Like I said, pointless to discuss. Some day maybe you can take a statistics class and learn how to calculate correlation between 2 events.
Until then, agree to disagree.
Olivera traded for Kemp
- Thread starter Enscheff
- Start date
Like I said, pointless to discuss. Some day maybe you can take a statistics class and learn how to calculate correlation between 2 events.
Until then, agree to disagree.
All examples on incomplete data as well. Anything pre 2002 is going to be that way. We have no way of knowing their actual impact on range. Sheffield, Drew, and Francoeur? All show impacts on their range when Andruw was there and when he wasn't.
Not pointless when you didn't even know what made Jeff so good in 2005 and 2007.
striker42
Well-known member
For me the biggest question here is how Kemp will age. If he remains relatively the same player, I think this would be a very good deal. If Kemp can hit .260/.300/.500 (not out of the question considering his stats away from Petco) with 30 HRs and close to 100 RBIs, then I think we have to be thrilled with the deal.
The problem is he's about to turn 32. He'll be 35 by the time his contract ends. You've also started to see some worrying things at the plate. In 2014 his BB% was 8.7, in 2015 it was 6.0, and this year it's just 3.7. This makes me worry that he's losing some bat speed. When your bat speed starts to go you have to start your swing earlier. Pitches you would have recognized at taken earlier in your career are pitches you're swinging at now. He's right at the age where a lot of hitters start to see their bat speed decline so that fact coupled with his dropping BB rate is a concern for how he'll age.
I just can't get too up in arms about his defense if he's playing left. We were willing to stick with Olivera out there if he had been able to hit the ball instead of a woman. Kemp can't be any worse than Olivera out there. Add in that LF isn't a premium position and that we'll hopefully have Inciarte and Smith patrolling the other spots and I think Kemp's defense will be survivable.
The problem is he's about to turn 32. He'll be 35 by the time his contract ends. You've also started to see some worrying things at the plate. In 2014 his BB% was 8.7, in 2015 it was 6.0, and this year it's just 3.7. This makes me worry that he's losing some bat speed. When your bat speed starts to go you have to start your swing earlier. Pitches you would have recognized at taken earlier in your career are pitches you're swinging at now. He's right at the age where a lot of hitters start to see their bat speed decline so that fact coupled with his dropping BB rate is a concern for how he'll age.
I just can't get too up in arms about his defense if he's playing left. We were willing to stick with Olivera out there if he had been able to hit the ball instead of a woman. Kemp can't be any worse than Olivera out there. Add in that LF isn't a premium position and that we'll hopefully have Inciarte and Smith patrolling the other spots and I think Kemp's defense will be survivable.
chop2chip
Well-known member
Tell me how you would design this statistical test to test the correlation. I guess you could look at the effect of playing next to a CF with high DRS, but then you have to control against shifting and who the RF is. I don't think you would have the data to test for correlation either way.
Otherwise, it makes perfect qualitative sense why playing next to a great CF would hide a corner outfielders inefficiencies, since the CF can cover a greater range. Some things don't need to be tested analytically to make sense.
Other points of data. Through 2007 Matt Diaz was +14.5 in range with the Braves. Negative .05 after Andruw left. Langerhans also put up impressive numbers in range in Atlanta. Not nearly as good when he left.
This is not to show that every player improves when next to an elite defender. That is not the case. But it does happen. To say Kemp can't improve with a really good CFer next to him is false. But it's not to say he will either. It's also up the Braves to actually position him a way to take advantage of that. And Andruw positioned his corner outfielders perfectly.
This is not to show that every player improves when next to an elite defender. That is not the case. But it does happen. To say Kemp can't improve with a really good CFer next to him is false. But it's not to say he will either. It's also up the Braves to actually position him a way to take advantage of that. And Andruw positioned his corner outfielders perfectly.
There are no real stats to back up that claim though, as defensive stats as we know them were not available during that time.
OK, last time I'll talk about this.
How is Inciarte going to cover for Kemp? By shifting towards LF so Kemp can shift towards the line. Great, Inciarte catches some balls in LC that Kemp wouldn't get, and Kemp gets to some balls on the line that he wouldn't have gotten to otherwise. Inciarte's value stays the same, and Kemp might get a small bump in defensive value.
But who catches the balls in RC that Inciarte can't get because he is shaded towards LF? Do you stick Mallex (and his below average bat for a corner OF) out there to cover the extra ground? What did you gain by adding Kemp in that scenario?
OFers ranges simply don't overlap enough to make this a feasible solution. The vast majority of balls to LF will be Kemp's and he will play them poorly.
Have any of you played OF at a level higher than little league?
Add MLBTR as a site that thinks it was a bad idea:
Neal
3:39 Who came out better in the Kemp trade? Padres or Braves?
Steve Adams
3:42 I get the appeal of the Braves just wanting to be DONE with Olivera and applaud both them and the Padres for cutting bait. That said, if I'm John Coppolella or John Hart, I'd just release Olivera rather than take on Kemp at $8.5MM annually. They must think the defense isn't as bad as it's made out to be or believe that his recent surge is sustainable... I'm not sold on his OBP skills, but the power's still there, so it could end up paying dividends.
"Could end up paying dividends" is the best review I've seen, so that's something!
Still haven't seen anyone not affiliated with the Braves call it a good trade. I bet some of you can find some hack writer who thinks it was good though.
Neal
3:39 Who came out better in the Kemp trade? Padres or Braves?
Steve Adams
3:42 I get the appeal of the Braves just wanting to be DONE with Olivera and applaud both them and the Padres for cutting bait. That said, if I'm John Coppolella or John Hart, I'd just release Olivera rather than take on Kemp at $8.5MM annually. They must think the defense isn't as bad as it's made out to be or believe that his recent surge is sustainable... I'm not sold on his OBP skills, but the power's still there, so it could end up paying dividends.
"Could end up paying dividends" is the best review I've seen, so that's something!
Still haven't seen anyone not affiliated with the Braves call it a good trade. I bet some of you can find some hack writer who thinks it was good though.
zbhargrove
Well-known member
I'm still waiting for your vaunted brilliant correlation statistics that you keep talking about but haven't shared.
I didn't see where he said it was a bad idea.
On the bright side, Kemp could possibly have 3 teams all pay other teams to take on the same contract. That has to be a record, right?
Vernon Wells
chop2chip
Well-known member
So you acknowledge that Inciarte has greater range, yes?
Kemp has less to cover, so he shifts to the line and the RF can cover the same ground. I don't get why that concept is so difficult to understand.
It's not supposed to be drastic. It's about marginal improvements, but over 1,500 innings in a season marginal improvements can be substantial.
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
Right. Nothing you said there is at odds with my comment, is it? 2 balls in four months? Career 99.1% on routine balls?
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
BTW, you wanted an expert who thinks that the Kemp acquisition was a good deal?
Look no further than the Macon Telegraph. Bill Shanks is a huge fan.
http://www.macon.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/bill-shanks/
Look no further than the Macon Telegraph. Bill Shanks is a huge fan.
http://www.macon.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/bill-shanks/
Haha, that's all I needed to see to tell me just how bad the trade was. Chip and Don said pretty much the same thing.
Would I want to agree with the analysts at MLBTR, FG and BP, or Bill, Chip and Don? Hmm...
Southcack77
Well-known member
Yes, in real life teams place weak defenders in left field quite a bit and use positioning and superior defenders to try and cover for them.
My sense is that the advanced defensive stats overstate the comparative importance of defense. I'm also not so sure those metrics do a particularly good job, though its better than it used to be.
I think Kemp's ability to play LF is the least of the Braves worries about his contract. Since the Braves aren't going to be contending for championships, what balls he doesn't get to are not going to be high profile misses that anyone is going to remember.
Where Atlanta might be screwed is if he continues to struggle making contact at the plate, or if his injury situation makes him someone that they can't really play anymore.
But given I think its unlikely the Braves are in a position to sign a great free agent or contend prior to 2018 or 2019, it may well be that it doesn't end up mattering. And if he hits .290, .340 with power like he's been doing lately, he will be just fine as an acquisition and the Braves may well be able to flip him for an asset.
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
Lolololol
Knew you'd like it. Crap, if Shanks likes it, I may have to rethink my whole analysis.
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
That seems like a pretty good analysis. Although I did note that his Z-swing% has actually increased, which leads me to believe it's more impatience and over aggressiveness than it is bat speed. He's still pretty young to lose that much bat speed.