Winter Meetings Thread

bravesfanMatt said:
your error is comparing MM to another closer. You don't do that. You compare him to the pitcher that he would be replacing in the Braves BP. And a little hint, that wouldn't be JJ..
Click to expand...

How often does the 7th man in the pen pitch in meaningful games? Obv, it's not strict MM to Johnson, but I thought most people would understand the general premise.
 
chop2chip said:
Odd you would cite conversion rate in a discussion about value.
Click to expand...

Why? Unless managers change how they use closers, the value of a closer is tied to conversion rate.

As far as Clev/Chi/Bos, they made those moves with the intention of winning a world series. They believed that the additional "win" or whatever could make a difference for them. And when you have almost an endless supply of money and a ton of prospects, why not get a closer? It is a different situation than a non contending team on a medium sized payroll.
 
gilesfan said:
How often does the 7th man in the pen pitch in meaningful games? Obv, it's not strict MM to Johnson, but I thought most people would understand the general premise.
Click to expand...

Ok, compare MM with your 4th best reliever. Obviously, the gNats replaced chokelabon with MM, so you would not expect a huge difference in save % as JP was a good closer. But the Pirates went from 75% save rate to 66% save rate. How does that equate to 1 game? Or can that dip in Save % not be quantified?
 
bravesfanMatt said:
Ok, compare MM with your 4th best reliever. Obviously, the gNats replaced chokelabon with MM, so you would not expect a huge difference in save % as JP was a good closer. But the Pirates went from 75% save rate to 66% save rate. How does that equate to 1 game? Or can that dip in Save % not be quantified?
Click to expand...

That is a tiny sample, but how many of those game did the Pirates still win?
 
gilesfan said:
As far as Clev/Chi/Bos, they made those moves with the intention of winning a world series. They believed that the additional "win" or whatever could make a difference for them. And when you have almost an endless supply of money and a ton of prospects, why not get a closer? It is a different situation than a non contending team on a medium sized payroll.
Click to expand...
So your implying the additional win on the win curve is worth a top 15 prospect (Torres and Frazier) or multiple top 30's (Boston's package for Kimbrel)?

I do think you are working with a biased sample here. Essentially you are saying any team that's a playoff contender is a World Series contender (I agree), but effectively any team that's above average is a playoff contender, thereby is also a world series contender. I think it's generally understood that closers don't provide value to below average teams. So you can basically justify any price paid for a relief pitcher as a premium a contender must pay to win a world series.

We are 10 years deep into teams paying above WAR values for relief pitchers. The market is clearly stating what the perceived value of elite relief pitching is.
 
chop2chip said:
So your implying the additional win on the win curve is worth a top 15 prospect (Torres and Frazier) or multiple top 30's (Boston's package for Kimbrel)?

I do think you are working with a biased sample here. Essentially you are saying any team that's a playoff contender is a World Series contender (I agree), but effectively any team that's above average is a playoff contender, thereby is also a world series contender. I think it's generally understood that closers don't provide value to below average teams. So you can basically justify any price paid for a relief pitcher as a premium a contender must pay to win a world series.

We are 10 years deep into teams paying above WAR values for relief pitchers. The market is clearly stating what the perceived value of elite relief pitching is.
Click to expand...

Some teams, not all teams overpay for relief pitchers.

But, just for fun; Melancon is getting something like 4/65. He's one of the elite closers on the market and he's getting paid roughly 8-9 mil per WAR in free agency by a desperate Giants team. At best, he's replacing a replacement level pitcher, but certainly not all of the hypothitical 7th man innings are going to Melancon.

In general though, you are right relief pitchers get paid way out of wack on the $/WAR scale. It really doesn't make a ton of sense. Some of it can probably be explained by "making fans happy," to be honest.
 
gilesfan said:
That is a tiny sample, but how many of those game did the Pirates still win?
Click to expand...

you go down swinging.. that is admirable.

How about this.

NY Stankies. Pre all star 78% Post 71% wonder what changed

Cubs pre all star 60% Post 82% wonder what changed

Tribe pre all star 70% post 85% wonder what changed

So take comebacks then. what typical team has 20 or so. But the average Save chance is around 65 games. You can do the math on each of those % and see if you get to 1 game.. Let me know how it turned out. I need to go do some more quantitative stats.
 
chop2chip said:
So your implying the additional win on the win curve is worth a top 15 prospect (Torres and Frazier) or multiple top 30's (Boston's package for Kimbrel)?

I do think you are working with a biased sample here. Essentially you are saying any team that's a playoff contender is a World Series contender (I agree), but effectively any team that's above average is a playoff contender, thereby is also a world series contender. I think it's generally understood that closers don't provide value to below average teams. So you can basically justify any price paid for a relief pitcher as a premium a contender must pay to win a world series.

We are 10 years deep into teams paying above WAR values for relief pitchers. The market is clearly stating what the perceived value of elite relief pitching is.
Click to expand...

Just as when the Save was the stat that made closers filthy rich a decade + ago.

Teams will overpay for elite relievers compared to starters and position players. And now that those elite relievers are being used non-traditionally you will see financial impact of the save dwindle to what it once was. They have had their own market value for quite some time.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
you go down swinging.. that is admirable.

How about this.

NY Stankies. Pre all star 78% Post 71% wonder what changed
Cubs pre all star 60% Post 82% wonder what changed
Tribe pre all star 70% post 85% wonder what changed

So take comebacks then. what typical team has 20 or so. But the average Save chance is around 65 games. You can do the math on each of those % and see if you get to 1 game.. Let me know how it turned out. I need to go do some more quantitative stats.
Click to expand...

I'm not ever sure where you are going since you didn't answer the question and resorted to more small samples? How many did they still win? Were there more 1 run games? More 2 run games?
 
thewupk said:
Just as when the Save was the stat that made closers filthy rich a decade + ago.
Teams will overpay for elite relievers compared to starters and position players. And now that those elite relievers are being used non-traditionally you will see financial impact of the save dwindle to what it once was. They have had their own market value for quite some time.
Click to expand...

Do you think that is going to be more prominent? Or just playoffs?
 
gilesfan said:
Do you think that is going to be more prominent? Or just playoffs?
Click to expand...

It's a copycat league so I can see it being more prominent if you have that type of reliever. The Indians had been using Miller like that before the playoffs starter. It would probably would be regulated to important division games though.
 
thewupk said:
Just as when the Save was the stat that made closers filthy rich a decade + ago.
Teams will overpay for elite relievers compared to starters and position players. And now that those elite relievers are being used non-traditionally you will see financial impact of the save dwindle to what it once was. They have had their own market value for quite some time.
Click to expand...
There was a time where the save probably drove those values, but this really hasn't been the case the last few years, unless you assume Theo, Rizzo, Antonetti, Cashman, etc. are being tricked by the save statistic?
 
gilesfan said:
I'm not ever sure where you are going since you didn't answer the question and resorted to more small samples? How many did they still win? Were there more 1 run games? More 2 run games?
Click to expand...

That is 4 cases just last year of elite closers moving to different teams. All with expected results. What does comebacks have to do with it. It should be expected that comebacks are a part of both sets of numbers. But your SSS doesn't hold water since that is 4 sets of data (including Pit) that shows adding an elite relief pitcher changes your save %. Just an 11% change in saves is 4 games for ever 36 save chances. 36 save chances is just half a season worth for a lot of teams.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
That is 4 cases just last year of elite closers moving to different teams. All with expected results. What does comebacks have to do with it. It should be expected that comebacks are a part of both sets of numbers. But your SSS doesn't hold water since that is 4 sets of data (including Pit) that shows adding an elite relief pitcher changes your save %. Just an 11% change in saves is 4 games for ever 36 save chances. 36 save chances is just half a season worth for a lot of teams.
Click to expand...

Because you lose nothing if you blow a save, but come back to win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top