was hitting over .300 and OPSing over .800 in the Dodgers minor league system. in AAA Okl. he had a .968 OPS (only 31 abs) and a .855 in AA..

Thats not really impressive for a 30 year old in an extreme hitting environment. How should a decent 30 year old hit in a hitter friendly AA?

I was talking about the value of Wood/Peraza at the time.

yeezus

08-23-2016, 12:15 PM

Thats not really impressive for a 30 year old in an extreme hitting environment. How should a decent 30 year old hit in a hitter friendly AA?

HO also wasn't your typical 30 year old minor leaguer.

thewupk

08-23-2016, 12:16 PM

agree 100%.

The only thing I'd add is that the Braves have had super awful luck and/or super awful evaluation on some big moves lately. Lots of teams spend too much on free agents and have them disappoint late or even disappoint early. I'm talking about a situation like D Lowe where he was good for 2/4 years. But we've just had a string of guys that were AWFUL from day 1.
KK
Uggla-had some moments
BJ
Olivera
Aybar

You can argue Uggla was good for the trade portion of that deal. But his years of the extension were horrible.

Southcack77

08-23-2016, 05:56 PM

I've always thought that when a trade involves a draft pick, that the best way to evaluate that part is the expected value of the pick not the best or worst case scenario.

In this situation, it seems not quite accurate to count the expected value since the Braves strategy was to acquire bonus money to exceed the expected value of their picks. It'll be pretty hard to calculate exactly how much value the pick carried since it is more than just Wentz, it is probably to some degree Muller as well. Or the other million dollar bonus kid down the line.

I don't quite understand why the drum needs to be banged so often. The Braves missed on Oliveira. They said they got it wrong and wish they had it back.

What more do you want from them other than to reverse time?

I'm sure if you told the Braves that Oliveira would end up being suspended for domestic violence, apparently be a bad clubhouse guy, and not hit, they'd have made a different trade, but I personally don't think you can be right every time and I don't really mind that they traded Peraza or Wood.

Southcack77

08-23-2016, 05:59 PM

Yeah, you could argue it's the 2nd worst trade in the past couple of years, but it's still light years behind the crap sandwich of a trade the Dbacks made. Hell, I think Inciarte might put up more WAR in his career by himself than the entire group of players we sent to the Dodgers.

I'm not sure many people outside of Atlanta think about his trade much, because I'm not sure anyone else particularly felt that Wood or Peraza were all that good. The Dodgers got little enough out of it.

Southcack77

08-23-2016, 06:03 PM

which is exactly what I said. But many have judged this trade on what has happened since, but only for HO. Wood and Jose always goes back to the same argument 'There value at the time of the trade'... You can't say that and not look at HO value (regardless of how he fit for the Braves) at the time of the trade. I didn't like the trade because he didn't fit our time frame.. but at the time of the trade, he had value as well.

Also, you can do the research, but HO was hitting over .300 and OPSing over .800 in the Dodgers minor league system. in AAA Okl. he had a .968 OPS (only 31 abs) and a .855 in AA..

this is also a valid point.

The performance of Oliveira is almost entirely what people evaluate, while substring to some perceived value that Wood and Peraza had at that moment in time. They don't want to talk about what the trades players did out of a Braves uniform and suggest that it doesn't really matter.

So hindsight on one side of the equation with a completely unverifiable perceived value at a moment in time on the other side.

I think the reality of this trade is that it didn't much work out for either team particularly well.

UNCBlue012

08-23-2016, 06:29 PM

It doesn't look good for Wood right now, but I was pretty pissed at the time. I was a big Alex Wood fan and thought he was an absolute bulldog. I guess it all depends on Kemp now? ;)

cajunrevenge

08-23-2016, 06:51 PM

I am still pissed because we traded for Olivera as if he was a proven player. You don't trade multiple mlb pieces for one prospect.

bravesfanMatt

08-23-2016, 07:07 PM

I am still pissed because we traded for Olivera as if he was a proven player. You don't trade multiple mlb pieces for one prospect.

We didn't. We got bird. Pick and paco. But I see your point.

Carp

08-23-2016, 07:11 PM

smootness

08-23-2016, 07:28 PM

Is this the worst deal of last year, by any team? Including the Dbacks trade of Swanson and Inciarte?

Uh....no?

Carp

08-24-2016, 09:50 AM

I would say the draft pick did get taken away from the Braves. Because they knew there was going to be one attached to Tex going somewhere else in FA.

But the Angels didn't specifically trade for the draft pick as they attempted to resign Tex. But the Braves did specifically trade for the draft pick as it was part of the deal, and apparently it was a pretty important piece of the trade for them.

thewupk

08-24-2016, 09:56 AM

But the Angels didn't specifically trade for the draft pick as they attempted to resign Tex. But the Braves did specifically trade for the draft pick as it was part of the deal, and apparently it was a pretty important piece of the trade for them.

Braves attempted to resign Tex as well. But that was part of the consolation when trading for soon to be FA's then. You knew you had that added draft pick and that was always part of the value when getting such a player. And yes I'm sure the draft pick in this trade was important to them. But at this point I think it's trying to put a positive spin on the deal. They had a hard on for HO and it proved to be a disaster.

zitothebrave

08-24-2016, 10:08 AM

Hindsight can be a real pain sometimes. Certainly not how it was intended to turn out.

Many here expressed concerns at the trade of even Wood for Olivera given his age and lack of experience. COppy made the trade much worse by trading Olivera for Kemp. That was moronic.

zitothebrave

08-24-2016, 10:09 AM

Coppy didn't make that trade. Hart did.

And I think Hart stepping down for Coppy largely happened because of that terrible trade.

thewupk

08-24-2016, 10:18 AM

And I think Hart stepping down for Coppy largely happened because of that terrible trade.

I think Hart was named GM to be the bad guy while cleaning house. Coppy was involved in all of the trades since Wren was fired though.

yeezus

08-24-2016, 10:50 AM

Many here expressed concerns at the trade of even Wood for Olivera given his age and lack of experience. COppy made the trade much worse by trading Olivera for Kemp. That was moronic.

So you are more intelligent than the FO correct?

Chico

08-24-2016, 10:51 AM

I think Hart was named GM to be the bad guy while cleaning house. Coppy was involved in all of the trades since Wren was fired though.

Exactly. Hart was there to take the bullets, but Coppy orchestrated many of the moves.

thewupk

08-24-2016, 10:56 AM

So you are more intelligent than the FO correct?

It wasn't hard to see this move as being a bad one. At the time fans were wondering when the Braves would finally move pitching for offense. It gets announced that Wood (a good, young, and controllable starter) is getting traded. Fans are excited that's its finally happening that we are moving pitching for hitting. And then we get HO who is an unproven 30 year old cuban with his best baseball days behind him. That's is not what should have happened and had plenty of skepticism behind it. The FO has done a lot of really good moves the last year and a half of so. This was not one of them and it was clear to see.

smootness

08-24-2016, 12:02 PM

Bringing in Olivera was a disaster. Letting go of Peraza and Wood wasn't.

It wasn't a good trade, but it also wasn't awful overall. We could have tried to get more for Peraza and Wood, but it's looking more and more like LA didn't really get much in the deal, either.

Wentz could eventually even make the deal a win for us in the end.

yeezus

08-24-2016, 12:13 PM

It wasn't hard to see this move as being a bad one. At the time fans were wondering when the Braves would finally move pitching for offense. It gets announced that Wood (a good, young, and controllable starter) is getting traded. Fans are excited that's its finally happening that we are moving pitching for hitting. And then we get HO who is an unproven 30 year old cuban with his best baseball days behind him. That's is not what should have happened and had plenty of skepticism behind it. The FO has done a lot of really good moves the last year and a half of so. This was not one of them and it was clear to see.

I'm saying the Olivera for Kemp part. I don't think it was "moronic."

thewupk

08-24-2016, 12:29 PM

I'm saying the Olivera for Kemp part. I don't think it was "moronic."

By itself I don't think it is as it's a decent gamble to boost the offense and likely better than anything in FA given what it took to get Kemp. The overall chain of events is not good though.

yeezus

08-24-2016, 12:35 PM

By itself I don't think it is as it's a decent gamble to boost the offense and likely better than anything in FA given what it took to get Kemp. The overall chain of events is not good though.

Well, sure, that's pretty objectively true.

Carp

08-24-2016, 01:23 PM

Braves attempted to resign Tex as well. But that was part of the consolation when trading for soon to be FA's then. You knew you had that added draft pick and that was always part of the value when getting such a player. And yes I'm sure the draft pick in this trade was important to them. But at this point I think it's trying to put a positive spin on the deal. They had a hard on for HO and it proved to be a disaster.

I don't recall the Braves ever making an offer to Tex. The draft pick was of little relevance to a team like the Angels. At the time, they would much rather have resigned Tex.

You comparison is deeply flawed. Ever since the rebuild began, the Braves have placed a high value on compiling draft picks. Their value of this draft pick should not be ignored.

thewupk

08-24-2016, 01:28 PM

I don't recall the Braves ever making an offer to Tex. The draft pick was of little relevance to a team like the Angels. At the time, they would much rather have resigned Tex.

You comparison is deeply flawed. Ever since the rebuild began, the Braves have placed a high value on compiling draft picks. Their value of this draft pick should not be ignored.

I don't know if they made an offer but they wanted to keep him. It was just obvious he was out of their price range. I'm not saying to ignore the pick but it was hardly what they went into this deal for. They wanted a middle of the order bat with minimal cost. They got a woman beater.

Carp

08-24-2016, 01:54 PM

I don't know if they made an offer but they wanted to keep him. It was just obvious he was out of their price range. I'm not saying to ignore the pick but it was hardly what they went into this deal for. They wanted a middle of the order bat with minimal cost. They got a woman beater.

Olivera was the heart of the deal, I would agree. But I also think the deal is scrapped if the draft pick isn't included. Draft picks are often undervalued by fans in baseball because the player doesn't make an immediate impact (if any at all) at the major league level. But I wold say that most 1st round picks are almost immediately among a team's top 10 prospects.

thewupk

08-24-2016, 01:58 PM

Olivera was the heart of the deal, I would agree. But I also think the deal is scrapped if the draft pick isn't included. Draft picks are often undervalued by fans in baseball because the player doesn't make an immediate impact (if any at all) at the major league level. But I wold say that most 1st round picks are almost immediately among a team's top 10 prospects.

I don't think it would be scrapped. I just think Peraza and the minor leaguers from LA get removed from the deal.

TheBravos

08-24-2016, 02:30 PM

I wasn't big on Peraza either BUT he was our #1 prospect. I liked Wood, and I understand their concerns with him BUT he was still a well regarded young pitcher at the time. Throw in the solid relievers and it was a package that could have gotten us one heck of a hitter. NOW, given how none of the players have done well, we can sqeek by and say with the draft pick it wasn't that bad of a deal....we GOT LUCKY. If Wood stayed healthy and Peraza suddenly clicked... this would have been in the Teixeira trade realm. They have done a good job of making lemonade, but come on...we could have gotten an established hitter for that package. Instead they took a huge gamble on a guy that was unproven to save money. Of all the trades, my jaw hit the ground when I found out what we had given up. I told myself that surely they know from inside knowledge that this guy is going to be a unreal hitter, because he HAS to be to justify what we gave up (at the time). This was a monumental BAD trade and anyone who says different by saying "well none of the players are good now", are drawing a pretty picture made from turds. Coppy even said as much. I'll never understand this trade...I hated it from the moment it was announced.

yeezus

08-24-2016, 02:35 PM

thewupk

08-24-2016, 02:38 PM

source please, and what hitter?

Did you miss this past trade deadline?

smootness

08-24-2016, 02:40 PM

Did you miss this past trade deadline?

What big hitter was traded?

yeezus

08-24-2016, 02:48 PM

Did you miss this past trade deadline?

What does that have to do with the situation when Peraza and Wood were traded? And what hitters are we talking about?

thewupk

08-24-2016, 03:01 PM

What big hitter was traded?

Did you see what kind of talent got returned for even meh pitching?

thewupk

08-24-2016, 03:02 PM

What does that have to do with the situation when Peraza and Wood were traded? And what hitters are we talking about?

That the Braves sold low on Wood.

Preacher

08-24-2016, 03:11 PM

Did you see what kind of talent got returned for even meh pitching?

To be fair, this year's market didn't exist when we traded Alex Wood.

The bottom line is the Braves sold high on both Wood and Pereza, their value has gone down since we dealt them; they were CORRECT on those two!

The problem is they bought very high on Olivera and misjudged him horribly.

At the end of the day, Wentz could be the best player in this package which would make the deal come out alright in the end for the Braves.

Hawk

08-24-2016, 03:21 PM

It is incomprehensible to me that there is still a faction on this board trying to defend the Olivera trade in any way, shape, form, or fashion.

The Braves traded value for non-value.

End of story.

smootness

08-24-2016, 03:33 PM

gilesfan

08-24-2016, 03:33 PM

Olivera had value at the time of that deal. The Dodgers didn't give him millions because they knew he was going to be terrible.

no, it was because they were dumb.

Hawk

08-24-2016, 03:35 PM

Olivera had value at the time of that deal. The Dodgers didn't give him millions because they knew he was going to be terrible.

Haha, give it up dude.

bravesfanMatt

08-24-2016, 03:42 PM

Haha, give it up dude.

He did have value. I don't think he equaled the value that we gave up, but he was regarded as a good hitter.. much like Cubans who are getting 60+ million contracts. The biggest problem with the trade was the need for a 30 hitter. We were not close. Now we traded that hitter for a more expensive 30 year old hitter who is bad on defense. Hopefully there is more to the plan.. but I would have much rather traded Wood and Jose/JJ/Luis for more prospects or some combo of those names. But it is ignorant to say HO was a no value player.

Hawk

08-24-2016, 03:51 PM

but he was regarded as a good hitter..

By whom? Where had he shown this except in Cuba prior to 2013?

His play was poor, scouting reports were critical, and his health was a major concern.

The Braves knew all of this before they executed the trade.

But it is ignorant to say HO was a no value player.

I said that Atlanta traded value for non-value. Did Olivera provide the Braves any semblance of value?

Have Wood/Peraza provided value to date? Is it likely that they continue to provide value to their teams?

Carp

08-24-2016, 04:13 PM

Did you miss this past trade deadline?

I agree with your premise, but Wood was injured this past deadline, so it likely wouldn't have mattered. We traded Wood at the right time, imo. It's just the overall return that makes its terrible. Hopefully Paco, Bird, or Wentz make this trade somewhat bearable.

TheBravos

08-24-2016, 04:21 PM

It is incomprehensible to me that there is still a faction on this board trying to defend the Olivera trade in any way, shape, form, or fashion.

The Braves traded value for non-value.

End of story.

Three cost effective major league players (one a young starting pitcher) and their #1 rated prospect. For a guy that hadn't played in MLB AND had a big contract. Yes, it is amazing anyone can defend this trade. Even the guy that made the trade said it was a monumental screw up.

bravesfanMatt

08-24-2016, 04:25 PM

By whom? Where had he shown this except in Cuba prior to 2013?

His play was poor, scouting reports were critical, and his health was a major concern.

The Braves knew all of this before they executed the trade.

I said that Atlanta traded value for non-value. Did Olivera provide the Braves any semblance of value?

Have Wood/Peraza provided value to date? Is it likely that they continue to provide value to their teams?

I guess by the teams that bid for his services. and the fact that before the trade he hit very well in the Dodger's minor league system in a very small sample size.. but those were the only stats you could go by at that point since he didn't start sucking until he put on a Brave's uni

bravesfanMatt

08-24-2016, 04:30 PM

Three cost effective major league players (one a young starting pitcher) and their #1 rated prospect. For a guy that hadn't played in MLB AND had a big contract. Yes, it is amazing anyone can defend this trade. Even they guy that made the trade said it was a monumental screw up.

again that guy came with hype. much like Yulieski Gurriel. The Stros are taking a chance that he will pay off. The Braves were doing the same thing. Was it dumb, yes.. but it wasn't like they traded these guys for nothing..well he turned into nothing.

gilesfan

08-24-2016, 04:32 PM

again that guy came with hype. much like Yulieski Gurriel. The Stros are taking a chance that he will pay off. The Braves were doing the same thing. Was it dumb, yes.. but it wasn't like they traded these guys for nothing..well he turned into nothing.

He was also damaged goods at the time of the trade.

TheBravos

08-24-2016, 04:34 PM

Hawk

08-24-2016, 04:34 PM

I guess by the teams that bid for his services.

Okay ... this is safe, but not very sound logic.

and the fact that before the trade he hit very well in the Dodger's minor league system in a very small sample size.. but those were the only stats you could go by at that point since he didn't start sucking until he put on a Brave's uni

Ok. But I think you know that the Atlanta front office wasn't going entirely off of 68 ABs in the AFL, AA, and the PCL.

bravesfanMatt

08-24-2016, 04:36 PM

He was also damaged goods at the time of the trade.

yes.. hammy, so not the end of the world. did HO even go on the disabled list while with the Braves? I can't remember. I don't think he was a big health problem.

again, I hate that I am arguing this. I hated the trade. I feel like I am defending a criminal when I know he did it.. but I still think it is unfair to say HO was garbage at the time of the trade.

bravesfanMatt

08-24-2016, 04:39 PM

Ok. But I think you know that the Atlanta front office wasn't going entirely off of 68 ABs in the AFL, AA, and the PCL.

nope, probably a combo of his work out, and Cuban numbers plus Dodger's numbers.... Basically saying he was one of those mystery boxes in the store. pay 10 bucks and you don't know what you are getting. Just this box cost way more than $10. I have a feeling the Braves might not shop for those mystery boxes anymore.

TheBravos

08-24-2016, 04:41 PM

yes.. hammy, so not the end of the world. did HO even go on the disabled list while with the Braves? I can't remember. I don't think he was a big health problem.

again, I hate that I am arguing this. I hated the trade. I feel like I am defending a criminal when I know he did it.. but I still think it is unfair to say HO was garbage at the time of the trade.

He wasn't garbage at the time, but he was at best a HUGE gamble with no MLB experience that we paid through the nose for. Did the Braves even stop to think "Why are they trading a guy they just signed to a big deal if he's that good?"....because I questioned that off the get go.

bravesfanMatt

08-24-2016, 04:42 PM

The Dodgers knew they had messed up. You don't give a guy a 60+million contract and trade him a few months later without reason. There was no doubt a celebration when the trade went down. They targeted the teams that were in the bidding war to sign him to begin with and found the biggest sucker.

could the Braves have done the same. They found a team that would take a much over hyped prospect and a pitcher destined to be on the DL plus two garbage relievers for a Cuban they liked, cash, a long shot pitching prospect, a good reliever that might get healthy and more important, a very good draft position.

bravesfanMatt

08-24-2016, 04:43 PM

He wasn't garbage at the time, but he was at best a HUGE gamble with no MLB experience .

this I can agree with..

Hawk

08-24-2016, 04:56 PM

nope, probably a combo of his work out, and Cuban numbers plus Dodger's numbers.... Basically saying he was one of those mystery boxes in the store. pay 10 bucks and you don't know what you are getting. Just this box cost way more than $10. I have a feeling the Braves might not shop for those mystery boxes anymore.

I don't think they looked his numbers at all. I think somebody in the front office wanted him really bad (like Theo Epstein going ballistic over losing Jose Contreras to NYY) and the Dodgers played into the Braves' desire. Maybe it was the Cuban connection with Fredi, maybe it was the showcase, who knows the genesis of it.

Taking a gamble on Olivera would have made a lot of sense for a lot of teams. Despite the fact that his elbow was a major question mark and there were still lingering questions about his skill level and long-term position. But not for the Braves and not for Peraza and Wood, even more certainly. No matter how hard you try to bury those two pieces, they were still valuable players at the time and, sure, they're perhaps less valuable now - but they are still actually playing Major League baseball, and will likely continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

TheBravos

08-24-2016, 05:20 PM

I don't think they looked his numbers at all. I think somebody in the front office wanted him really bad (like Theo Epstein going ballistic over losing Jose Contreras to NYY) and the Dodgers played into the Braves' desire. Maybe it was the Cuban connection with Fredi, maybe it was the showcase, who knows the genesis of it.

Taking a gamble on Olivera would have made a lot of sense for a lot of teams. Despite the fact that his elbow was a major question mark and there were still lingering questions about his skill level and long-term position. But not for the Braves and not for Peraza and Wood, even more certainly. No matter how hard you try to bury those two pieces, they were still valuable players at the time and, sure, they're perhaps less valuable now - but they are still actually playing Major League baseball, and will likely continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

No MLB experience at 30 years old, injury concerns, and a big long term contract...this has "buyer beware" written all over it. I'll just never understand the trade. You can make a argument for any other trade over the past few years...i'll give you that. Anyone making an excuse for this one when even the GM says it was bad? No...no excuses....horrible, bonehead, shortsighted...I could go on.

zitothebrave

08-24-2016, 05:49 PM

I'm saying the Olivera for Kemp part. I don't think it was "moronic."

It is. Because it's significant increase in payroll. 25 million for a player who's last 4 seasons has combined for a 1.6 fWAR. Which if we call him a 0.4 fWAR player per year makes him worth about 3M, which leaves us at 5.5 million per year deficit.

That being said, There's a chance he could post a year like 2014 where he's certainly worth the money we're paying. Or it could be like 2013 where he costs you wins.

Basically for 3 of the last 4 years. Matt Kemp has been a league average hitter with terrible defense, that's not worth 8.5M.

zitothebrave

08-24-2016, 05:52 PM

FWIW, I was all for trading Peraza and Wood. I just wanted a MLB player back. Like if we could have gotten Todd Frazier, wouldn't that have been nice? Or packaged them in a LuCroy deal. Or moved them for other prospects.

TheBravos

08-24-2016, 06:02 PM

Southcack77

08-24-2016, 07:39 PM

And I think Hart stepping down for Coppy largely happened because of that terrible trade.

I think Coppy pushed for that trade. he certainly never distanced himself from it before it failed. Not sure he's done so now. In fact, I think he said that is one "I would like to have back."

They did a few things PR wise to make Hart the heavy, but it seemed apparent at the time that it was basically Coppy's show.

Course Coppy is very comfortable making his decisions seem like a group effort when they go wrong -- just my impression from listening to a couple of podcasts.

Southcack77

08-24-2016, 07:43 PM

The Dodgers knew they had messed up. You don't give a guy a 60+million contract and trade him a few months later without reason. There was no doubt a celebration when the trade went down. They targeted the teams that were in the bidding war to sign him to begin with and found the biggest sucker.

You might if you get Mat Latos, Alex Wood, Jim Johnson, Luis Avila, Michael Morse, and Jose Peraza out of the deal.

Still...sure, the Dodgers obviously didn't think he was going to be an elite player. Whether they knew he might not hit .260 with 15 HRs some day? I don't know. They got a lot of pieces in an attempt to go for it without giving up their most treasured prospects.

Course it really didn't do much for them either.

zitothebrave

08-24-2016, 08:37 PM

This war thing....Heyward should put that to rest. Kemp won the game last night for us, has the most RBI and pretty much the same HR's as Freddie (our $100 mil player). Tell me another bat you can get for under 9 mil that will hit over 30 HR's and 100 RBI...you won't find one...not one unless it's just a lucky sign. His bat will win more than his D will cost us..way more.

Except that it may not. Realize that Kemp hasn't hit 30 homers regularly. If he hits 30 this year, it will only be the second season that he's done it. He's got power, but nothing too insane. And RBIs are 100% dependent on the players who play in front of you. If he has a 100 RBI season, it's because the guys in front of him are getting on. Not because of any skill he has.

WAR is not perfect, but ti's a good estimation. Kemp has some value, but he's a flawed hitter. He relies so heavily on his power that when it's not on his highest game he tanks his value.

thewupk

08-24-2016, 08:40 PM

yeezus

08-25-2016, 07:00 AM

It is. Because it's significant increase in payroll. 25 million for a player who's last 4 seasons has combined for a 1.6 fWAR. Which if we call him a 0.4 fWAR player per year makes him worth about 3M, which leaves us at 5.5 million per year deficit.

That being said, There's a chance he could post a year like 2014 where he's certainly worth the money we're paying. Or it could be like 2013 where he costs you wins.

Basically for 3 of the last 4 years. Matt Kemp has been a league average hitter with terrible defense, that's not worth 8.5M.

AGAIN: Teams don't just look at WAR when evaluating players/trades like you do. Thank the lord they don't, because they'd be a terrible, terrible organization if that's all they did. WAR is not the holy grail for any organization like it is for you.

yeezus

08-25-2016, 07:03 AM

Who was defending the HO trade in the first place anyway?

thewupk

08-25-2016, 07:35 AM

Who was defending the HO trade in the first place anyway?

thethe most notably. There are a few people that support the FO 99% of the time so they were on board with it.

thewupk

08-25-2016, 07:36 AM

AGAIN: Teams don't just look at WAR when evaluating players/trades like you do. Thank the lord they don't, because they'd be a terrible, terrible organization if that's all they did. WAR is not the holy grail for any organization like it is for you.

But it does factor into the FA market. That's pretty standard at this point.

yeezus

08-25-2016, 07:49 AM

But it does factor into the FA market. That's pretty standard at this point.

I don't doubt at all that teams look at it when making decisions. It's just not close to the only thing they look at.

yeezus

08-25-2016, 07:51 AM

thethe most notably. There are a few people that support the FO 99% of the time so they were on board with it.

Oh I meant right now, or yesterday when it was being discussed. Hawk said something about people defending the deal still, but I don't think anyone was (in any capacity).

thewupk

08-25-2016, 07:54 AM

I don't doubt at all that teams look at it when making decisions. It's just not close to the only thing they look at.

I would agree with that. However it's not hard to see that even at 8 million extra to the Braves Kemp could still be overpaid depending on how he plays. If its like 2016 then that certainly will be the case. However I do have reason to believe his OBP won't be near as bad next year.

Southcack77

08-25-2016, 07:57 AM

This war thing....Heyward should put that to rest. Kemp won the game last night for us, has the most RBI and pretty much the same HR's as Freddie (our $100 mil player). Tell me another bat you can get for under 9 mil that will hit over 30 HR's and 100 RBI...you won't find one...not one unless it's just a lucky sign. His bat will win more than his D will cost us..way more.

The payroll cost is really 18 million for the each of the next three seasons, which is a bit more relevant way of looking at it, I think.

The shedding of oliveira can be used as different frames for viewing this one but ultimately braces are citing big checks to Kemp through 2019.

Of course shedding the 8.5 million in 2020 might have made the deal worth it alone.

gilesfan

08-25-2016, 08:42 AM

gilesfan

08-25-2016, 08:44 AM

yeezus

08-25-2016, 08:58 AM

I would agree with that. However it's not hard to see that even at 8 million extra to the Braves Kemp could still be overpaid depending on how he plays. If its like 2016 then that certainly will be the case. However I do have reason to believe his OBP won't be near as bad next year.

I agree. I'm not saying Kemp is definitely going to be worth the extra money we're paying for him. I just don't think the trade is "moronic" and certainly don't think zito understands baseball better by simply using WAR than the FO in this case.

mfree80

08-25-2016, 11:04 AM

thewupk

08-25-2016, 11:25 AM

Just an interesting side note... Each year we all pick up on a handful of guys who seem to be the next hot free agent that the Braves ought to sign. Just a reminder that only a few years ago Kemp was high on the list of guys that could put the Braves over the top. Hindsight is awesome, and while we are mostly okay with having Kemp right now for what he costs and brings to the table, if we had been the ones to sign him to the big contract instead of the Dodgers... imagine how the board would view that move now.

Which is why I'm generally against giving contracts that pays guys well into their 30's. Especially those players who aren't already good at one area (like defense or high K rate) which you would expect to decline during those ages. It's the classic paying guys for what they have done and not what they will do. What they did with JT and Freeman are great examples of what we should be doing.

Enscheff

08-25-2016, 12:21 PM

But it does factor into the FA market. That's pretty standard at this point.

Teams obviously don't look up a player's WAR from Fangraphs or Baseball Reference when making roster decisions, but you can be assured they have their own version of WAR they use. They also have their own projection systems, based on predictive stats and scouting input, to determine how a player will perform over time. And then they do the exact same cost analysis for that WAR that we do when we talk about trades and signings.

For anyone to suggest teams don't go through that process is nothing but willful ignorance, and verging on pure stupidity.

We obviously don't have access to each team's proprietary WAR systems and projections. What we do have is WAR calculated by places like FG and BRef, and projection systems like Steamer and ZiPs. So we use those sources of information to educate ourselves so we can draw logical conclusions.

That is opposed to many posters who seem to pride themselves on being low information baseball fans. It's fine to not care about all the information available, but it's silly to think a low information fan knows more than someone that takes the time to consume as much info as possible to educate themselves.

yeezus

08-25-2016, 12:30 PM

For anyone to suggest teams don't go through that process is nothing but willful ignorance, and verging on pure stupidity.

no one suggested anything close to this.

zitothebrave

08-25-2016, 05:24 PM

AGAIN: Teams don't just look at WAR when evaluating players/trades like you do. Thank the lord they don't, because they'd be a terrible, terrible organization if that's all they did. WAR is not the holy grail for any organization like it is for you.

They certainly look at it. Maybe not in what's available to us, but they have their own metric. Some teams use stats more than others. Reality is that Kemp is flawed.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 06:41 AM

They certainly look at it. Maybe not in what's available to us, but they have their own metric. Some teams use stats more than others. Reality is that Kemp is flawed.

Never said anything to the contrary of any of this.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 08:37 AM

You guys don't think teams read fangraphs? The Braves hired Kiley McDaniel for goodness sake. I would venture to guess it is a consideration among a lot of other things.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 09:29 AM

You guys don't think teams read fangraphs? The Braves hired Kiley McDaniel for goodness sake. I would venture to guess it is a consideration among a lot of other things.

Holy crap.
Who said, anywhere, that teams don't read stuff like that?
I cannot comprehend how you and zito get that out of what I was saying. It's not even close to what I said.

Hawk

08-26-2016, 09:40 AM

You guys don't think teams read fangraphs? The Braves hired Kiley McDaniel for goodness sake. I would venture to guess it is a consideration among a lot of other things.

Or, perhaps, it's because McDaniel did work for the Yankees (Coppolella connection), Pittsburgh, Baltimore before.

I don't think any FO seriously considers what is posted on 'FanGraphs' in the slightest, no. Do they read it? Yeah, probably, kind of in the same type of way that I read Maxim when taking a ****.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 09:43 AM

Or, perhaps, it's because McDaniel did work for the Yankees (Coppolella connection), Pittsburgh, Baltimore before.

I don't think any FO seriously considers what is posted on 'FanGraphs' in the slightest, no. Do they read it? Yeah, probably, kind of in the same type of way that I read Maxim when taking a ****.

I would venture to guess that most teams have WAR based calculations that are either equal or very similar to fangraphs. They essentially have to if you look at the FA market and how close contracts correlate to WAR. I mean, they also have their scouts and old baseball men talking about why they like the player or not.

Hawk

08-26-2016, 10:18 AM

I would venture to guess that most teams have WAR based calculations that are either equal or very similar to fangraphs. They essentially have to if you look at the FA market and how close contracts correlate to WAR. I mean, they also have their scouts and old baseball men talking about why they like the player or not.

Of course. The notion that teams have proprietary statistical data to analyze players is a given one. What I'm saying is that it isn't Fangraphs.

50PoundHead

08-26-2016, 10:26 AM

You guys don't think teams read fangraphs? The Braves hired Kiley McDaniel for goodness sake. I would venture to guess it is a consideration among a lot of other things.

They should change the name to GMgraphs.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 10:53 AM

You guys don't think teams read fangraphs? The Braves hired Kiley McDaniel for goodness sake. I would venture to guess it is a consideration among a lot of other things.
The Braves didn't hire Kiley because they read Fangraphs. Coppy was Kiley's boss back with the Yankees. They have a history together.

To your point though, Coppy said in an interview that he used Fangraphs a lot back when he was an assistant in the Wren era.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 10:59 AM

Of course. The notion that teams have proprietary statistical data to analyze players is a given one. What I'm saying is that it isn't Fangraphs.

This is undoubtedly true, which is funny because we then analyze their moves by multiplying their Fangraphs WAR by $8 million and subtracting out their contract to determine if they made a good move.

My least favorite part of the statistical evolution is how lazy and myopic the casual stat head has become. We used to dig hard to argue our case on player's value, but now we just look at the last column on the right of a player's fangraph player profile page.

smootness

08-26-2016, 10:59 AM

Of course. The notion that teams have proprietary statistical data to analyze players is a given one. What I'm saying is that it isn't Fangraphs.

I think teams absolutely read that stuff with more than a passing interest. Or they should. A FO is made of people, same as FG or any other site. Your scouts can only do so much. If you're not taking in as much info as you can, you're not doing your job.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 11:13 AM

This is undoubtedly true, which is funny because we then analyze their movies by multiplying their Fangraphs WAR by $8 million and subtracting out their contract to determine if they made a good move.

My least favorite part of the statistical evolution is how lazy and myopic the casual stat head has become. We used to dig hard to argue our case on player's value, but now we just look at the last column on the right of a player's fangraph player profile page.

Because that number is going to give us a better indication than any of us Joe Blows can come up with on our own.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 11:24 AM

Because that number is going to give us a better indication than any of us Joe Blows can come up with on our own.

I actually don't think that's true. I know you're statistically savvy enough to dig deep into the vast pool of data to make evaluations on player's ability. For example, when you posted about Matt Duffy's launch angles that led me to research the topic a little bit more and I saw that Ender Inciarte also had a launch angle that would predict that he was a better offensive player than what he was showing at the time. Sure enough his offense has improved as the sample size has grown.

WAR is excellent shorthand for guesstimating approximate value, but there's a lot of publically available statistics that do a better job of demonstrating ability which is a better predictor of future value than past WAR does, IMO.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 11:41 AM

I actually don't think that's true. I know you're statistically savvy enough to dig deep into the vast pool of data to make evaluations on player's ability. For example, when you posted about Matt Duffy's launch angles that led me to research the topic a little bit more and I saw that Ender Inciarte also had a launch angle that would predict that he was a better offensive player than what he was showing at the time. Sure enough his offense has improved as the sample size has grown.

WAR is excellent shorthand for guesstimating approximate value, but there's a lot of publically available statistics that do a better job of demonstrating ability which is a better predictor of future value than past WAR does, IMO.

I think launch angle/exit velocity is a good tool, but still kinda in the incubator phase. Obviously Ender isn't as bad as he was earlier in the year and was going to progress.

There are some traits in players that can certainly make you project a player either upward or downward, but in general, WAR is going to tell you how good a player is. Its going to tell you how good a team is.

Who did fangraphs tell us the best teams in the league would be this year? Red Sox, Indians, Astros, Nationals, Cubs, Dodgers.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 11:43 AM

Of course. The notion that teams have proprietary statistical data to analyze players is a given one. What I'm saying is that it isn't Fangraphs.

So what's your point? That we should all create our own version of WAR to base our arguments around? Or that we shouldn't base our logic around BRef and FG WAR values at all, and instead use our "gut" like the DBacks do?

Do you have a better metric we can refer to? Maybe one you created and keep up to date?

WAR vs cost is what we have to base our logic around. If I had the Braves version of WAR, I would use that as well.

And there is a pic of Coppy with MLBTR on his PC. It is pretty much a given FO guys refer to these fansites.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 11:46 AM

So what's your point? That we should all create our own version of WAR to base are arguments around? Or that we shouldn't base our logic around BRef and FG WAR values?

Do you have a better metric we can refer to? Maybe one you created and keep up to date?

WAR vs cost is what we have to base our logic around. If I had the Braves version of WAR, I would use that as well.

And there is a pic of Coppy with MLBTR on his PC. It is pretty much a given FO guys refer to these fansites.

I lost count at the number of straw men in this post. Solid job!

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 11:46 AM

I think teams absolutely read that stuff with more than a passing interest. Or they should. A FO is made of people, same as FG or any other site. Your scouts can only do so much. If you're not taking in as much info as you can, you're not doing your job.

There is a pic of Coppy with MLBTR on his PC. It is a given that FO guys follow these fansites fairly closely.

bravesfanMatt

08-26-2016, 11:50 AM

There is a pic of Coppy with MLBTR on his PC. It is a given that FO guys follow these fansites fairly closely.

that pic seemed staged though. it was attached to a trade rumor article IIRC.. But agree that our scouting department has to use their data they collect along with other 'public' sites. I am sure they have a back door access that gives them reporting abilities greater than the average fan. SQL/Oracle ties that can produce data at a much greater detail.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 11:57 AM

I think launch angle/exit velocity is a good tool, but still kinda in the incubator phase. Obviously Ender isn't as bad as he was earlier in the year and was going to progress.

There are some traits in players that can certainly make you project a player either upward or downward, but in general, WAR is going to tell you how good a player is. Its going to tell you how good a team is.

Who did fangraphs tell us the best teams in the league would be this year? Red Sox, Indians, Astros, Nationals, Cubs, Dodgers.

You're confusing what I'm saying with "WAR sux", which isn't what I'm trying to say.

I'm arguing the point that it's the best tool we have of evaluating players. Maybe that's true because its really the only all in one tool that we have. I'm just arguing that it's best to separate the components out and challenge the valuations.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 12:01 PM

that pic seemed staged though. it was attached to a trade rumor article IIRC.. But agree that our scouting department has to use their data they collect along with other 'public' sites. I am sure they have a back door access that gives them reporting abilities greater than the average fan. SQL/Oracle ties that can produce data at a much greater detail.

It was an Ask Coppy pic and had nothing to do with MLBTR when it was taken. It was later posted to MLBTR's twitter, which is how you probably saw it.

And teams have their own data repositories. I highly doubt they are pulling data from the FG databases. They are pulling their data directly from the same sources FG and BRef pulls theirs. Sites like FG and BRef are not generating raw data, they are analyzing it.

Teams have access to tons of data that aren't available to the public, mostly because it is either expensive to buy (like the radar tracking stuff), or the raw data is generated by the team's themselves (like scouting and medical data), or the data is propietary (like budgetary data). Dave Cameron refers to this additional info teams have all the time as a major limitation to analytics in the public space.

Hawk

08-26-2016, 12:18 PM

So what's your point? That we should all create our own version of WAR to base our arguments around? Or that we shouldn't base our logic around BRef and FG WAR values at all, and instead use our "gut" like the DBacks do?

Do you have a better metric we can refer to? Maybe one you created and keep up to date?

WAR vs cost is what we have to base our logic around. If I had the Braves version of WAR, I would use that as well.

And there is a pic of Coppy with MLBTR on his PC. It is pretty much a given FO guys refer to these fansites.

My point is/was that you shouldn't get so butthurt when your precious FanGraphs is cut down to size or questioned or scrutinized, especially within the scope of a discussion the context of which is people ridiculing the notion that it is something that a Major League organization seriously considers. To believe that is patently absurd.

It's a website created by fans, for fans.

And there is a pic of Coppy with MLBTR on his PC. It is pretty much a given FO guys refer to these fansites.

Lol ... I'm not even going to touch this.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 12:33 PM

My point is/was that you shouldn't get so butthurt when your precious FanGraphs is cut down to size or questioned or scrutinized, especially within the scope of a discussion the context of which is people ridiculing the notion that it is something that a Major League organization seriously considers. To believe that is patently absurd.

It's a website created by fans, for fans.

Lol ... I'm not even going to touch this.

Great, then what stats/sites do you use when trying to research baseball related topics? I would like to expand my knowledge base to include some Hawk-approved sources.

What data do you come armed with? Or are you another low-information fan spewing ignorant opinions with zero fact-based data to back them up?

thewupk

08-26-2016, 12:48 PM

I don't see why some people try to disprove WAR (the one that fangraphs or baseball-ref use) so much. It correlates highly to actual win totals just like Pythagorean win total does (based on runs allowed vs rusn scored). The teams that have higher WAR (aka the ones who score more runs than they allow) are going to have higher win totals. There are exceptions like the Rangers this year but it's easy to see that their 28-8 record in 1 run games is the major reason their record is what it is. Those teams happen (O's from a couple of years ago is another good example) but they are flukey. Probably the best chance the Braves have for being good next season.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 12:52 PM

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 12:54 PM

Hawk

08-26-2016, 12:59 PM

Great, then what stats/sites do you use when trying to research baseball related topics? I would like to expand my knowledge base to include some Hawk-approved sources.

What data do you come armed with? Or are you another low-information fan spewing ignorant opinions with zero fact-based data to back them up?

So is this you finally admitting that FanGraphs is your grail, your solitary source for statistics, the mecca of your 'knowledge' of the sport?

Because you are literally making my argument for me.

I realize that statistics are a crutch for you, but - completely excluding the basic idea that baseball is more than a game of numbers, which is not something even being discussed here - surely you realize that there is an absolute plethora of statistical information available (to the general public) that can factor into the analysis of a particular player that goes well beyond the confines of one website.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:01 PM

The crux of the discussion is "do teams rely on Fangraphs?" not "Does WAR suck?".

On an aside, just because something is extremely accurate in the aggregate doesn't mean it's necessarily as accurate on an individual basis where player evaluation occurs.

Teams rely on the same data that Fangraphs uses however. They may calculate it in a different way but I would bet most offensive models are based on linear weights. Now the values they plug in may differ. Same with defensive data. They may have their own methods but I would also bet they are based on actual play by play data.

And you may be right on the individual basis part. But it's the best we have right now and again it all correlates very well. I'm going to give it the benefit of the doubt until something better comes along instead of just basing my opinions on the eyeball test or an ancient thought process on the game.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:06 PM

I don't see why some people try to disprove WAR (the one that fangraphs or baseball-ref use) so much.

oh. my. lord.

Hawk

08-26-2016, 01:07 PM

oh. my. lord.

I know, it's almost not even worth it.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:07 PM

So is this you finally admitting that FanGraphs is your grail, your solitary source for statistics, the mecca of your 'knowledge' of the sport?

Because you are literally making my argument for me.

I realize that statistics are a crutch for you, but - completely excluding the basic idea that baseball is more than a game of numbers, which is not something even being discussed here - surely you realize that there is an absolute plethora of statistical information available (to the general public) that can factor into the analysis of a particular player that goes well beyond the confines of one website.

You aren't even presenting an argument. All you are saying is "FG sucks". So what doesn't suck? What data do you reference that is better? I am constantly reading material from every non-fluff site I can find like MLBTR, BRef, BP, BA, etc. What am I missing?

Or do you "use your eyes" like a scout?

I played D1 baseball with and against guys who went on to become professionals. I've stood in the box and hit 90+ MPH fastballs, been plunked by the same fastballs, stole bases against catchers with average pop times, fielded balls off the bat from guys that would become professional hitters, thrown out guys on the bases that had 60+ grade speed, and have been part of pro day scouting/testing. What level did you play? What qualifies you to make "scouting" determinations on players?

What knowledge are you privy to that I'm missing? Seriously, I want to know so I can expand my knowledge base.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:09 PM

And you may be right on the individual basis part. But it's the best we have right now and again it all correlates very well. I'm going to give it the benefit of the doubt until something better comes along instead of just basing my opinions on the eyeball test or an ancient thought process on the game.

you are completely missing the point of the conversation. I am lost as to how you're reading what's being said as some sort of an attack on WAR. no one is trying to disprove it. no one is saying it's useless. no one is saying the eyeball test is better. that has been 0% of the discussion.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:09 PM

oh. my. lord.

yes?

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:10 PM

You aren't even presenting an argument. All you are saying is "FG sucks".

lol. this dude cannot be for real.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:11 PM

yes?

NO ONE IS TRYING TO DISPROVE WAR. NO ONE. AT ALL.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 01:11 PM

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:12 PM

you are completely missing the point of the conversation. I am lost as to how you're reading what's being said as some sort of an attack on WAR. no one is trying to disprove it. no one is saying it's useless. no one is saying the eyeball test is better. that has been 0% of the discussion.

I'm not missing anything. What is your issue with fangraphs? The data that it provides? I am curious on why you bash it so often? That it disagrees with your viewpoint?

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 01:12 PM

Teams rely on the same data that Fangraphs uses however. They may calculate it in a different way but I would bet most offensive models are based on linear weights. Now the values they plug in may differ. Same with defensive data. They may have their own methods but I would also bet they are based on actual play by play data.
So you agree that teams don't rely on Fangraphs? Obviously teams rely on data. How teams interpret the data is kind of the differentiation point, no?

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:12 PM

NO ONE IS TRYING TO DISPROVE WAR. NO ONE. AT ALL.

Then why do you hate on it constantly?

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:13 PM

It depends on if posters like the player or not.

you are also not comprehending what's being said. like, at all. it's like some of you are so defensive about WAR that saying "teams don't just look at fangraphs when making evaluations" is taken as some sort of an attack. it's crazy. the merits of FG and WAR aren't even being discussed.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:14 PM

So you agree that teams don't rely on Fangraphs? Obviously teams rely on data. How teams interpret the data is kind of the differentiation point, no?

Yes I agree that teams have their own models that they use. However I don't believe they differ all that much on the on field performance side since the raw data is going to be pretty close to the same.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:14 PM

Then why do you hate on it constantly?

lol, oh my goodness. where have I hated on it in this thread? or anywhere? I use it all. the. time.

Hawk

08-26-2016, 01:14 PM

You aren't even presenting an argument. All you are saying is "FG sucks". So what doesn't suck? What data do you reference that is better? I am constantly reading material from every non-fluff site I can find like MLBTR, BRef, BP, BA, etc. What am I missing?

Or do you "use your eyes" like a scout?

I played D1 baseball with and against guys who went on to become professionals. I've stood in the box and hit 90+ MPH fastballs, been plunked by the same fastballs, stole bases against catchers with average pop times, fielded balls off the bat from guys that would become professional hitters, thrown out guys on the bases that had 60+ grade speed, and have been part of pro day scouting/testing. What level did you play? What qualifies you to make "scouting" determinations on players?

What knowledge are you privy to that I'm missing? Seriously, I want to know so I can expand my knowledge base.

I confess, I was really just trying to goad you into bringing up the D1 thing again

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:16 PM

you are also not comprehending what's being said. like, at all. it's like some of you are so defensive about WAR that saying "teams don't just look at fangraphs when making evaluations" is taken as some sort of an attack. it's crazy. the merits of FG and WAR aren't even being discussed.

And who is saying that teams only look at fangraphs all the time? Who are you arguing against? Nobody is saying this.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:17 PM

lol, oh my goodness. where have I hated on it in this thread? or anywhere? I use it all. the. time.

sure

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:17 PM

sure

Can you provide examples of my hatred of WAR?

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:21 PM

Yes I agree that teams have their own models that they use. However I don't believe they differ all that much on the on field performance side since the raw data is going to be pretty close to the same.

They don't differ all that much, except probably when it comes to evaluating defensive contributions.

The advent of WAR (or whatever a team calls their version of it) and using it to perform cost/benefit analysis is the sole reason teams like the A's and Rays created parity over the last decade or so with the large market teams. The usage of analytics is also solely responsible for parity leaving the game again once those large market teams started adopting them and eliminating the small market teams' advantages.

When teams like the BoSox, Dodgers, Cubs and now the Yankees took the A's and Rays systems and injected them with unlimited money, they are suddenly back to being unbeatable.

Folks are against analytics because they don't understand them or they disprove something they are too stubborn to admit isn't true. We fans don't have our own analytics department, so we rely on sites like FG and BRef to do it for us...and likely get pretty close to what most teams are doing internally.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:21 PM

Can you provide examples of my hatred of WAR?

If it's on fangraphs somewhere

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:22 PM

And who is saying that teams only look at fangraphs all the time? Who are you arguing against? Nobody is saying this.

This all started with zito calling the Kemp move moronic and then reading off some FG numbers. I said something to effect of "that's great, but teams don't just look at FG to make decisions." Then a barrage of posts saying "TEAMS MOST DEFINITELY LOOK AT FANGRAPHS YOU'RE NAIVE IF YOU THINK THEY DON'T AT ALL" came up. Then you interpreted something as someone trying to "disprove" WAR or saying the eyeball test is better when that literally didn't happen one single time.

In short, I never said anyone said teams only look at FG. I said analyzing the Kemp move by looking at FG is a lot cruder than the way the FO would have done it. Now we're here, and apparently WAR is being attacked but I don't know where.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:22 PM

I confess, I was really just trying to goad you into bringing up the D1 thing again

You're still deflecting. I'm not shocked.

What data should I be referencing if not BRef or FG? What data/experience do you draw from?

You are oddly silent on the topic. Almost like you don't want to admit to being a low information fan.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:23 PM

If it's on fangraphs somewhere

Right, ya can't.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:23 PM

You're still deflecting. I'm not shocked.

What data should I be referencing if not BRef or FG? What data/experience do you draw from?

for such a genius, something so simple keeps flying over your head.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:28 PM

This all started with zito calling the Kemp move moronic and then reading off some FG numbers. I said something to effect of "that's great, but teams don't just look at FG to make decisions." Then a barrage of posts saying "TEAMS MOST DEFINITELY LOOK AT FANGRAPHS YOU'RE NAIVE IF YOU THINK THEY DON'T AT ALL" came up. Then you interpreted something as someone trying to "disprove" WAR or saying the eyeball test is better when that literally didn't happen one single time.

In short, I never said anyone said teams only look at FG. I said analyzing the Kemp move by looking at FG is a lot cruder than the way the FO would have done it. Now we're here, and apparently WAR is being attacked but I don't know where.

To defend zito I don't see how you can't see that point of view. They Braves added ~$8.5 million in salary per year for 3 years for Kemp. The last 1 5/6's seasons Kemp has provided 0.5 total WAR. If he does that the next two seasons the Braves will have paid close to 17 million for 0.5 WAR. With the going rate of 8 million per WAR that is a horrible use of money. And one could consider that moronic. Now there are other considerations I won't get into that I personally agree with but the reality is the Braves will be overpaying for Kemp. And to some people that is not a good thing.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:29 PM

I'm not missing anything. What is your issue with fangraphs? The data that it provides? I am curious on why you bash it so often? That it disagrees with your viewpoint?

Again: Where have I bashed fangraphs? I love that site. I'm on it every day. I think it's great. I have zero issue with it. So please show me where I've bashed it.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 01:31 PM

Yes I agree that teams have their own models that they use. However I don't believe they differ all that much on the on field performance side since the raw data is going to be pretty close to the same.

The raw data isn't the same though. Dave Cameron (as ensheff mentioned earlier) as said as much. Each individual team pours a hundred fold more resources into the data collection process than Fangraphs does. I'm sure the valuations correlate strongly on the aggregate, but I'm sure there plenty of examples of individual players whose individual valuations differ dramatically.

Fangraphs and Baseball Reference have a version of WAR that on the aggregate probably come close to equaling each other, but in certain cases they differ dramatically. The Braves may have a model that tells them that Matt Kemp is worth 3 wins per season (or maybe not). It's about as close as the difference between what FG and Baseball reference say about Ender Inciarte. What everyone is trying to say is don't take everything FG produces at face value.

bravesfanMatt

08-26-2016, 01:32 PM

I confess, I was really just trying to goad you into bringing up the D1 thing again

you think it is saved on a word doc for easy copy and paste.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:35 PM

To defend zito I don't see how you can't see that point of view. They Braves added ~$8.5 million in salary per year for 3 years for Kemp. The last 1 5/6's seasons Kemp has provided 0.5 total WAR. If he does that the next two seasons the Braves will have paid close to 17 million for 0.5 WAR. With the going rate of 8 million per WAR that is a horrible use of money. And one could consider that moronic. Now there are other considerations I won't get into that I personally agree with but the reality is the Braves will be overpaying for Kemp. And to some people that is not a good thing.

And again: The Braves did not analyze whether or not to make that move by going to fangraphs and looking at Kemp's WAR. Much more went into it. That's not an attach on fangraphs, or WAR. Perhaps they feel the defense in LF won't matter as much as WAR would suggest, and the added power to the lineup outweighs it more than WAR would suggest. I'm sure the FO is capable of doing the WAR x Salary calculation. It's not like this is information they missed, or were too moronic to comprehend.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 01:36 PM

They don't differ all that much, except probably when it comes to evaluating defensive contributions.

I'm sure that's not true, at least in the sense of predicting future production. The sabermetric community hasn't reached a consensus on BABIP, the value of the strike-out, hard hit balls, etc. We are just now starting to grasp these issues since Statcast data is starting to trickle out to the general public.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 01:37 PM

What everyone is trying to say is don't take everything FG produces at face value.

damn dude why do you hate fangraphs so much?

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:38 PM

The raw data isn't the same though. Dave Cameron (as ensheff mentioned earlier) as said as much. Each individual team pours a hundred fold more resources into the data collection process than Fangraphs does. I'm sure the valuations correlate strongly on the aggregate, but I'm sure there plenty of examples of individual players whose individual valuations differ dramatically.

Fangraphs and Baseball Reference have a version of WAR that on the aggregate probably come close to equaling each other, but in certain cases they differ dramatically. The Braves may have a model that tells them that Matt Kemp is worth 3 wins per season (or maybe not). It's about as close as the difference between what FG and Baseball reference say about Ender Inciarte. What everyone is trying to say is don't take everything FG produces at face value.

It is very interesting to note the large differences in WAR values between BRef and FG on players like Cano and Braun (going from memory). For example, FG has Cano with a very good career WAR of 48, but BRef has him a fringe-HoF worthy 61. The differences are almost strictly related to defensive values.

Discrepancies like that are why I don't put much stock into defensive valuations compared to offensive valuations. I think they are useful to give us a general idea of who is a good defender (Inciarte) and who is a bad defender (Kemp), but I think they do a poor job comparing offense value to defense value.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 01:40 PM

If the Braves have a model that says Kemp is worth 3 wins per year, I offer my services to help adjust it.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:40 PM

I'm sure that's not true, at least in the sense of predicting future production. The sabermetric community hasn't reached a consensus on BABIP, the value of the strike-out, hard hit balls, etc. We are just now starting to grasp these issues since Statcast data is starting to trickle out to the general public.

There is lots of stuff out there with expected BABIP, and other stats revolving around batted ball profiles.

Statcast data is going to finally help clarify defensive contributions though.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:42 PM

If the Braves have a model that says Kemp is worth 3 wins per year, I offer my services to help adjust it.

They probably have a model that says he is worth 1-2 WAR, which is why they agreed to take on that much additional money on his contract. They are clearly a team that doesn't value defensive metrics as much as a team like the Cubs (they let Heyward go, traded away Simmons, signed Markakis, traded for Kemp), so it wouldn't be surprising at all if they think Kemp is an overall average player.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 01:43 PM

To defend zito I don't see how you can't see that point of view. They Braves added ~$8.5 million in salary per year for 3 years for Kemp. The last 1 5/6's seasons Kemp has provided 0.5 total WAR. If he does that the next two seasons the Braves will have paid close to 17 million for 0.5 WAR. With the going rate of 8 million per WAR that is a horrible use of money. And one could consider that moronic. Now there are other considerations I won't get into that I personally agree with but the reality is the Braves will be overpaying for Kemp. And to some people that is not a good thing.

What if three years from now the Braves model says that Kemp was worth 2 wins per season and Fangraphs says he was worth 0.5 wins per season. That's the difference in saying Kemp was worth 48 million dollars rather than 12 million dollars. That's not to say we can't have our own opinions about players and that we can't evaluate the front office, but it should make you think twice.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:45 PM

What if three years from now the Braves model says that Kemp was worth 2 wins per season and Fangraphs says he was worth 0.5 wins per season. That's the difference in saying Kemp was worth 48 million dollars rather than 12 million dollars. That's not to say we can't have our own opinions about players and that we can't evaluate the front office, but it should make you think twice.

The differences in player valuation models is precisely why trades happen. Teams trade for players they value more highly than the other team, and trade away players they value less.

It then all comes down to who was right. Whichever team had the better valuation model wins more games.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:46 PM

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:47 PM

you think it is saved on a word doc for easy copy and paste.

Mockery, the last bastion of those without a legitimate point. I would have loved to see your smirk wiped away out on the field though.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 01:48 PM

There is lots of stuff out there with expected BABIP, and other stats revolving around batted ball profiles.

Statcast data is going to finally help clarify defensive contributions though.Agreed. But WAR doesn't adjust for expected BABIP and I'm not even saying it should, but there should be some version that is more predictive.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:49 PM

What if three years from now the Braves model says that Kemp was worth 2 wins per season and Fangraphs says he was worth 0.5 wins per season. That's the difference in saying Kemp was worth 48 million dollars rather than 12 million dollars. That's not to say we can't have our own opinions about players and that we can't evaluate the front office, but it should make you think twice.

I mean if they have a model that suggests Kemp is an average player then great but I would be very skeptical of such a model. He's barely an average hitter right now.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 01:50 PM

The differences in player valuation models is precisely why trades happen. Teams trade for players they value more highly than the other team, and trade away players they value less.

It then all comes down to who was right. Whichever team had the better valuation model wins more games. Again.. that's true in the aggregate. The Braves being right about Kemp doesn't necessarily equate to more wins unless you can control for other variables, which we really can't.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 01:51 PM

Agreed. But WAR doesn't adjust for expected BABIP and I'm not even saying it should, but there should be some version that is more predictive.

Yup. WAR is a stat that tells you what happened. A stat like you described would be like xWAR...a predictive stat trying to determine what will happen.

You see articles all the time about players who under/over perform their xBABIP and/or batted ball profiles. They are an attempt to do something like xWAR, it just hasn't been wrapped up into a single stat yet.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:52 PM

Agreed. But WAR doesn't adjust for expected BABIP and I'm not even saying it should, but there should be some version that is more predictive.

To me WAR should be based on what happened and not what will happen. It's why I like B-Ref's version for pitchers.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 01:53 PM

Yeah. What I'm saying is the raw data is the same. It's all from the same game(s). How they calculate it and what they use is what can be different.

In an existential sense, yes. The game itself is a confluence of raw data. Fangraphs just doesn't have the same access to the resources necessary to extract the same data as teams do.

If they were able to pour millions of dollars and hire full time staff to track every game, then maybe they would, but they are glorified blog with a cool sortable player board interface.

bravesfanMatt

08-26-2016, 01:53 PM

Mockery, the last bastion of those without a legitimate point.

no dog in this fight. really a dumb argument that I don't have an opinion on, nor care to join..

it was just a humorous comment that made me laugh, so I added to it. carry on with the rest of your day.. I seriously doubt my comment hurt your feelings and probably didn't need a response.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 01:59 PM

In an existential sense, yes. The game itself is a confluence of raw data. Fangraphs just doesn't have the same access to the resources necessary to extract the same data as teams do.

If they were able to pour millions of dollars and hire full time staff to track every game, then maybe they would, but they are glorified blog with a cool sortable player board interface.

I would say they are more than a glorified blog. The basis of their offensive stat was created by Tom Tango who has worked for the Blue Jays, M's, and Cubs.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 02:00 PM

no dog in this fight. really a dumb argument that I don't have an opinion on, nor care to join..

it was just a humorous comment that made me laugh, so I added to it. carry on with the rest of your day.. I seriously doubt my comment hurt your feelings and probably didn't need a response.

fragile egos are loud but also hurt easily.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 02:04 PM

yeezus

08-26-2016, 02:07 PM

Right. You wouldn't even survive a game of catch with me, so being mocked by a little league veteran doesn't really register.

lmao i'm dying

thewupk

08-26-2016, 02:07 PM

And again: The Braves did not analyze whether or not to make that move by going to fangraphs and looking at Kemp's WAR. Much more went into it. That's not an attach on fangraphs, or WAR. Perhaps they feel the defense in LF won't matter as much as WAR would suggest, and the added power to the lineup outweighs it more than WAR would suggest. I'm sure the FO is capable of doing the WAR x Salary calculation. It's not like this is information they missed, or were too moronic to comprehend.

It means whatever they use to judge player performance suggests Kemp is worth 8 million or more a year or that he will be with his time with the Braves. I disagree that he has been worth that in the past two years. Whether he is worth that remains to be seen. But just because the Braves believe that doesn't mean that's actually the case. Teams screw up on player evaluation all the time.

Hawk

08-26-2016, 02:10 PM

lmao i'm dying

$100 that he's living in his Mom's basement.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 02:10 PM

I would say they are more than a glorified blog. The basis of their offensive stat was created by Tom Tango who has worked for the Blue Jays, M's, and Cubs.

That doesn't disprove my point, since it's Tango's work... But the first part about not having the resources to extract data like the clubs is the important part.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 02:11 PM

That doesn't disprove my point, since it's Tango's work... But the first part about not having the resources to extract data like the clubs is the important part.

What is the payroll for each clubs scouting department/services?

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 02:12 PM

$100 that he's living in his Mom's basement, and that my rental property is worth more than your home...if you even own one.

Betcha that $100 I made more than you did last year.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 02:12 PM

But just because the Braves believe that doesn't mean that's actually the case. Teams screw up on player evaluation all the time.

I agree. I just found the use of the word "moronic" humorous. As if zito isn't a moron because he was able to go to fangraphs and look at WAR, which the moronic FO isn't capable of doing. I'm sure they understand where fangraph's WAR puts Kemp's salary at. Disagree with valuation? Sure. Calling them moronic and proving it by going to a website anyone can go to for free? Na.

Enscheff

08-26-2016, 02:14 PM

What is the payroll for each clubs scouting department/services?

I can't speak to the scouting departments, but when I looked into it they didn't pay their analytic people well at all. I would have had to take a 60%-70% pay cut and worked insane hours. Baseball nerd jobs are only for young guys with no family haha!

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 02:14 PM

What is the payroll for each clubs scouting department/services?

Dude... are we really going down this path?

yeezus

08-26-2016, 02:14 PM

$100 that he's living in his Mom's basement.

careful, dude. he might challenge you to a game of catch. and trust me, you couldn't handle that.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 02:18 PM

Dude... are we really going down this path?

Im just asking because I do not know. I just assumed it was small.

Hawk

08-26-2016, 02:19 PM

Betcha that $100 I made more than you did last year.

Ok ... but Mom's gonna get mad when she finds out you thieved $200 from her purse.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 02:20 PM

That doesn't disprove my point, since it's Tango's work... But the first part about not having the resources to extract data like the clubs is the important part.

I would agree with that. If they had the resources maybe we would have better data. However I tend to think most of the data that teams use is based on creating an on field advantage. Shifts, where to pitch, who to use, etc. I don't feel the actual performance is going to differ all that much to really matter. I think most models will show Ender as a plus defender in center. Neck being an average hitter this year, Freeman being really good, etc. Where things will differ is exactly how good that player is and how they value it. What is there value on left field defense compared to short or center, etc.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 02:23 PM

I agree. I just found the use of the word "moronic" humorous. As if zito isn't a moron because he was able to go to fangraphs and look at WAR, which the moronic FO isn't capable of doing. I'm sure they understand where fangraph's WAR puts Kemp's salary at. Disagree with valuation? Sure. Calling them moronic and proving it by going to a website anyone can go to for free? Na.

I agree to a point. But should have we all not laughed at the Phillies for their Howard contract? They could have had a model that suggested he was worth that money (he hits lots of homers and rbi). That was a moronic deal and fangraphs told me that too.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 02:35 PM

Im just asking because I do not know. I just assumed it was small.

Teams would never make the information publicly available, but I promise you that it's a lot and growing. From Lindbergh:

In fact, the recent expansion of analytics staffing doesn’t seem to have squeezed out other kinds of employees. By our count, big-league teams employed 1,246 full-time scouts in the first year of our sample, across all levels and specialties — pro, amateur, advance and international. This year’s media guides list 1,539 scouts — an average increase of almost 10 per team. Only five teams employ fewer scouts than they did in 2009, and of those, four were previously among the top five scout employers. No team has downsized by more than six total scouts or 12 percent of its previous force.

That's not even factoring all of the money that goes into building out the database, like say Ground Control for the Astros, hiring full time analytics staff, paying for database access from MLB for things like PitchFX, statcast, etc.

Teams wouldn't be investing that much money into this if they could just rely upon Fangraphs as a resource.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 02:37 PM

I agree to a point. But should have we all not laughed at the Phillies for their Howard contract? They could have had a model that suggested he was worth that money (he hits lots of homers and rbi). That was a moronic deal and fangraphs told me that too.

Isn't it common knowledge that the Amaro led Phillies didn't have an analytics department? Surely they didn't rely on any model at all.

yeezus

08-26-2016, 02:37 PM

I agree to a point. But should have we all not laughed at the Phillies for their Howard contract? They could have had a model that suggested he was worth that money (he hits lots of homers and rbi). That was a moronic deal and fangraphs told me that too.

I don't think most needed fangraphs for that. He was clearly on the decline, or his prime wasn't going to last much longer. He's a guy I personally feel is undervalued by WAR in his career tho. The potential to turn a game upside down with one swing the way he could far outweighed his poor defense at a position like first base. But I think that contract was a combination of desperation, pressure, and wishful thinking.

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 02:39 PM

yeezus

08-26-2016, 02:39 PM

Isn't it common knowledge that the Amaro led Phillies didn't have an analytics department? Surely they didn't rely on any model at all.

But I think that contract was a combination of desperation, pressure, and wishful thinking.

I debated adding ..."and Reuben Amaro" but couldn't remember if he was definitely the GM at the time of the deal.

bravesfanMatt

08-26-2016, 02:43 PM

Right. You wouldn't even survive a game of catch with me, so being mocked by a little league veteran doesn't really register.

then why do you keep responding.. am I giving you the attention you so crave? Should I stop responding?

50PoundHead

08-26-2016, 02:43 PM

Im sure you are right for the most part. I will make note though on the number of scouts because I have interacted with many. A lot of them are just low paid part time guys. One I know in particular was just a local high school coach. Another one (Braves scout) was just an old guy that went to about 50% of our high school games. I don't even remember his name.

Most of the bottom-tier scouts are part-time guys. Sometimes they are coaches who simply submit reports on players in their league/area. I think the guys who go to the showcases and do the cross-checking are all paid.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 02:48 PM

Im sure you are right for the most part. I will make note though on the number of scouts because I have interacted with many. A lot of them are just low paid part time guys. One I know in particular was just a local high school coach. Another one (Braves scout) was just an old guy that went to about 50% of our high school games. I don't even remember his name.
Lindbergh's study excluded part time scouts, which means the costs are even higher when they are factored in. This is the full time employees, which means employee benefits as well on top of salary (which I've read is around 30-40K for inexperienced and 80K for experienced).

gilesfan

08-26-2016, 02:49 PM

Lindbergh's study excluded part time scouts, which means the costs are even higher when they are factored in. This is the full time employees, which means employee benefits as well on top of salary (which I've read is around 30-40K for inexperienced and 80K for experienced).

Ah, gotcha. I didn't realize the top guys didn't make dick.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 03:01 PM

Isn't it common knowledge that the Amaro led Phillies didn't have an analytics department? Surely they didn't rely on any model at all.

And I'm sure there are other teams that still don't rely on it that much. And other teams rely on it at varying degrees. The DBacks are a team that I don't rely on analytics much if any at all. There are some cases where we can look at a move and call it dumb. They happen..all the time. And for whatever reason the team making the move wouldn't think it was dumb at the time of the deal. Still doesn't make it not dumb. I don't see an issue with calling a FO out on it if it's your opinion.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 03:20 PM

I don't think most needed fangraphs for that. He was clearly on the decline, or his prime wasn't going to last much longer. He's a guy I personally feel is undervalued by WAR in his career tho. The potential to turn a game upside down with one swing the way he could far outweighed his poor defense at a position like first base. But I think that contract was a combination of desperation, pressure, and wishful thinking.

I wouldn't say he was on a decline when that extension was signed. He was coming off a 45 homer 4.5 WAR season when he signed it. The main problem was that he was already signed for 2 more years and then proceeded to decline hard the same year he signed the deal. And I wouldn't say WAR undervalued him. He had 16.4 fWAR in his 4 year prime with a single year high of 5.9.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 03:51 PM

I don't see an issue with calling a FO out on it if it's your opinion. I agree with your overall point up until this. You can't assume to understand the data that you don't have.

Now I fully support calling the FO out when they make errors in the decision making process. It made sense to question the logic behind the Markakis and HO moves.

chop2chip

08-26-2016, 03:53 PM

I wouldn't say he was on a decline when that extension was signed. He was coming off a 45 homer 4.5 WAR season when he signed it. The main problem was that he was already signed for 2 more years and then proceeded to decline hard the same year he signed the deal. And I wouldn't say WAR undervalued him. He had 16.4 fWAR in his 4 year prime with a single year high of 5.9.

Does the WAR movement get sole credit for being right with Howard? I think that extension was universally panned.

smootness

08-26-2016, 05:59 PM

I can't speak to the scouting departments, but when I looked into it they didn't pay their analytic people well at all. I would have had to take a 60%-70% pay cut and worked insane hours. Baseball nerd jobs are only for young guys with no family haha!

You sound amazing.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 06:04 PM

I agree with your overall point up until this. You can't assume to understand the data that you don't have.

Now I fully support calling the FO out when they make errors in the decision making process. It made sense to question the logic behind the Markakis and HO moves.

While true you can disagree with player valuations based on it even if you don't have access to it. I don't see an issue with someone not thinking Kemp has been worth 8 million a year or that he will be in the future. I would tend to agree with that but at the same time I don't really care because I doubt the Braves compete in the next couple of years and money doesn't carry over so it's a non issue to me.

thewupk

08-26-2016, 06:07 PM

Does the WAR movement get sole credit for being right with Howard? I think that extension was universally panned.

Sure.....Howard came up late so he was already old when hitting the FA years. He's a classic case of paying for what you did and not what you will do. These are mistakes made by all types of FO's.

zitothebrave

08-26-2016, 06:09 PM

I don't think most needed fangraphs for that. He was clearly on the decline, or his prime wasn't going to last much longer. He's a guy I personally feel is undervalued by WAR in his career tho. The potential to turn a game upside down with one swing the way he could far outweighed his poor defense at a position like first base. But I think that contract was a combination of desperation, pressure, and wishful thinking.

It's called he doesn't hit breaking balls well. When pitchers realized they could throw him slop and he'd chase it, he was cooked. Add to that his injuries that sapped his power, he was lost. In a way he had a longer more interesting fall than our own Failcoeur. Who was on fire at first (like Howard) then people realized his flaws and he became an effective but flawed hitter, a coach changed his approach from an all or nothing hitter to try to put it the other way and found some moderate success, then that went and it was over.

GovClintonTyree

08-26-2016, 06:54 PM

It's called he doesn't hit breaking balls well. When pitchers realized they could throw him slop and he'd chase it, he was cooked. Add to that his injuries that sapped his power, he was lost. In a way he had a longer more interesting fall than our own Failcoeur. Who was on fire at first (like Howard) then people realized his flaws and he became an effective but flawed hitter, a coach changed his approach from an all or nothing hitter to try to put it the other way and found some moderate success, then that went and it was over.

I don't think so. I think Ryan Howard was just like Dan Marino.

He was never the same after he blew out his Achilles.

Southcack77

08-26-2016, 06:54 PM

To defend zito I don't see how you can't see that point of view. They Braves added ~$8.5 million in salary per year for 3 years for Kemp. The last 1 5/6's seasons Kemp has provided 0.5 total WAR. If he does that the next two seasons the Braves will have paid close to 17 million for 0.5 WAR. With the going rate of 8 million per WAR that is a horrible use of money. And one could consider that moronic. Now there are other considerations I won't get into that I personally agree with but the reality is the Braves will be overpaying for Kemp. And to some people that is not a good thing.

Disregarding 2016, by my calculation, Braves add to payroll 12 million in 2017, 11.5 million in 2018, and 10.5 in 2019.

They save 8 million in 2020.

It's possible that saving 8 million in 2020 is the biggest positive for the trade. If the Braves were able to get good production out of him and flip him without having to pay too much of his salary (the Dodgers and Padres say good luck to that), it could be a nifty maneuver.