Page 4 of 135 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 2691

Thread: 2019 Trade Deadline Thread:

  1. #61
    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 nsacpi View Post
    Position players assigned a 70 FV go on to be more productive than pitchers assigned a 70 FV. But this covers a very small number of players.

    Looking at the 65s, it looks like the pitchers go on to be more productive on average by a small amount.

    Looking at the 60s, it also looks like pitchers do better by a small amount.

    Then for the 55s and 50s, the hitters do better by a significant amount. A 55 pitcher is closer to a 50 hitter than a 55 hitter.

    I suspect the results for the 60s and 65s are flukes due to small samples. But maybe this needs to be looked at more closely.
    Most prospects are 55s and 50s. These types of results are why we saw FG unilaterally shift the grading of pitchers down half a grade, and is why Soroka suddenly went from a 60 to a 55.

    This shift in grading stopped this type of mismatch from happening, which was the first kind of work done to show just how much value pitchers gave up due to risk:

    https://blogs.fangraphs.com/valuing-...100-prospects/

    This has been a gradual process to get pitchers valued roughly equal to position players. Folks who have followed along over the years have a good understanding about why pitchers have seen their overall value drop over the last 3-5 years.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Enscheff For This Useful Post:

    jpx7 (06-19-2019), UNCBlue012 (06-19-2019)

  3. #62
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,433
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    a similar and maybe more intuitive rule is that any list of Top 100 players should have twice as many hitters as pitchers. Same for any draft board for the first 2 rounds of the draft.
    "I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."

    "I am your retribution."

  4. #63
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Data says you're wrong. Data says the volatility of pitchers make them less valuable overall. Data says to value prospects roughly as: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/an-updat...ect-valuation/

    Pitching prospects are still valuable, as long as their risk is factored in correctly when calculating their overall value.
    i don't remember making a claim as to which is the more valuable prospect overall. my sentence about stockpiling pitching has little to do with value and more to do with how much pitching is needed and how and when it's acquired, especially by a mid-market team.

    again, i've yet to see anyone lay out a blueprint for a mid-market team to acquire the necessary amount of solid pitching to be competitive for more than a year. "already developed" guys are either old and risky, young and risky, or will be expensive in terms of money and/or prospects.
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  5. #64
    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 CJ9 View Post
    Fangraphs write up on Scherzer's trade value: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/max-scherzers-trade-value/

    Suggests Pache and Bryse Wilson would be fair value.
    This analysis doesn't include any contender's premium for the 2019 season.

    Scherzer's trade value is probably closer to $100M. The Braves aren't getting him for Pache and Wilson...

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

    jpx7 (06-19-2019)

  7. #65
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    how do you suppose a mid-market team acquire enough solid pitching to get thru multiple years of contention?
    i'm all ears here.
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  8. #66
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    you especially have to consider where the Braves' pitching was at the time. there were like 2-3 potential big league starters. pitching was desperately needed.
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  9. #67
    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 Super View Post
    i don't remember making a claim as to which is the more valuable prospect overall. my sentence about stockpiling pitching has little to do with value and more to do with how much pitching is needed and how and when it's acquired, especially by a mid-market team.

    again, i've yet to see anyone lay out a blueprint for a mid-market team to acquire the necessary amount of solid pitching to be competitive for more than a year. "already developed" guys are either old and risky, young and risky, or will be expensive in terms of money and/or prospects.
    It is cheaper in terms of prospect capital to buy a finished product like Archer or Gausman with position prospects than it is to develop them while suffering massive pitcher attrition. Those guys are then supplemented by short term deals like the Braves just did with DK.

    The Dodgers have shown the blueprint...

    Invest in the most valuable prospects, period. As long as the risk inherent in being a pitcher is properly baked into the valuation, pitchers are still among the most valuable prospects...just not "stockpiling them".

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

    jpx7 (06-19-2019)

  11. #68
    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 Super View Post
    you especially have to consider where the Braves' pitching was at the time. there were like 2-3 potential big league starters. pitching was desperately needed.
    You are rehashing tehteh's silly comment, "if pitchers are so risky you better get a lot of them!".

    I think that's a pretty good sign you're wrong...

  12. #69
    Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is. jpx7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,903
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    47,596
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6,441
    Thanked in
    3,830 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    This analysis doesn't include any contender's premium for the 2019 season.

    Scherzer's trade value is probably closer to $100M. The Braves aren't getting him for Pache and Wilson...
    And I honestly wouldn’t want them to, at that price. Scherzer’s still one of the top three or so starters in the game, but age isn’t on his side and he’s due a ton of cash.
    "For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."

  13. #70
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,433
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    i'm all ears here.
    You do have to take some pitchers. The approach I would take is:

    1) Populate your draft board for the first three rounds so that there are twice as many hitters as pitchers. Make sure that over time this results in you taking twice as many hitters as pitchers in those rounds.

    2) College pitchers are a good bet in rounds 4-10. Mostly this reflects the fact that you won't find too many high ceiling types in those rounds from any demographic. So might as well go for a disproportionate number of high floor college pitchers in those rounds.

    I think the above approach will leave you a little thin in pitching and any team taking it will have to compensate by acquiring major league level talent to fill in the back end of the rotation.
    "I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."

    "I am your retribution."

  14. #71
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    It is cheaper in terms of prospect capital to buy a finished product like Archer or Gausman with position prospects than it is to develop them while suffering massive pitcher attrition. Those guys are then supplemented by short term deals like the Braves just did with DK.

    The Dodgers have shown the blueprint...

    Invest in the most valuable prospects, period. As long as the risk inherent in being a pitcher is properly baked into the valuation, pitchers are still among the most valuable prospects...just not "stockpiling them".
    Dodgers have the luxury of already having one of the greatest pitchers of all time / The funds to keep that pitcher as well as the funds to make acquisitions like Ryu/Hill.

    The Dodgers are clearly the best run team in baseball but they have some inherent advantages on how they can plan for a complete build.
    Natural Immunity Croc

  15. #72
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    We are now firmly in the area that I predicted several years ago IMO of being good but with too many holes to really be great and not enough cash flexibility to buy what's needed that way.

    That leaves a likely scenario pf 2 possibilities:

    1. The Braves decide to "go for it" and open the prospect vault to trade for what is necessary to flesh out the current team as a competitor in the short term. I'm not talking about trading marginal prospects for marginal upgrades. I'm talking about significant adds that cost significant prospect capital. The Cubs took that route and won a WS but gave up a couple of high value prospects in Gleyber Torres and Eloy Jimenez to do it. They've won at a pretty good clip through their window and stand a good chance of making the playoffs again. But, even without the sanctions and money problems of the Braves, the Cubs find their farm mostly barren and their ML club getting relatively old, expensive and without a lot of significant player control. Their window is clearly closing. But I think you say it was worth it given the WS win. Without the WS win, I don't think most Cubs fans would be happy.

    or

    2. The Braves choose to hold the prospect capital and hope for enough development from within or a scrap heap trade reclamation to fill the holes well enough to get the job done. This is the Pittsburgh approach which extends a period of "good" baseball but largely precludes "great" baseball. Pittsburgh went away from that approach with the Archer trade of last year in a gamble that they apparently hoped would put them over the top. It didn't work. Their window is closed and they are headed for rebuild.

    The Braves look to have secured a reasonable window of good baseball no matter what they do, especially with the unexpected Acuna and Albies extensions. But, given the apparent payroll constraints, any significant trade improvement will come as a significant prospect capital cost which will in turn limit the flexibility of future teams and shorten the window and ability to become a great team.

  16. #73
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    It is cheaper in terms of prospect capital to buy a finished product like Archer or Gausman with position prospects than it is to develop them while suffering massive pitcher attrition. Those guys are then supplemented by short term deals like the Braves just did with DK.

    The Dodgers have shown the blueprint...

    Invest in the most valuable prospects, period. As long as the risk inherent in being a pitcher is properly baked into the valuation, pitchers are still among the most valuable prospects...just not "stockpiling them".
    buy a finished product like Archer and Gausman...are we seeing what's happening with them this year?
    you better pick the exact right guys i guess. Archer also cost *a ton* in prospect capital. i'm sure the Pirates aren't thrilled, to say the least, with investing what they did in him.
    the Dodgers' payroll/situation is also nothing like the Braves'.

    but to your last paragraph, i think the Braves' "emphasis" on pitching during the rebuild is overblown, while other teams' "emphasis" on hitters is similarly overblown, anyway. i think they probably did often take the best player offered to them, whether in a trade or via draft. a lot of times that could have been an undervalued pitcher they liked a lot.
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  17. #74
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    I think the above approach will leave you a little thin in pitching and any team taking it will have to compensate by acquiring major league level talent to fill in the back end of the rotation.
    and i think it's extremely easy to pick the wrong ones.
    how many guys are reliably good year after year? a select few. now what will it cost to acquire them? how much money, how many good prospects? it'd be great if there were a crystal ball available for guys like Odorizzi, Morton, and Minor, but a lot of it is luck and guys just kind of randomly putting it together.
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  18. #75
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    We are now firmly in the area that I predicted several years ago IMO of being good but with too many holes to really be great and not enough cash flexibility to buy what's needed that way.

    That leaves a likely scenario pf 2 possibilities:

    1. The Braves decide to "go for it" and open the prospect vault to trade for what is necessary to flesh out the current team as a competitor in the short term. I'm not talking about trading marginal prospects for marginal upgrades. I'm talking about significant adds that cost significant prospect capital. The Cubs took that route and won a WS but gave up a couple of high value prospects in Gleyber Torres and Eloy Jimenez to do it. They've won at a pretty good clip through their window and stand a good chance of making the playoffs again. But, even without the sanctions and money problems of the Braves, the Cubs find their farm mostly barren and their ML club getting relatively old, expensive and without a lot of significant player control. Their window is clearly closing. But I think you say it was worth it given the WS win. Without the WS win, I don't think most Cubs fans would be happy.

    or

    2. The Braves choose to hold the prospect capital and hope for enough development from within or a scrap heap trade reclamation to fill the holes well enough to get the job done. This is the Pittsburgh approach which extends a period of "good" baseball but largely precludes "great" baseball. Pittsburgh went away from that approach with the Archer trade of last year in a gamble that they apparently hoped would put them over the top. It didn't work. Their window is closed and they are headed for rebuild.

    The Braves look to have secured a reasonable window of good baseball no matter what they do, especially with the unexpected Acuna and Albies extensions. But, given the apparent payroll constraints, any significant trade improvement will come as a significant prospect capital cost which will in turn limit the flexibility of future teams and shorten the window and ability to become a great team.
    yawnnnnnnnnnnnn
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  19. #76
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,433
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    and i think it's extremely easy to pick the wrong ones.
    how many guys are reliably good year after year? a select few. now what will it cost to acquire them? how much money, how many good prospects? it'd be great if there were a crystal ball available for guys like Odorizzi, Morton, and Minor, but a lot of it is luck and guys just kind of randomly putting it together.
    Sure you need a little luck. We have hit on guys like Anibal and Harang for a year. I'm talking about signing a few guys like that to be your fifth starter, not making trades for someone like Archer.

    So in any given season your rotation would look something like this:

    1) Former high round pick
    2) Former high round pick
    3) International signing
    4) Later round pick who panned out
    5) Someone like Anibal
    Last edited by nsacpi; 06-19-2019 at 12:53 PM.
    "I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."

    "I am your retribution."

  20. #77
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    Sure you need a little luck. We have hit on guys like Anibal and Harang for a year. I'm talking about signing a few guys like that to be your fifth starter, not making trades for someone like Archer.

    So in any given season your rotation would look something like this:

    1) Former high round pick
    2) Former high round pick
    3) International signing
    4) Later round pick who panned out
    5) Someone like Anibal
    That takes a massive internal investment from an amateur perspective. Similar to the one that the Braves undertook during the rebuild.
    Natural Immunity Croc

  21. #78
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    Sure you need a little luck. We have hit on guys like Anibal and Harang for a year. I'm talking about signing a few guys like that to be your fifth starter, not making trades for someone like Archer.

    So in any given season your rotation would look something like this:

    1) Former high round pick
    2) Former high round pick
    3) International signing
    4) Later round pick who panned out
    5) Someone like Anibal
    unless you don't develop any high round picks...
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  22. #79
    Expects Yuge Games nsacpi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    47,433
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,704
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11,384
    Thanked in
    7,533 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thethe View Post
    That takes a massive internal investment from an amateur perspective. Similar to the one that the Braves undertook during the rebuild.
    Huh? I outlined a draft strategy that would involve investing far fewer high picks in pitchers than we did during the Hartcoppy years.
    "I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."

    "I am your retribution."

  23. #80
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nsacpi View Post
    You do have to take some pitchers. The approach I would take is:

    1) Populate your draft board for the first three rounds so that there are twice as many hitters as pitchers. Make sure that over time this results in you taking twice as many hitters as pitchers in those rounds.

    2) College pitchers are a good bet in rounds 4-10. Mostly this reflects the fact that you won't find too many high ceiling types in those rounds from any demographic. So might as well go for a disproportionate number of high floor college pitchers in those rounds.

    I think the above approach will leave you a little thin in pitching and any team taking it will have to compensate by acquiring major league level talent to fill in the back end of the rotation.

    I think that's a reasonable strategy.

    I don't think it's the only reasonable strategy, but over infinite repetitions it probably would prove to be the most efficient approach by some likely relatively small degree, based on what the numbers seem to show.

    Even so, the context of a team's circumstances matter. Organizational need (as opposed to MLB roster need) has to factor into decision making. The Braves did not begin the rebuild in pitching equilibrium.

Similar Threads

  1. 2018 Trade Deadline ROSTERBATION
    By Enscheff in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 2852
    Last Post: 09-02-2018, 09:01 PM
  2. Trade Deadline: What are you willing to do?
    By Horsehide Harry in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 419
    Last Post: 07-28-2016, 09:01 PM
  3. Trade Deadline/Rumors thread
    By sturg33 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 1126
    Last Post: 07-31-2015, 06:49 PM
  4. MLB Trade Deadline Discussion
    By NinersSBChamps in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 960
    Last Post: 08-06-2014, 03:22 PM
  5. Trade Deadline Day
    By bravesnumberone in forum 2013 Legendary
    Replies: 253
    Last Post: 08-02-2013, 09:08 AM

Posting Permissions

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