Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: Looking for value: McCutchen?

  1. #1
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts

    Looking for value: McCutchen?

    So, I saw on MLBTR that the Pirates are looking to play Marte in CF and have Cutch go to RF. Seems like the Pirates have decided that playing CF is actually hurting Cutch's trade value (his defense there has never been good).

    So, it seems to me that maybe Cutch could be had at a discount and the Pirates have done a potential acquiring team the favor of re-aligning Cutch's expectations about what position he will play -stay in Pitt, play RF, get traded play LF or RF but CF will never be his home again.

    Obviously, when he was contending for MVP every year his trade value was off the charts. But, what does everyone think it might be now given recent events?

    I was thinking trade for McCutchen and play him in LF. And trade one of Kemp/Neck (hell, why not both?) and the one who stays plays RF.

    But what do the Braves give up that still is a win for them?

  2. #2
    Arbitration Eligible NYCBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,271
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,151
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    720
    Thanked in
    526 Posts
    Personally, just too risky. He wasn't great last year, and is now on the wrong side of 30. Under contract for this year plus one option year. I don't think it makes sense for us to take the risk at this point. WAR last year: McCutchen: .7, Kemp: .7, Markakis: 1.1. I get it, your betting on a rebound, but its no sure thing.

  3. #3
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NYCBrave View Post
    Personally, just too risky. He wasn't great last year, and is now on the wrong side of 30. Under contract for this year plus one option year. I don't think it makes sense for us to take the risk at this point. WAR last year: McCutchen: .7, Kemp: .7, Markakis: 1.1. I get it, your betting on a rebound, but its no sure thing.
    Yeah, his bWAR last year was -.7 due mostly to his -2.6 DWAR with 2.2 OWAR. The years before his WAR was 4.9, 6.3, 8.1, 7.0, 5.7, 3.8, 2.3

    He will be 30 this year

    I think the Pirates are thinking that they will move him out of CF to LF or RF where his range will play better and his DWAR will significantly improve. Let's say his DWAR gets back to 1.0 and his OWAR gets back to 5. He could be seen then as a 5+ WAR guy again, not out of the realm of possibility. I think if you can get him for the trade value cost of a 2 WAR guy then the risk is worthwhile. OTOH, the Pirates may see the risk of getting him back to 5 WAR value as worth the payroll.

  4. #4
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    Yeah, his bWAR last year was -.7 due mostly to his -2.6 DWAR with 2.2 OWAR. The years before his WAR was 4.9, 6.3, 8.1, 7.0, 5.7, 3.8, 2.3

    He will be 30 this year

    I think the Pirates are thinking that they will move him out of CF to LF or RF where his range will play better and his DWAR will significantly improve. Let's say his DWAR gets back to 1.0 and his OWAR gets back to 5. He could be seen then as a 5+ WAR guy again, not out of the realm of possibility. I think if you can get him for the trade value cost of a 2 WAR guy then the risk is worthwhile. OTOH, the Pirates may see the risk of getting him back to 5 WAR value as worth the payroll.
    That's really what it comes down to. What is Pittsburgh willing to get back for Cutch. How do they currently value him and what does the league value him at? If you can trade for him as a 2 WAR player then it would something to entertain.

    Another thing is are the Braves the team that should be making this gamble? If they were 1 player away and think a rebounding Cutch could be that guy then yes. But I don't think the Braves are that team. Braves would still need more to go right than Cutch playing like he did pre 2016.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to thewupk For This Useful Post:

    50PoundHead (02-06-2017)

  6. #5
    Atlanta Braves Fan
    Wash Nationals Fan
    Bryce Harper Fanatic

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,459
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    87
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,317
    Thanked in
    874 Posts
    Fans will burn the team at the stake if they don't get significant value in return. I think he may be damaged good so I wouldn't take that risk.
    "Yes, I did think Aldrich was good UNTIL I SAW HIM PLAY. "- thethe

  7. #6
    It's OVER 5,000! cajunrevenge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    uranus
    Posts
    25,147
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,484
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,792
    Thanked in
    2,710 Posts
    I would take a chance on him but I wouldnt pay the asking price.
    "Donald Trump will serve a second term as president of the United States.

    It’s over."


    Little Thethe Nov 19, 2020.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to cajunrevenge For This Useful Post:

    JohnAdcox (02-06-2017)

  9. #7
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Back when the Nats were trying to get Cutch, the Pirates wanted Giolito and Robles. That is 2 Top 10 prospects in the game. The Nats refused and got Eaton instead.

    The Braves would have to give up Swanson and Albies to match that package. If you believe Giolito is valued as a Top 50 guy rather than a Top 5 guy (which is a sentiment I've read in a few places), the equivalent package would be Albies plus Newcomb.

    For a team projected to win 80 games, even with a resurgent Cutch, it makes zero sense.

  10. #8
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    Yeah, his bWAR last year was -.7 due mostly to his -2.6 DWAR with 2.2 OWAR. The years before his WAR was 4.9, 6.3, 8.1, 7.0, 5.7, 3.8, 2.3

    He will be 30 this year

    I think the Pirates are thinking that they will move him out of CF to LF or RF where his range will play better and his DWAR will significantly improve. Let's say his DWAR gets back to 1.0 and his OWAR gets back to 5. He could be seen then as a 5+ WAR guy again, not out of the realm of possibility. I think if you can get him for the trade value cost of a 2 WAR guy then the risk is worthwhile. OTOH, the Pirates may see the risk of getting him back to 5 WAR value as worth the payroll.
    His dWAR is not likely to improve much by moving to RF. His lack of range will hurt him just as much in a corner spot as it does in CF.

    I don't think this move is being made with the intent of improving his trade value as much as it's being made to make their team better. Marte is the better option in CF.

  11. #9
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Back when the Nats were trying to get Cutch, the Pirates wanted Giolito and Robles. That is 2 Top 10 prospects in the game. The Nats refused and got Eaton instead.

    The Braves would have to give up Swanson and Albies to match that package. If you believe Giolito is valued as a Top 50 guy rather than a Top 5 guy (which is a sentiment I've read in a few places), the equivalent package would be Albies plus Newcomb.

    For a team projected to win 80 games, even with a resurgent Cutch, it makes zero sense.
    Yeah, but I think the Pirates have come to the conclusion that the Cutch isn't as valuable a they thought. If that's the case and they want to move him for money reasons, then he might be had for less.

    I agree that it doesn't make much sense for a rebuilding Braves team at this point in time. I've said the same about the so called ACE acquisitions like Sale, Quintana, Archer, etc. as well as most other thoughts on bringing in one big time player because I don't think the Braves are just one big time anything away from really being competitive. In fact, I've been pretty vocal that they are a long way from being finished with a talent gathering period of a rebuilding phase.

    BUT, others don't view it that way. They want to win now, Now, NOW! I think it would be the wrong move to try to short circuit the process. But, McCutchen at a reasonable price wouldn't be a horrible gamble IF you were of the mind that he would make any real difference in the long run.

  12. #10
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    His dWAR is not likely to improve much by moving to RF. His lack of range will hurt him just as much in a corner spot as it does in CF.

    I don't think this move is being made with the intent of improving his trade value as much as it's being made to make their team better. Marte is the better option in CF.
    I guess it would depend, and I don't know the answer, on his range to his right vs his left and how much territory he would be expected to cover with Marte in CF. I would think it would depend a lot on how well he adjusts before a gauge on range can be determined.

  13. #11
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    Yeah, but I think the Pirates have come to the conclusion that the Cutch isn't as valuable a they thought. If that's the case and they want to move him for money reasons, then he might be had for less.

    I agree that it doesn't make much sense for a rebuilding Braves team at this point in time. I've said the same about the so called ACE acquisitions like Sale, Quintana, Archer, etc. as well as most other thoughts on bringing in one big time player because I don't think the Braves are just one big time anything away from really being competitive. In fact, I've been pretty vocal that they are a long way from being finished with a talent gathering period of a rebuilding phase.

    BUT, others don't view it that way. They want to win now, Now, NOW! I think it would be the wrong move to try to short circuit the process. But, McCutchen at a reasonable price wouldn't be a horrible gamble IF you were of the mind that he would make any real difference in the long run.
    Cutch is one of those players I think the Braves would have targeted for 2017 if pitchers like Folty, Wisler, Jenkins, Blair and Newcomb had progressed as expected. If the 2017 rotation was going to consist of Teheran, plus 3 of the 5 guys I listed, plus one of Garcia/Dicke/Colon, I think the Braves would have been a strong candidate to acquire Cutch (or Braun, or Ces) to play LF.

    Since those pitchers failed to progress as hoped, the FO was forced to punt 2017 by acquiring cheaper "names" like Kemp, and all 3 of Garcia/Dickey/Colon.

    It has always been my contention that the underwhelming roster the Braves currently have is a direct result of that aforementioned group of pitchers failing to develop, thus forcing the Braves to extend the rebuild one more season. As long as those pitchers continue to stall, the Braves will be forced into a holding pattern, which will lead to more losing seasons.

  14. #12
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Cutch is one of those players I think the Braves would have targeted for 2017 if pitchers like Folty, Wisler, Jenkins, Blair and Newcomb had progressed as expected. If the 2017 rotation was going to consist of Teheran, plus 3 of the 5 guys I listed, plus one of Garcia/Dicke/Colon, I think the Braves would have been a strong candidate to acquire Cutch (or Braun, or Ces) to play LF.

    Since those pitchers failed to progress as hoped, the FO was forced to punt 2017 by acquiring cheaper "names" like Kemp, and all 3 of Garcia/Dickey/Colon.

    It has always been my contention that the underwhelming roster the Braves currently have is a direct result of that aforementioned group of pitchers failing to develop, thus forcing the Braves to extend the rebuild one more season. As long as those pitchers continue to stall, the Braves will be forced into a holding pattern, which will lead to more losing seasons.
    Agree with the caveat that I think counting on the Folty, Wisler, Jenkins, Blair group for 2017 was always folly. Wisler and Folty both showed in 2015 that they were works in progress. Blair was rushed in 2016. Jenkins never showed that he could miss bats. So a plan counting on those guys making up 3/5 or even 2/5 of a "good" rotation in 2017 was always wishful thinking. And wishful thinking is something good FO can't afford.

    Even IF 3 of those guys were as good as reasonably hoped for, the Braves still have a lousy offensive team on the whole. A few hot months last year didn't change they real dynamic IMO and another year tacked onto Markakis and Kemp and Flowers won't help. And I am certainly not a believer in Garcia at 3B. Offensively you have to hope (pray) that Freeman continues his MVP play, Inciarte continues as the second half guy, not the first, Swanson at least holds serve to last year and doesn't regress and you get fountain of youth type miracles out of Kemp, Markakis, Garica, Flowers and Peterson (at least for a while).

    In other words, 2017 only ever made any sense IF the pitching grew up and Wisler, Blair, Newcombe could be counted on for better than Garcia, Colon, Dickey (Folty is in both) AND they picked up significant offensive upgrades in 2-3 positions. And that's just to get to OK.

  15. #13
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    Agree with the caveat that I think counting on the Folty, Wisler, Jenkins, Blair group for 2017 was always folly. Wisler and Folty both showed in 2015 that they were works in progress. Blair was rushed in 2016. Jenkins never showed that he could miss bats. So a plan counting on those guys making up 3/5 or even 2/5 of a "good" rotation in 2017 was always wishful thinking. And wishful thinking is something good FO can't afford.

    Even IF 3 of those guys were as good as reasonably hoped for, the Braves still have a lousy offensive team on the whole. A few hot months last year didn't change they real dynamic IMO and another year tacked onto Markakis and Kemp and Flowers won't help. And I am certainly not a believer in Garcia at 3B. Offensively you have to hope (pray) that Freeman continues his MVP play, Inciarte continues as the second half guy, not the first, Swanson at least holds serve to last year and doesn't regress and you get fountain of youth type miracles out of Kemp, Markakis, Garica, Flowers and Peterson (at least for a while).

    In other words, 2017 only ever made any sense IF the pitching grew up and Wisler, Blair, Newcombe could be counted on for better than Garcia, Colon, Dickey (Folty is in both) AND they picked up significant offensive upgrades in 2-3 positions. And that's just to get to OK.
    Right, but for example, let's say the young guys made some reasonable progression, so the rotation was projected to be:

    Teheran: 3-4 WAR
    Folty: 2-3 WAR
    Wisler: 2-3 WAR
    Blair: 1-2 WAR
    Colon: 1-2 WAR

    The Braves could have afforded to make some substantial changes to the offense:

    C - Castro
    1B - Freeman
    2B - Jace/SRod/Albies
    SS - Swanson
    3B - Valbuena/SRod
    LF - Ces/Braun/Cutch
    CF - Inciarte
    RF - Markakis

    I think that team would have easily projected to win 85+ games and been a true WC contender.

    Unfortunately, the young pitchers almost all fell flat on their faces in 2016, and the Braves were forced to spend their resources acquiring short term fixes to make the team "palatable" going into the new stadium. The only silver lining is that they were able to construct a roster with a non-zero chance of winning 80 games without mortgaging any of the future.

    All we can hope for is this 1 year stall tactic works and the pitchers develop this season. If they don't the Braves won't be good for a few more years since the majority of their eggs are in the young pitching basket.

  16. #14
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Right, but for example, let's say the young guys made some reasonable progression, so the rotation was projected to be:

    Teheran: 3-4 WAR
    Folty: 2-3 WAR
    Wisler: 2-3 WAR
    Blair: 1-2 WAR
    Colon: 1-2 WAR

    The Braves could have afforded to make some substantial changes to the offense:

    C - Castro
    1B - Freeman
    2B - Jace/SRod/Albies
    SS - Swanson
    3B - Valbuena/SRod
    LF - Ces/Braun/Cutch
    CF - Inciarte
    RF - Markakis

    I think that team would have easily projected to win 85+ games and been a true WC contender.

    Unfortunately, the young pitchers almost all fell flat on their faces in 2016, and the Braves were forced to spend their resources acquiring short term fixes to make the team "palatable" going into the new stadium. The only silver lining is that they were able to construct a roster with a non-zero chance of winning 80 games without mortgaging any of the future.

    All we can hope for is this 1 year stall tactic works and the pitchers develop this season. If they don't the Braves won't be good for a few more years since the majority of their eggs are in the young pitching basket.
    Agreed

  17. #15
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    I guess it would depend, and I don't know the answer, on his range to his right vs his left and how much territory he would be expected to cover with Marte in CF. I would think it would depend a lot on how well he adjusts before a gauge on range can be determined.
    Range doesn't really overlap, though. A corner OF may have a little less room to cover near the line, but he shouldn't if he's being positioned correctly.

  18. #16
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    Range doesn't really overlap, though. A corner OF may have a little less room to cover near the line, but he shouldn't if he's being positioned correctly.
    This article sheds some light on why thexare moving Cutch to RF. Apparently he has good range to his right, and terrible range to his left. Putting him in RF allows his good range to play in the gap.

    It is the damnedest thing, and I have not heard any reasonable explanations as to why his range is so lopsided.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-p...field-shuffle/

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Enscheff For This Useful Post:

    Horsehide Harry (02-07-2017)

  20. #17
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    This article sheds some light on why thexare moving Cutch to RF. Apparently he has good range to his right, and terrible range to his left. Putting him in RF allows his good range to play in the gap.

    It is the damnedest thing, and I have not heard any reasonable explanations as to why his range is so lopsided.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-p...field-shuffle/
    Good catch.

    I still think the move is designed to rebuild value if they can before they trade him. I think Meadows is their long term CF with everybody else sliding back.

  21. #18
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    This article sheds some light on why thexare moving Cutch to RF. Apparently he has good range to his right, and terrible range to his left. Putting him in RF allows his good range to play in the gap.

    It is the damnedest thing, and I have not heard any reasonable explanations as to why his range is so lopsided.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-p...field-shuffle/
    Interesting. This is a good example of why using data is pretty much always a good thing. If you're using the straw man argument against data, then you're going to argue that people who like more data are going to say a player will be the exact same defensive player in all positions because that's what WAR says and they don't consider the fact that different positions have different angles, different territories to cover, etc. But here we see that data is showing us exactly that, that perhaps the positional change will help because he appears to be better at some aspects than others.

    Data is always good if used as a tool because it simply seeks to explain and describe what is happening on the field. It cracks me up that people who refuse to use any kind of advanced analytics swear by things like BA and RBI...as though that isn't data.

    Anyway, yes, that is a very interesting article. It will be an interesting test case on how much positional alignment affects defense. As the article mentions, they're moving two clear defensive strengths to new positions in the process. It could even prove true that McCutchen sees an improvement in defensive metrics but Marte and Polanco both go the other direction, and the overall impact on the team is neutral or negative.

  22. #19
    Co-Owner, BravesCenter
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,516
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,345
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4,305
    Thanked in
    2,446 Posts
    You realize that data and statistics are two separate things, right?

  23. #20
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    You realize that data and statistics are two separate things, right?
    They really aren't.

    Sure, some of the advanced metrics are not as simple and clear-cut as 'this stat shows this %'. But they all incorporate the same basic data, the advanced metrics just do so in a much more in-depth way to attempt to explain things better. You just see the final product, which is 'this player is worth X WAR'. You don't see all the underlying data, or statistics, but that's all it is: a calculation of statistics.

    So while BA will always tell you exactly what % of ABs end in H, and in that sense be completely accurate at all times, and WAR is more complex and may not tell you literally the number of wins a player was worth or contributed, that doesn't necessarily make BA a better measure of anything. The issue with BA is what it doesn't tell you and the fact that it is a very poor measure of a player's overall worth. The issue with WAR is that it isn't clearly measured and may not be entirely accurate. What I don't understand is using one as some kind of absolute measure of worth while discounting the other entirely. IMO, BA should be used for exactly what it measures, and WAR should be taken into account as a rough measure of a player's overall ability and taken with a grain of salt. They are both using data to describe something, and both are useful if used correctly.

Similar Threads

  1. Buy low on McCutchen?
    By Enscheff in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 07-20-2016, 02:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •