bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I wait on Viz and just hope he has a solid 1st half. His value is depressed due to injuries and ineffectiveness. But I agree, you start to shop him now and hope he regains his value.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Winter Meetings Thread
- Thread starter rico43
- Start date
I wait on Viz and just hope he has a solid 1st half. His value is depressed due to injuries and ineffectiveness. But I agree, you start to shop him now and hope he regains his value.
I think I'd rather have Shaw than Garcia, and I'd rather have Demeritte than Dubon.
Agreed...I'd take a middle infield prospect with power any day of the week,
I like Shaw. he's a good role player. I think it's a good sell high trade for the Brewers.
I'd really like to know what the market for Mauricio is out there.
I wait on Viz and just hope he has a solid 1st half. His value is depressed due to injuries and ineffectiveness. But I agree, you start to shop him now and hope he regains his value.
I think his value is too low to trade right now. Let him be a 7th or 8th inning guys next season, get some exposure and then look to flip.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
I wait on Viz and just hope he has a solid 1st half. His value is depressed due to injuries and ineffectiveness. But I agree, you start to shop him now and hope he regains his value.
BUT, if you truly believe this is a contending team, then you really can't give a guy half a season to find himself, especially closing games.
BUT, if you truly believe this is a contending team, then you really can't give a guy half a season to find himself, especially closing games.
He's not going to be closing games. I don't think it comes down to if we believe we're contending or not. It comes down to when his value is at its highest.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
BUT, if you truly believe this is a contending team, then you really can't give a guy half a season to find himself, especially closing games.
But I also truly believe that he is better than his stumble in late June. He never got back out there in the 2nd half to prove otherwise. If he comes back you can flip him or re-evaluate who is expendable. Someone(s) should be expendable in our pen.
But I also truly believe that he is better than his stumble in late June. He never got back out there in the 2nd half to prove otherwise. If he comes back you can flip him or re-evaluate who is expendable. Someone(s) should be expendable in our pen.
If you go by the usual bullpen construction of a closer, two leftys, a swingman, and 3 1 inning righties we will have some guys expendable. Roe and Ramirez are out of options and both have high upside.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
It's pretty linear up to around 3 WAR and then you start getting more bang for your buck for the superstar players. The actual $/WAR does change (usually up) per offseason but trades/FA signings are gauged on what the market is showing in that given year.
Market value FA signings of the 1-2 WAR types are among the worst value you can actually get.(see Markakis) But those players and markets do exist. Joe Ross as just a 2 WAR player for 5 more years is extremely valuable.
But, to me, this is where WAR breaks down pretty bad as a measuring stat.
Take Inciarte for instance: An OK offensive player who's going to be in the .730-.740 OPS range and steal you a few bases while hitting LO. His Bref oWar for 2016 was 2.2, dWar 1.7, overall War 3.8. His offense was up a bit and defense down a bit, but let's say that he's a routine 4 WAR guy for the next several years with half that value in his defense. At $7M-$8M per War, that would make him a $28-$30M per year player. Now, I like Inciarte and all, but in no universe is he worth that.
I mean, the minor leagues is crawling with defense/speed guys who can't hit a lick but who could, given the opportunity, play CF defense as well as Inciarte. But, they never get that chance because they can't even achieve the relatively paltry offense that Inciarte provides. Sure, War tries to account for that by assigning negative offensive War to a player, which in theory drives down the overall War and his value. But, let's say a hypothetical CF has 0 oWar, but a 2.5 dWar (keep in mind that the 0 oWar guy would have to be significantly worse than Inciartes .735OPS and 20SB) guy would, by your figuring be worth somewhere around $15M per year. That doesn't work in reality.
BP has Robles ahead of Giolito now but he's still ahead of Lopez.
There's been talk from day 1 that Giolito may just be a BP guy. Skepticism around Giolito is nothing new. I read about how divisive he is in scouting circles all the time. Some think he is a slam dunk TOR stud, and some think he is destined for the BP, with very little in between.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
There's been talk from day 1 that Giolito may just be a BP guy. Skepticism around Giolito is nothing new. I read about how divisive he is in scouting circles all the time. Some think he is a slam dunk TOR stud, and some think he is destined for the BP, with very little in between.
reminds me a bit of John Smoltz
But, to me, this is where WAR breaks down pretty bad as a measuring stat.
Take Inciarte for instance: An OK offensive player who's going to be in the .730-.740 OPS range and steal you a few bases while hitting LO. His Bref oWar for 2016 was 2.2, dWar 1.7, overall War 3.8. His offense was up a bit and defense down a bit, but let's say that he's a routine 4 WAR guy for the next several years with half that value in his defense. At $7M-$8M per War, that would make him a $28-$30M per year player. Now, I like Inciarte and all, but in no universe is he worth that.
I mean, the minor leagues is crawling with defense/speed guys who can't hit a lick but who could, given the opportunity, play CF defense as well as Inciarte. But, they never get that chance because they can't even achieve the relatively paltry offense that Inciarte provides. Sure, War tries to account for that by assigning negative offensive War to a player, which in theory drives down the overall War and his value. But, let's say a hypothetical CF has 0 oWar, but a 2.5 dWar (keep in mind that the 0 oWar guy would have to be significantly worse than Inciartes .735OPS and 20SB) guy would, by your figuring be worth somewhere around $15M per year. That doesn't work in reality.
Yes, the $X/WAR value is really for the guys in the 1-2 WAR range. Beyond that, that value starts to break down. Obviously no one is going to pay Trout $70-80 million per year, but based on that number, that's also what he's worth.
So on the FA market, the worst value is the average guys, and you get incrementally better value beyond that.
But, to me, this is where WAR breaks down pretty bad as a measuring stat.
Take Inciarte for instance: An OK offensive player who's going to be in the .730-.740 OPS range and steal you a few bases while hitting LO. His Bref oWar for 2016 was 2.2, dWar 1.7, overall War 3.8. His offense was up a bit and defense down a bit, but let's say that he's a routine 4 WAR guy for the next several years with half that value in his defense. At $7M-$8M per War, that would make him a $28-$30M per year player. Now, I like Inciarte and all, but in no universe is he worth that.
I mean, the minor leagues is crawling with defense/speed guys who can't hit a lick but who could, given the opportunity, play CF defense as well as Inciarte. But, they never get that chance because they can't even achieve the relatively paltry offense that Inciarte provides. Sure, War tries to account for that by assigning negative offensive War to a player, which in theory drives down the overall War and his value. But, let's say a hypothetical CF has 0 oWar, but a 2.5 dWar (keep in mind that the 0 oWar guy would have to be significantly worse than Inciartes .735OPS and 20SB) guy would, by your figuring be worth somewhere around $15M per year. That doesn't work in reality.
All estimation models break down at the extremes (0 WAR and 5+ WAR players in this case), but estimates are supposed to cover the majority of cases, not the fringe cases. There is a floor a player must achieve to be an MLB player at all. If they don't reach that floor offensively or defensively, they don't make it. That barrier to entry makes it impossible for your 0 oWAR hypothetical player to ever stay on a roster, much less make it to the point where he is paid on the FA market.
Having said that, terrible players (0-1 WAR) find their way onto rosters all the time because they are cheap, especially if they are young. The only reason Jace is on the Braves is because he costs virtually nothing. The minute he hits arb1 and starts to cost $2M+ he will be non-tendered.
Yes, the $X/WAR value is really for the guys in the 1-2 WAR range. Beyond that, that value starts to break down. Obviously no one is going to pay Trout $70-80 million per year, but based on that number, that's also what he's worth.
So on the FA market, the worst value is the average guys, and you get incrementally better value beyond that.
I think superstars like Trout are worth even more than the theoretical $/WAR calculations suggest. The added value comes from concentrating all those wins into a single lineup spot.
For example, a 9 man lineup full of 2 WAR guys may be had for a great $/WAR value, but they will still only total 18 WAR and won't be very good.
Stick a guy like Trout and his 9 WAR in a single lineup slot, and now you have 8 slots to fill with cheap 1-2 WAR guys. That team will be much better, even if they fill the lineup with worse players than the first example team.
That's the main reason Trout will not be traded. That much WAR concentrated into a single player starts to introduce the fact that any return for him will have the equivalent WAR spread out among so many guys that lineup slot restrictions start to become a real factor.
I think superstars like Trout are worth even more than the theoretical $/WAR calculations suggest. The added value comes from concentrating all those wins into a single lineup spot.
For example, a 9 man lineup full of 2 WAR guys may be had for a great $/WAR value, but they will still only total 18 WAR and won't be very good.
Stick a guy like Trout and his 9 WAR in a single lineup slot, and now you have 8 slots to fill with cheap 1-2 WAR guys. That team will be much better, even if they fill the lineup with worse players than the first example team.
That's the main reason Trout will not be traded. That much WAR concentrated into a single player starts to introduce the fact that any return for him will have the equivalent WAR spread out among so many guys that lineup slot restrictions start to become a real factor.
I get what you're saying, but I still think the $/WAR is accurate on a linear basis, it's just that the top guys won't ever get what they're worth based on that. I don't think it means the top guys are worth even more than that figure.
If you have a $150 million payroll, and your lineup full of 2 WAR guys is paid at market value, they take up your entire payroll. Trout concentrating all that WAR in one lineup spot is obviously ridiculous valuable, but if you're using up more than half your payroll on him, you're not likely to end up with an overall better team, again assuming you pay everyone at market value.
It's the young, cheap players that allow you to start really adding value without the additional payroll.
There's been talk from day 1 that Giolito may just be a BP guy. Skepticism around Giolito is nothing new. I read about how divisive he is in scouting circles all the time. Some think he is a slam dunk TOR stud, and some think he is destined for the BP, with very little in between.
I've never heard anyone call him a bullpen guy.
But, to me, this is where WAR breaks down pretty bad as a measuring stat.
Take Inciarte for instance: An OK offensive player who's going to be in the .730-.740 OPS range and steal you a few bases while hitting LO. His Bref oWar for 2016 was 2.2, dWar 1.7, overall War 3.8. His offense was up a bit and defense down a bit, but let's say that he's a routine 4 WAR guy for the next several years with half that value in his defense. At $7M-$8M per War, that would make him a $28-$30M per year player. Now, I like Inciarte and all, but in no universe is he worth that.
I mean, the minor leagues is crawling with defense/speed guys who can't hit a lick but who could, given the opportunity, play CF defense as well as Inciarte. But, they never get that chance because they can't even achieve the relatively paltry offense that Inciarte provides. Sure, War tries to account for that by assigning negative offensive War to a player, which in theory drives down the overall War and his value. But, let's say a hypothetical CF has 0 oWar, but a 2.5 dWar (keep in mind that the 0 oWar guy would have to be significantly worse than Inciartes .735OPS and 20SB) guy would, by your figuring be worth somewhere around $15M per year. That doesn't work in reality.
Yes, defensive first players generally get less paid less than their offensive first counterparts. It's one of the few market vulnerabilities still left. Players like an Ender or Andrelton Simmons are worth more to their team than they are on the open market (either by trade or FA).
So the $$/WAR model doesn't fit every single player in the game. But I would say it does for a good 90% of them.
Yep, defense isn't paid up to those War standards, in general, and HH has illustrated why they aren't.
And those players that are good hitters and plus defenders usually only get paid for their offensive abilities. Here is hoping Swanson takes after Brandon Crawford and gets paid accordingly.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Yep, defense isn't paid up to those War standards, in general, and HH has illustrated why they aren't.
OK, so why not break the $/WAR value into two components, 1 offense, 1 defense.
For example, let's say the dollar/WAR values averages over baseball at $7M/WAR. Why not split that $7M into two value components such as $5M per oWAR and $2M per dWAR. In that case, a player like Inciarte who excels at defense and is just good at offense would be paid more in line with what makes sense (at least to me). Inciarte, as a 4 WAR player with 2 coming from offense and 2 defense would be: 2(5) + 2(2) = $14M (makes sense) INSTEAD of 4(7) = $28M (makes NO sense)
If you take a guy like Kemp with a 1.8 oWAR and a -2.6dWAR his value would be 1.8(5) + (-2.6)(2) = $3.8M instead of (-.08)(7) = -5.6M
Trouts oWAR at 9.9 and dWAR at 1.0 would make him a 9.9(5) + 1.0(2) = $51.5M player
I think that would better represent the scarcity factor of hitting over defense. I think you can train yourself to at least be an adequate fielder. But it takes unusual talent to hit at the ML.