Marlins fans must love life!!
The memories!! The flags!!! Wow!!!
Derrppp!!
Marlins fans must love life!!
The memories!! The flags!!! Wow!!!
Derrppp!!
Here's the thing about "flags fly forever", as it relates to the Cubs: they possibly didn't need Chapman to win that World Series (and they lapped their division, so they certainly didn't need him in the regular season). Chapman pitched in five games in that series: two comfortable wins, a loss, a close game where he actually blew the save (game seven) and one close game where he was dominant (game five). He had an ERA closer to four than to three in the LCS and the World Series.
Of course, you don't usually want to get that granular with the analysis, and you can't look at game logs to say a given trade was good or bad. But it does illustrate just how tricky the win now/screw the future trades are. You trade Torres for Chapman knowing you'll likely "lose" the trade in terms of value acquired vs. value surrendered, but that's OK because you're prioritizing value in the present over value in the future. But when you're talking about such small sample sizes, especially with regards to relievers, you can't be sure you're actually in a position to get big-time present-day value. You're sacrificing the future without even knowing that you're getting the present in return.
In essence, the Cubs traded the career of Gleyber Torres, a great damn player, in exchange for game five of the World Series.
The goal is to win the world series isnt it?
It's unlikely the Cubs win without the Chapman trade, but whatever.
If I could absolutely guarantee a WS win in 2020, you bet your ass I'd take it. Clearly it can't be guaranteed it, so it's a moot point, and I certainly wouldn't make that trade otherwise.
But again, this isn't about supporting a Braves plan to follow the Sox/Cubs. The point is that making fun of the Sox/Cubs when they clearly received the desired benefits of such moves is dumb. They sold the future for a chance to win now and it worked.
It really breaks down into an example of a choice between 2 options:
1. 10 seasons with a 10% of winning a WS, or
2. 1 season with a guaranteed WS and 9 seasons of irrelevance.
The behavioral science behind wager games are built on #1 being far more preferable. The entire casino industry is literally founded in it.
Personally, I’d rather watch 10 exciting seasons than 1. Maybe I need more bull semen.
Personally I loved the year of weak contact, starring Eury Perez and Pedro Ciriaco. We had a very entertaining team that year.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
Two things to consider. Not sure if any correlation, but this really makes me feel like AA is pursuing a trade of Riley to whoever values him the highest to get a legit bat in return.
Also thinking of the valuation of relevers with the new rules going into place. Is AA trying to get ahead of the curve in a time when LOOGYs and ROOGYs will see their value diminished?
jpx7 (11-15-2019)
This is a very good point that we (meaning I) glossed over.
2 year xwOBA of those pitchers prior to getting their big contract:
McGee: .323
Chatwood: .323
Kelly: .313
Britton: .304
Iglesias: .291
Davis: .278
Familia: .278
Shaw: .276
Ottavino: .275
Kimbrel: .253
Smith: .248
So yes, it is fair to say Will Smith is considerably better than all of those BP arms were except Kimbrel.
Given that data, signing Will Smith to a contract similar to the deal received by lesser (in some cases much lesser) BP arms should be considered a good value move.
jpx7 (11-15-2019)
https://www.12up.com/posts/cubs-shou...d-01dppc16tbat
From the Chicago tribune:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...725-story.html
It could be that later in the off-season another team will sign Ryu or Wheeler or Bumgarner on a similar value move. But I think any GM given a chance to sign Smith on those terms at this point in the off-season would have had to seriously consider doing so. It does mean less $$ to be spent on other areas of need. But value is value and we can spend some prospect capital if necessary to fill other areas of need.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."