Crasnick Article On BA

[smootness]

This is the problem with relying so heavily on the consistently unreliable projections. They won 89 games, so saying "they should have won 77 games" is pretty ridiculous. The Gnats "should have won 96 games", what should we take from that? The Braves and Phillies are both much younger and are coming off better years, so should Washington start looking to unload everybody and start from scratch?

Remind us how many games those projection systems had the 2018 Braves winning. How about the Athletics? The Gnats? Didn't they have the Astros projected to win the most games? And where are they? Exactly how many of the teams did the projections peg correctly?

The numbers have to be used as a tool - a very good tool, mind you - but still an imperfect tool. You simply can't just go with what the analytics department prescribes 100% of the time in every situation, because they're not infallible. The unexpected happens - Trout has one too many beers the night his brother comes to town, wakes up with a pounding headache, and misses a fastball when everyone KNOWS it's coming in the bottom of the third with two men on.

No one's saying you shouldn't rely heavily on what the analytics tell you - simply that if they're the only thing you use in your decision-making process that you're going to wind up being disappointed more often than you think you will. If AA & Company had approached 2018 strictly as another year in the rebuilding process - as the analytics told them to - there would be one less flag flying over SunTrust Park next April (if those going strictly by the numbers in every situation had been proven right every time, that flag would be flying in Philly or D. C. instead).

You're confusing preseason projections and simply runs scored vs. runs allowed.

It is absolutely true that regardless of the projections or advanced metrics, when you score and give up a certain amount of runs is not a repeatable skill. Over 162 games, run differential is a far more accurate guide for how good you are and how good you will be going forward than wins and losses.

The Braves were as good as their record indicated they were. The Nationals were a better team than their record indicated but still not as good as the Braves. And no, they should not have won 96 games. They should have won about 89-90. The Braves were about where they should have been, if not a win or two below it.

The Mariners should have won 77-78 games based on what they actually did on the field, not based on some projection system. Thinking that team is an 89-win team instead of an 80-or-fewer win team is how executives look stupid down the road and get fired.

 

[smootness]

They're a big market club that won 89 games despite missing Robinson Cano for a half season.

They get out from under Feliz the following season.

They should have the payroll to remain relevant.

They're a big market club who scored 34 fewer runs than they allowed, got insanely lucky and still missed the playoffs, has an aging team, is loaded with hefty contracts, and has nothing on the farm.

If you want them to keep just treading water, that's fine, but I doubt their fans would like the results of that any more than the results of tanking.

 

[clvclv]

You're confusing preseason projections and simply runs scored vs. runs allowed.

It is absolutely true that regardless of the projections or advanced metrics, when you score and give up a certain amount of runs is not a repeatable skill. Over 162 games, run differential is a far more accurate guide for how good you are and how good you will be going forward than wins and losses.

The Braves were as good as their record indicated they were. The Nationals were a better team than their record indicated but still not as good as the Braves. And no, they should not have won 96 games. They should have won about 89-90. The Braves were about where they should have been, if not a win or two below it.

The Mariners should have won 77-78 games based on what they actually did on the field, not based on some projection system. Thinking that team is an 89-win team instead of an 80-or-fewer win team is how executives look stupid down the road and get fired.

The problem is that the other posts haven't been as specific, referring to projections and the like rather than breaking it down as far as you are.

We're all usually talking around the same thing rather than "about" the same thing. Again, I agree they're in need of an overhaul (I think everybody gets that) - it's just that they're in such a *hitty situation with so many long-term commitments that they can't shed at this point, I don't see the harm in rolling the dice and hoping they get lucky one more time since they're not going to get any return for most of those commitments even if they pay down the money. Maybe a couple of those guys start out hot and they can unload them while they're hot and save a little of the money needed to get rid of them. They're not going to be out much if they do - they're in for a really long rebuild anyway, and trying to unload those guys (outside of Segura, Diaz, Paxton, and Haniger) this winter won't get them far - especially since everyone's going to try to get them for pennies on the dollar.

 

[smootness]

The problem is that the other posts haven't been as specific, referring to projections and the like rather than breaking it down as far as you are.

We're all usually talking around the same thing rather than "about" the same thing. Again, I agree they're in need of an overhaul (I think everybody gets that) - it's just that they're in such a *hitty situation with so many long-term commitments that they can't shed at this point, I don't see the harm in rolling the dice and hoping they get lucky one more time since they're not going to get any return for most of those commitments even if they pay down the money. Maybe a couple of those guys start out hot and they can unload them while they're hot and save a little of the money needed to get rid of them. They're not going to be out much if they do - they're in for a really long rebuild anyway, and trying to unload those guys (outside of Segura, Diaz, Paxton, and Haniger) this winter won't get them far - especially since everyone's going to try to get them for pennies on the dollar.

Even in a year in which they got insanely lucky, they finished 8 games out of the WC. They were 173 runs worse than the A's and 216 worse than the Yankees. They're not anywhere close to contention. There's no incentive to give it a shot.

 

[nsacpi]

They may have a short window between when the Hernandez contract winds up and when Cano becomes a Pujols style albatross when they could put together a playoff team.

 

[clvclv]

Even in a year in which they got insanely lucky, they finished 8 games out of the WC. They were 173 runs worse than the A's and 216 worse than the Yankees. They're not anywhere close to contention. There's no incentive to give it a shot.

Which is fine, but what do you do if you're running them? The easy part is to say "tear it down", the hard part is doing it.

The Braves would be interested in Paxton and Haniger - quite a few teams will. They MIGHT even be interested in Segura, although that's questionable given the long-term commitment and no screaming need to upgrade at SS - don't forget, you're looking for someone to take on $57 million with him. The Yankees could use a SS after Didi's injury, but are they really going to give up prospects when they could just sign Machado and let the insurance pay a big chunk of the last season of Gregorius' contract? They'd more likely want Paxton. Boston doesn't need him, neither do the LA teams. Nor the Rockies, D-Backs, A's or Gnats. Suddenly you're running out of contenders and big markets. Philly might want him, maybe the Cubs depending on what happens with Russell. If the Yankees were to sign Machado and the Dodgers sign Harper, you've lost a couple potential bidders with deep systems for Haniger. Tampa won't be in on him. Probably not Oakland. Both Texas teams will be out.

The problem they're going to have is that with so few contenders and so many tankers, they're going to have a tough time finding any overpays - even for the pieces that might be worth overpaying for.

 

[Southcack77]

define "remain relevant." they were pretty clearly lucky to win 89 games this year.
they have nothing to supplement the major league team with. like, literally nothing.
they can spend a ton of money and still be easily the 3rd best team in the division at best. this would also require adding a ton of risk in long-term contracts. Cano will be 36 to start the year, Nelson Cruz will be close to 39.

it's fine if you think they should try and compete i guess. i don't see any kind of path for them. there are two teams in their own division much younger and much better. i maintain that it would be foolish for them to try and compete.

Nothing is sillier than to tear down a wild card team because the other big market teams are too good, you think, in the hopes that maybe you’ll have another good team in five years when the other big market teams will probably still be good.

Expecting the A’s to have any kind of sustained success is pretty silly also given their situation.

 

[Southcack77]

Even in a year in which they got insanely lucky, they finished 8 games out of the WC. They were 173 runs worse than the A's and 216 worse than the Yankees. They're not anywhere close to contention. There's no incentive to give it a shot.

I’m not sure it’s insanely lucky to not have your best player for 82 games.

They have every incentive to give it a shot, because losing baseball is really a drag that gets front offices fired, drives down revenues, and is genuinely a slog for everyone involved except maybe for people on the spectrum.

Nscapi basically wants the Braves to exist in that same 85-90 win window permanently what’s so bad about that? I joking.

They have 35 million contracts coming off this year and another 30+ after next season. Plenty of flexibility here to stay relevant.

The default now seems to be quit and be losers for a long time. This should be a last resort. guaranteedmisery with no promise of a big payoff. .

 

[Southcack77]

You're confusing preseason projections and simply runs scored vs. runs allowed.

It is absolutely true that regardless of the projections or advanced metrics, when you score and give up a certain amount of runs is not a repeatable skill. Over 162 games, run differential is a far more accurate guide for how good you are and how good you will be going forward than wins and losses.

The Braves were as good as their record indicated they were. The Nationals were a better team than their record indicated but still not as good as the Braves. And no, they should not have won 96 games. They should have won about 89-90. The Braves were about where they should have been, if not a win or two below it.

The Mariners should have won 77-78 games based on what they actually did on the field, not based on some projection system. Thinking that team is an 89-win team instead of an 80-or-fewer win team is how executives look stupid down the road and get fired.

Shrug. Pretty good way of getting fired is to tear down a team and be terrible for five years. Relatively few front offices survive it.

The reality of losing is different from theory.

If you want to lose, you can always do that later.

 

[clvclv]

If they do choose to rebuild, the return for Segura ought to provide a pretty interesting case. Simmons cost the Angels Newk and Ellis when Andrelton was owed 4 years and $53 million. The Ms owe Segura 4 years and $57 million. Can they honestly expect a much better return? Newk was coming off a season where he got his first taste of AA ball (2-2 in 7 starts with a 2.75 ERA and a 39/24 K/BB Ratio). Anderson made 4 starts in Mississippi (2-1 in 4 starts with a 2.33 ERA and 24/9 K/BB Ratio). Anderson and Dansby or Tucker Davidson for Segura? How much more is he worth?

 

[thewupk]

Nothing is sillier than to tear down a wild card team because the other big market teams are too good, you think, in the hopes that maybe you’ll have another good team in five years when the other big market teams will probably still be good.

Expecting the A’s to have any kind of sustained success is pretty silly also given their situation.

But the Mariners are not a wild card team. They played way above their talent level.

 

[Southcack77]

But the Mariners are not a wild card team. They played way above their talent level.

They were also without their best player for half the season.

And they presumably might have about 30 million to upgrade their team this offseason. And maybe 30 million next year. They can certainly re-tool their roster as they go as well.

The option of selling off is something they can always do later without sacrificing much value if they play it right. It's the easiest thing in the world to tank. No sense sacrificing a chance, IMO. the misery of losing usually costs you your job no matter how much everyone says they understand.

 

[thewupk]

They were also without their best player for half the season.

And they presumably might have about 30 million to upgrade their team this offseason. And maybe 30 million next year. They can certainly re-tool their roster as they go as well.

The option of selling off is something they can always do later without sacrificing much value if they play it right. It's the easiest thing in the world to tank. No sense sacrificing a chance, IMO. the misery of losing usually costs you your job no matter how much everyone says they understand.

Their run differential puts them at roughly a 77 win team. A half season of Cano is going to make up 10 wins?

The M's just need to base their projections on their talent level and not how many wins they ended 2018 with and act accordingly. Thinking they are an 89 win team and getting Cano back would be a mistake.

 

[Southcack77]

Their run differential puts them at roughly a 77 win team. A half season of Cano is going to make up 10 wins?

The M's just need to base their projections on their talent level and not how many wins they ended 2018 with and act accordingly. Thinking they are an 89 win team and getting Cano back would be a mistake.

They were +4 up to the injury.

There were -27 while he was out.

Then -11 for the full period of his return (8/14 - 9/30), but +9 for September. That roughly corresponded to him starting to drive the ball, but that's anecdotal.


Before you say it, I know that an even differential doesn't generally support the playoffs, but I do expect them to try and upgrade their team.

They should have the resources to do that and they aren't so far away as to make it a hopeless proposition.

I think they have the incentive to try and see how it goes and then to retool rather than tear it down. Tearing it down should be a last result. Not the go to move that people seem to think it should be.

 

[thewupk]

They were +4 up to the injury.

There were -27 while he was out.

Then -11 for the full period of his return (8/14 - 9/30), but +9 for September. That roughly corresponded to him starting to drive the ball, but that's anecdotal.


Before you say it, I know that an even differential doesn't generally support the playoffs, but I do expect them to try and upgrade their team.

They should have the resources to do that and they aren't so far away as to make it a hopeless proposition.

I think they have the incentive to try and see how it goes and then to retool rather than tear it down. Tearing it down should be a last result. Not the go to move that people seem to think it should be.

The sooner they rebuild the better they will be long term. The Braves timed their rebuild while the Nats were the clear class of the division. They are now losing Harper and their window is starting to close while the Braves is opening. Right now the Astros are in a clear contention window and the class of the division. Rebuild now and be on the upswing when the Astros start declining. That would be my plan.

 

[The Tariff King]

The sooner they rebuild the better they will be long term. The Braves timed their rebuild while the Nats were the clear class of the division. They are now losing Harper and their window is starting to close while the Braves is opening. Right now the Astros are in a clear contention window and the class of the division. Rebuild now and be on the upswing when the Astros start declining. That would be my plan.

Sigh.

*Remembers when I bought into the "we're not rebuilding we're reloading" hype Suspenders was spewing out in 2005 when we brought up all the kids that year and won the division with them*

Thought we were set to win the division for a few more years with Frenchy, Mac, Davies, Huddy, Smoltz, Chipper leading the way.

 

[thewupk]

Sigh.

*Remembers when I bought into the "we're not rebuilding we're reloading" hype Suspenders was spewing out in 2005 when we brought up all the kids that year and won the division with them*

Thought we were set to win the division for a few more years with Frenchy, Mac, Davies, Huddy, Smoltz, Chipper leading the way.

Meh. That technically was a rebuild similar to how the Braves are now. Just didn't get enough quality players from that group to sustain anything.

 

[The Tariff King]

Meh. That technically was a rebuild similar to how the Braves are now. Just didn't get enough quality players from that group to sustain anything.

Yep. Only Mac was worth anything from that group.

But man, with Chipper looking like he only had a few years left, and Andruw evolving into a 40 homer a year masher I really thought we had the division locked up for a few more years. Never imagined Francouer would have fallen off as big of a cliff as he did after having a decent basic statline in 2006.

 

[smootness]

I’m not sure it’s insanely lucky to not have your best player for 82 games.

They have every incentive to give it a shot, because losing baseball is really a drag that gets front offices fired, drives down revenues, and is genuinely a slog for everyone involved except maybe for people on the spectrum.

Nscapi basically wants the Braves to exist in that same 85-90 win window permanently what’s so bad about that? I joking.

They have 35 million contracts coming off this year and another 30+ after next season. Plenty of flexibility here to stay relevant.

The default now seems to be quit and be losers for a long time. This should be a last resort. guaranteedmisery with no promise of a big payoff. .

They didn't have their best player for half the season. Ok, give them those extra wins. They're still 5 games out of the WC. And if you give them the luck of not having their best player go down, then take away the luck of winning way more games than you should have. You end up around 80ish wins even with Cano.

The goal is not to be a loser for a long time. The goal is to avoid that. By going for it and not getting the most out of their assets, the Mariners would be making it more likely they'd have a long stretch of losing. It would become longer that way.

 

[Southcack77]

The sooner they rebuild the better they will be long term. The Braves timed their rebuild while the Nats were the clear class of the division. They are now losing Harper and their window is starting to close while the Braves is opening. Right now the Astros are in a clear contention window and the class of the division. Rebuild now and be on the upswing when the Astros start declining. That would be my plan.

Personally, I don't think the Nats window is at all dependent on Harper. But that's neither here nor there.

--- To say it again, I don't think Seattle sacrifices much of anything by going into this season trying to win. The same trades will be there at the deadline or next offseason. I think they can stay on the positive side and in my opinion that's probably better than being awful for an extended period. There is always time to be awful and maybe you can avoid it.