PDA

View Full Version : Weaver signed



dunner13
01-26-2007, 09:03 PM
With mariners for 1 yr 8.35 mill, up to 1 mill in incentives. Bet sarloos does better this year and is awhole lot cheaper.

jojo
01-26-2007, 09:45 PM
With mariners for 1 yr 8.35 mill, up to 1 mill in incentives. Bet sarloos does better this year and is awhole lot cheaper.

There is very little reason to believe Saarloos will do better, but there is every reason to believe Saarloos will be cheaper.

harangatang
01-26-2007, 10:04 PM
There is very little reason to believe Saarloos will do better, but there is every reason to believe Saarloos will be cheaper.
Saarloos was a little below average last year as a swingman, Weaver was absymal as a starter. I truthfully think Saarloos will be cheaper and better, especially with a change to the NL.

jmac
01-26-2007, 10:10 PM
Saarloos was a little below average last year as a swingman, Weaver was absymal as a starter. I truthfully think Saarloos will be cheaper and better, especially with a change to the NL.

Couldnt agree with you more.

Dracodave
01-26-2007, 10:31 PM
Saarloos at 4.65 era for 1.2 mil..

or

Weaver at 4.85 era for 8+ mil...

I'd say I'll stick with Saarloos.:laugh:

jojo
01-26-2007, 11:00 PM
Saarloos was a little below average last year as a swingman, Weaver was absymal as a starter. I truthfully think Saarloos will be cheaper and better, especially with a change to the NL.

Here's a summary of what the major projection systems think of the two for '07:

Saarloos 2007:
James: IP: 116; ERA: 4.97; FIP: 5.05;
Chone: IP: 121; ERA:4.98; FIP: 5.14;
Marcel:IP:124; ERA: 4.79; FIP: 5.09;
ZIPS: IP: 130; ERA: 4.98; FIP: 5.18;
Pecota:IP: 83; ERA: 5.19; FIP: 4.95;

Weaver 2007:
James: IP: 188; ERA: 4.40; FIP: 4.57;
Chone: IP: 198; ERA: 4.59; FIP: 4.90;
Marcel:IP: 168; ERA: 4.93; FIP: 4.97;
ZIPS: IP: 187; ERA: 4.28; FIP: 4.53;
Pecota:IP: 164; ERA: 4.44; FIP: 4.54;

It's important to note that all of these projection systems assumed Saarloos would be in Oakland (pitchers paradise) and Weaver would be in St Louis. Since Weaver is going to an extreme pitcher's park and Saarloos is going to GABP, these projections underestimate Weaver and overestimate Saarloos when the new park effects are considered.

Summary: Weaver is projected to eat a significant number of innings at roughly a league average performance level (major league average for qualified starters in '06 was-ERA:4.61; FIP: 4.61). Saarloos, when all is said and done, projects to be replacement level. Clearly Weaver has a much greater potential to be useful-and it isn't even close.


Saarloos at 4.65 era for 1.2 mil..

or

Weaver at 4.85 era for 8+ mil...

Sure, but thats wishful thinking. For instance, while Pecota's weighted mean projects Saarloos to have an ERA=5.19, it thinks his most likely ERA (50th percentile) will be 5.57. Keep in mind though, that after adjusting for his new park, it's probably closer to 5.70+. Your estimate for Weaver is close enough to Pecota's 50th percentile before adjusting for his new park that i wont quibble.

It's pretty much a no brainer....Weaver>>>>>>>>Saarloos.

Z-Fly
01-26-2007, 11:19 PM
JoJo, don't take me the wrong way for calling you out, but come on. Looking at the given salarys, you would rather have Weaver rather than sarloos? I know this is somewhat putting words into your mouth. I don't believe you have ever directly said this.

Your stats and projections are somewhat impressive. But even after looking at all your given info, I would still rather have Sarloos.

If they both had equal salarys, then I think I would agree, I would rather have Dream Weaver. But that simply isn't the case.

Chip R
01-26-2007, 11:23 PM
I was going to laugh if it was the Cubs who signed him. It's still funny that he signed with anyone but the Cards.

Z-Fly
01-26-2007, 11:25 PM
I was going to laugh if it was the Cubs who signed him. It's still funny that he signed with anyone but the Cards.

Agreed again Chipp. For whatever reason we are seeing eye to eye today.

I think he is crazy for not signing with the team that pretty much turned his career back in the right way.

harangatang
01-26-2007, 11:38 PM
Here's a summary of what the major projection systems think of the two for '07:

Saarloos 2007:
James: IP: 116; ERA: 4.97; FIP: 5.05;
Chone: IP: 121; ERA:4.98; FIP: 5.14;
Marcel:IP:124; ERA: 4.79; FIP: 5.09;
ZIPS: IP: 130; ERA: 4.98; FIP: 5.18;
Pecota:IP: 83; ERA: 5.19; FIP: 4.95;

Weaver 2007:
James: IP: 188; ERA: 4.40; FIP: 4.57;
Chone: IP: 198; ERA: 4.59; FIP: 4.90;
Marcel:IP: 168; ERA: 4.93; FIP: 4.97;
ZIPS: IP: 187; ERA: 4.28; FIP: 4.53;
Pecota:IP: 164; ERA: 4.44; FIP: 4.54;

It's important to note that all of these projection systems assumed Saarloos would be in Oakland (pitchers paradise) and Weaver would be in St Louis. Since Weaver is going to an extreme pitcher's park and Saarloos is going to GABP, these projections underestimate Weaver and overestimate Saarloos when the new park effects are considered.
Man that's so jaw dropping, holy crap your argument is based non-adjusted ERA and projections. Since 2003 Weaver has had one year with an ERA+ over a 100 with a 103 while pitching half of his games in Dodger Stadium and a follow up in 2004 with an ERA+ of 96. Last year between Anaheim and St. Louis with an ERA+ of 76 with an ERA+ of 85 in St. Louis. In comparison Milton finished the year with 95 ERA+. I honestly have more faith that Milton will outperform Weaver let alone Saarloos.

Now to get onto Saarloos, he finished last year with an ERA+ of 93 while not only being in the AL for whole year but being a swingman as well (Weaver ERA+ 70 in the AL in 2006). The previous year while in a more stable role with 27 starts had an ERA+ of 108. I like Saarloos chances in the NL, he has a new atmosphere most likely a stable role, and not to mention good movement on pitches. He is relatively young, cheap, and has an opportunity to pitch every day. I think the worst you'll see out of Saarloos barring an injury is league average with most likely being a little better. Weaver on the other hand might be league average at the best with a likely possibility of being much worse. For $7 million dollars difference I think I'll take a gamble on Saarloos. Even if the projections don't say so. ;)

harangatang
01-26-2007, 11:41 PM
JoJo, don't take me the wrong way for calling you out, but come on. Looking at the given salarys, you would rather have Weaver rather than sarloos? I know this is somewhat putting words into your mouth. I don't believe you have ever directly said this.

Your stats and projections are somewhat impressive. But even after looking at all your given info, I would still rather have Sarloos.

If they both had equal salarys, then I think I would agree, I would rather have Dream Weaver. But that simply isn't the case.A further look shows the incompleteness of the argument. All it is are projections, I mean Homer Bailey has projections for next year and that doesn't even mean he'll pitch in the big leagues at all.

Ltlabner
01-27-2007, 12:10 AM
When you compare lifetime basic numbers Weaver doesn't come out too shabby. Of course, his numbers are helped out by a great 2002 mixed in with his many mediocre years.


SPLIT G IP H R HR BB SO W L Sv WHIP BAA ERA
Kirk Saarloos 123 440.0 501 248 50 163 212 27 25 2 1.51 .292 4.79
Jeff Weaver 257 1568.0 1672 854 192 428 1044 86 101 2 1.34 .273 4.58
League Average Per BP 1.40 4.49

But when you look at the past two years it's a little different picture.



SEASON G GS IP H R ER HR BB SO W L ERA
Saarloos 2005 29 27 159.2 170 75 74 11 54 53 10 9 4.17
Weaver 2005 34 34 224.0 220 111 105 35 43 157 14 11 4.22

G GS IP H R ER HR BB SO W L ERA
Saarloos 2006 35 16 121.1 149 70 64 19 53 52 7 7 4.75
Weaver 2006 -- 31 31 172.0 213 117 110 34 47 107 8 14 5.76


Then mix in this....


GB% K/BF
Jeff Weaver 38.99% 13.90%
Kirk Saarloos 54.00% 9.49%

Saarloos only strikes out 9.49% of the batters he faces while Weaver has the edge at nearly 14%. However. Saarloos has a full 15 percentage point edge in inducing ground balls. And if you belive the numbers referenced in this piece (http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2007/01/categorizing_pi.php), groundballs have a far lower run impact than line drives and outfield flies. If Kirky can keep the ball on the ground, it plays into having the Gonzo, Phillips and Not-Griffey up the middle defense strategy.

Pitchers of Weaver's ilk are described as "This is the quadrant that you want to avoid. It is inhabited by some of the worst starters in the game". Not exactly glowing praise. Far fewer of his balls would be on the ground and in GABP that can be deadly. Mix in his realative inablity to miss bats and it would get ugly fast. Further mix in a $7m price differental and you would have Milton V 2.0

Weaver has to miss bats and keep the ball on the ground to be successfull. He had 157K/224IP (69%) in 2005, but decreased to 107K/172IP (62%) in 2006. But in all fairness, I'm only looking at 2 years.

Saarloos has to keep his walk rates under controll for his brand of pitching to be successfull. He had 54BB/159IP in 2005 (34.5%) but increased to 53BB/121 in 2006 (43.8%). Of course, I'm only looking at 2 years.

Just food for thought.....

harangatang
01-27-2007, 12:45 AM
When you compare lifetime basic numbers Weaver doesn't come out too shabby. Of course, his numbers are helped out by a great 2002 mixed in with his many mediocre years.


SPLIT G IP H R HR BB SO W L Sv WHIP BAA ERA
Kirk Saarloos 123 440.0 501 248 50 163 212 27 25 2 1.51 .292 4.79
Jeff Weaver 257 1568.0 1672 854 192 428 1044 86 101 2 1.34 .273 4.58
League Average Per BP 1.40 4.49

But when you look at the past two years it's a little different picture.



SEASON G GS IP H R ER HR BB SO W L ERA
Saarloos 2005 29 27 159.2 170 75 74 11 54 53 10 9 4.17
Weaver 2005 34 34 224.0 220 111 105 35 43 157 14 11 4.22

G GS IP H R ER HR BB SO W L ERA
Saarloos 2006 35 16 121.1 149 70 64 19 53 52 7 7 4.75
Weaver 2006 -- 31 31 172.0 213 117 110 34 47 107 8 14 5.76


Then mix in this....


GB% K/BF
Jeff Weaver 38.99% 13.90%
Kirk Saarloos 54.00% 9.49%

Saarloos only strikes out 9.49% of the batters he faces while Weaver has the edge at nearly 14%. However. Saarloos has a full 15 percentage point edge in inducing ground balls. And if you belive the numbers referenced in this piece (http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2007/01/categorizing_pi.php), groundballs have a far lower run impact than line drives and outfield flies. If Kirky can keep the ball on the ground, it plays into having the Gonzo, Phillips and Not-Griffey up the middle defense strategy.

Pitchers of Weaver's ilk are described as "This is the quadrant that you want to avoid. It is inhabited by some of the worst starters in the game". Not exactly glowing praise. Far fewer of his balls would be on the ground and in GABP that can be deadly. Mix in his realative inablity to miss bats and it would get ugly fast. Further mix in a $7m price differental and you would have Milton V 2.0

Weaver has to miss bats and keep the ball on the ground to be successfull. He had 157K/224IP (69%) in 2005, but decreased to 107K/172IP (62%) in 2006. But in all fairness, I'm only looking at 2 years.

Saarloos has to keep his walk rates under controll for his brand of pitching to be successfull. He had 54BB/159IP in 2005 (34.5%) but increased to 53BB/121 in 2006 (43.8%). Of course, I'm only looking at 2 years.

Just food for thought.....I totally agree with you that the sample size for Weaver is bigger than for Saarloos. But we already know what Weaver brings to table in that if he's on in the past few years he's league average. With Saarloos even though the sample size is smaller I think it provides more hope. I'm almost sure the Reds are going to give the guy every opportunity to succeed. He put up above league average numbers in 2005 in the AL when he had a full-time job starting. I think the strikeout thing becomes irrelevant because the styles of pitchers are totally different. If Saarloos was more of a power pitcher and had the same amount of strikeouts than that would be a completely legitimate point. Personally I don't care how many batters a pitcher strikes out as long they are successful. Over the past 2 years Saarloos has shown that even though he may not strikeout as many batters as Weaver, he has been more successful.

Phhhl
01-27-2007, 02:08 AM
After watching Duncan mold the crap he was handed into a world championship staff last year, I have to hope that Pole can turn Plebians like Sarloos and Lohse into Centurians. I certainly wouldn't feel any better about Weaver making that transition than those guys. Lohse, in particular, has at least as live an arm as Weaver. Sarloos seems to have excellent movement when he is "on". Considering the money tossed around to some of these guys this winter, our rotation isn't shaping up bad at all.

Ltlabner
01-27-2007, 06:48 AM
I totally agree with you that the sample size for Weaver is bigger than for Saarloos. But we already know what Weaver brings to table in that if he's on in the past few years he's league average.

With Saarloos even though the sample size is smaller I think it provides more hope. I'm almost sure the Reds are going to give the guy every opportunity to succeed. I think the strikeout thing becomes irrelevant because the styles of pitchers are totally different.

Oh, I agree with you. I like the Saarloos move. I don't think he's going to be the next Nolen Ryan but I think he may be able to be a reasonably priced decent starter. Weaver was able to piece togther something in St Louis but I highly doubt he's going to maintain it.

I agree about the strike out thing too. That's why I posted how signigicantly higher Saarloos GB% is over Weaver's. They approach pitching different. Weaver's method ranks him amoung other pitchers like Milton, Parez, Ortiz, and Woody Williams. Saarloos style ranks him with pitchers like Westbrook, Maddux, Glavine and Lowe. I know which list I'd rather be on.

I'm not saying Saarloos aproaches being on their tallent level, but his style of pitching is the same style employed by those guys. Assuming (and I know thats a big IF) he can induce a bunch of GB's, and the Gonzo, Phillips and Not-Griffey defense works as planned, he may be able to give the Reds some decent pitching starts.

thatcoolguy_22
01-27-2007, 07:13 AM
There is very little reason to believe Saarloos will do better, but there is every reason to believe Saarloos will be cheaper.

I think this should be the early leader for post of the year - 2007





Man that's so jaw dropping, holy crap your argument is based non-adjusted ERA and projections. Since 2003 Weaver has had one year with an ERA+ over a 100 with a 103 while pitching half of his games in Dodger Stadium and a follow up in 2004 with an ERA+ of 96. Last year between Anaheim and St. Louis with an ERA+ of 76 with an ERA+ of 85 in St. Louis. In comparison Milton finished the year with 95 ERA+. I honestly have more faith that Milton will outperform Weaver let alone Saarloos.

Now to get onto Saarloos, he finished last year with an ERA+ of 93 while not only being in the AL for whole year but being a swingman as well (Weaver ERA+ 70 in the AL in 2006). The previous year while in a more stable role with 27 starts had an ERA+ of 108. I like Saarloos chances in the NL, he has a new atmosphere most likely a stable role, and not to mention good movement on pitches. He is relatively young, cheap, and has an opportunity to pitch every day. I think the worst you'll see out of Saarloos barring an injury is league average with most likely being a little better. Weaver on the other hand might be league average at the best with a likely possibility of being much worse. For $7 million dollars difference I think I'll take a gamble on Saarloos. Even if the projections don't say so. ;)


Get 'em harangatang.

Sidenote- I appreciate jojo's insight on the board though. This one particular discussion I think it is obvious that saarlos is the better risk. Also I read almost everything posted everday but, usually whatever I was going to say has already been said. So I remain ghost and now I'm going back to my hermit lifestyle in the shadows of kilobytes and behind html codes...

bianchiveloce
01-27-2007, 07:31 AM
Taking a quick look at Weaver, Milton, and Saarloos in regards to Home Runs allowed the last two years combined.

Weaver -- 396.0 Inn. while giving up 69 Homers for a HR/9 rate of 1.57.

Milton -- 339.0 Inn. while giving up 69 Homers for a HR/9 rate of 1.83.

Saarloos -- 281.0 Inn. while giving up 30 Homers for a HR/9 of 0.96.

It's true that last year Saarloos gave up 19 gopher balls in 121.33 innings for a 1.41 HR/9 rate, but you can not discount that he was switched between starting and relieving. In the 2005 season, when Saarloos was used mostly as a starter (27 Games Started out of his 29 Games), he had a HR/9 rate of 0.62 (11 Homers in 159.33 Inn.).

I believe Krivsky has gone out and got us an absolutely, bonafide bargin in Saarloos rather than taking on the likes of Weaver and Ohka.

thatcoolguy_22
01-27-2007, 09:22 AM
Taking a quick look at Weaver, Milton, and Saarloos in regards to Home Runs allowed the last two years combined.

Weaver -- 396.0 Inn. while giving up 69 Homers for a HR/9 rate of 1.57.

Milton -- 339.0 Inn. while giving up 69 Homers for a HR/9 rate of 1.83.

Saarloos -- 281.0 Inn. while giving up 30 Homers for a HR/9 of 0.96.

It's true that last year Saarloos gave up 19 gopher balls in 121.33 innings for a 1.41 HR/9 rate, but you can not discount that he was switched between starting and relieving. In the 2005 season, when Saarloos was used mostly as a starter (27 Games Started out of his 29 Games), he had a HR/9 rate of 0.62 (11 Homers in 159.33 Inn.).

I believe Krivsky has gone out and got us an absolutely, bonafide bargin in Saarloos rather than taking on the likes of Weaver and Ohka.



i concur :beerme:

Newman4
01-27-2007, 11:00 AM
Hmm, I thought Weaver would spin in moment in the sunshine last post-season into a multi-year deal. Well, he should have anyways. Might not get that chance again.

jojo
01-27-2007, 01:48 PM
JoJo, don't take me the wrong way for calling you out, but come on. Looking at the given salarys, you would rather have Weaver rather than sarloos?

You're not putting words into my mouth... :beerme:

I don't think a player's worth can be appropriately evaluated without considering salary....

To spell out some of the basis for my original argument, here's a back of the napkin calculation of the projected bang for the buck both GMs might expect. Since Pecota has the best track record of projecting pitchers, lets focus on Pecota's weighted means to directly compare Saarloos and Weaver over 200 innings:

Weaver '07: RA: 4.80; expected runs: 107; salary: $8.3M; breakout: 18%; improve: 52%; collapse: 18%; attrition: 18%;
Saarloos '07: RA: 5.71; expected runs: 127; salary: $1.2M; breakout: 13%; improve: 32%; collapse: 36%; attrition: 39%;

So just their weighted means project Weaver to be two wins better. Wins are going for $3.5M right now so even before considering the necessary pertinent adjustments, Saarloos' salary is not a bargain compared to Weaver relative to their expected performances. The advantage in projected performance increases in Weaver's favor when factoring in their new ballparks (Weaver's HR tendencies are marginalized in Safeco where fly balls go to die while GABP, which is a pitcher's purgatory compared to Oakland's pitcher's paradise, will ding Saarloos). The gap gets even wider when considering the 50th percentile projection (i.e. the most likely level of performance or the top of the bell curve so to speak). Weaver conservatively could be expected to be 3 wins better than Saarloss. That's $2.3M/win given the differences in their salaries which is a bargain. Now consider that Seattle only had to sign Weaver for a year and his contract is not a big risk compared to other innings eaters that have been signed this off season.

If Saarloos and Weaver simply perform to their projections, Weaver is a better value. The next obvious question then is, "what is the likelihood that either miss their projections or exceed them?". Unfortunately, Pecota projects Saarloos to basically be all downside.

jojo
01-27-2007, 01:48 PM
First, I'd like to point out the obvious. There is more than one way to skin a cat and people can come at an issue from many different ways. Thats a good thing. Also, Pecota isn't destiny. In any event, issues like these are fun to discuss... Now....
:duel:


Man that's so jaw dropping, holy crap your argument is based non-adjusted ERA and projections.

Actually, no my argument isn't based upon ERA. It's based upon the consensus projections of the five gold-standard projections systems available to the public. I personally find the FIPs to be more compelling. The ERAs were included for those who like to see them.


Since 2003 Weaver has had one year with an ERA+ over.....

Lets stop here for a second and consider this... If ERA has no predictive power, why would ERA+?


Last year between Anaheim and St. Louis with an ERA+ of 76 with an ERA+ of 85 in St. Louis. In comparison Milton finished the year with 95 ERA+.

Yet Weaver was clearly the much better pitcher as evidenced by comparison of their xFIPs. ERA+ really is a flawed metric. Why use it when there are much better ways available?


I like Saarloos chances in the NL, he has a new atmosphere most likely a stable role, and not to mention good movement on pitches.

Well the same can be said for Weaver except that Weaver is moving to a home park ideal for his pitching tendencies while Sarloos is moving away from such an environment to one that is.....ehhhhhh... not as favorable.


He is relatively young, cheap, and has an opportunity to pitch every day.

All traits that in and of themselves have no value. By the way, I don't consider it a positive thing to give a replacement level arm the opportunity to pitch everyday no matter how cheap he is.


For $7 million dollars difference I think I'll take a gamble on Saarloos. Even if the projections don't say so. ;)

That's really the crux of the argument distilled into two sentences.... Paraphrased: He's cheap (who cares about the projections)-cross your fingers that he'll also be good. Sounds eerily like a lot of the moves that were made last season....


A further look shows the incompleteness of the argument. All it is are projections, I mean Homer Bailey has projections for next year and that doesn't even mean he'll pitch in the big leagues at all.

It's difficult to discuss projected performances without somehow projecting performance. I tried to error on the side of being as rigorous as possible. I think it's very compelling there is an absolute consensus with all five systems that Weaver will be clearly better.

Concerning Homer, if he doesn't pitch in the big leagues next year, the projection systems wouldn't be discredited. They are projecting what homer would do if he was a major leaguer in '07. If you care more about how he'd do in Louisville, you can easily use the relevant league and park factors to transform his mlb projections into AAA numbers....


Pitchers of Weaver's ilk are described as "This is the quadrant that you want to avoid. It is inhabited by some of the worst starters in the game". Not exactly glowing praise. Far fewer of his balls would be on the ground and in GABP that can be deadly. Mix in his realative inablity to miss bats and it would get ugly fast. Further mix in a $7m price differental and you would have Milton V 2.0

Weaver has to miss bats and keep the ball on the ground to be successful. He had 157K/224IP (69%) in 2005, but decreased to 107K/172IP (62%) in 2006. But in all fairness, I'm only looking at 2 years.

Saarloos has to keep his walk rates under control for his brand of pitching to be successful. He had 54BB/159IP in 2005 (34.5%) but increased to 53BB/121 in 2006 (43.8%). Of course, I'm only looking at 2 years.

Just food for thought.....

I agree....the ideal pitcher is a strikeout pitcher that has exceptional control and extreme ground ball tendencies. All pitchers to varying degrees are aggregate compromises relative the ideal so you try to compromise the least while matching a guy's strengths and weaknesses as best you can to your defense and home environment.

That being said, projection systems already consider these issues. Pecota for instance uses comparables to project how a certain pitcher might do in the future based upon how a host of similar pitchers did from their point of greatest similarity (with the guy in question) going forward in their careers. These numbers than get adjusted for things like park effects etc...

The five gold standard projections systems think Weaver in St. Louis would be clearly better than Saarloos in Oakland in '07. Intuitively these systems would've like Weaver even better if they'd considered he'd be in Safeco and Saarloos would be in GABP.


Over the past 2 years Saarloos has shown that even though he may not strikeout as many batters as Weaver, he has been more successful.

I'm not sure what you mean by *more successful*. I prefer to examine who was more effective. Weaver has been the more effective pitcher over the last two seasons when examining only things that a pitcher could control though last year was pretty much a wash:

Weaver: '05 xFIP: 4.30; '06 xFIP: 5.01;
Saarloos: '05 xFIP: 4.71; '06 xFIP: 5.13;


Taking a quick look at Weaver, Milton, and Saarloos in regards to Home Runs allowed the last two years combined.

Weaver -- 396.0 Inn. while giving up 69 Homers for a HR/9 rate of 1.57.

Milton -- 339.0 Inn. while giving up 69 Homers for a HR/9 rate of 1.83.

Saarloos -- 281.0 Inn. while giving up 30 Homers for a HR/9 of 0.96.

It's true that last year Saarloos gave up 19 gopher balls in 121.33 innings for a 1.41 HR/9 rate, but you can not discount that he was switched between starting and relieving. In the 2005 season, when Saarloos was used mostly as a starter (27 Games Started out of his 29 Games), he had a HR/9 rate of 0.62 (11 Homers in 159.33 Inn.).

I think you bring up an excellent point. However, the above stats are very misleading. Saarloos had an extremely low HR/FO percentage in '05 which skews his HR/9 totals for the 281 innings listed above. Unfortunately, having a low HR/FB ratio is not a repeatable skill (i.e. its generally out of the pitcher's control). This had little to do with his role. Basically he was homer lucky in '05. There is no reason to believe that Saarloos will be especially adept at keeping fly balls from sailing away in GABP in '07. On the other hand, Weaver would be expected to give up fewer HR in Safeco.


With mariners for 1 yr 8.35 mill, up to 1 mill in incentives. Bet sarloos does better this year and is awhole lot cheaper.

So getting back to the original point, there is very little reason to believe Saarloos will do better, but there is every reason to believe Saarloos will be cheaper.

Anyway, that's my argument and I'm sticking to it..... :beerme:

Matt700wlw
01-27-2007, 01:49 PM
With mariners for 1 yr 8.35 mill, up to 1 mill in incentives. Bet sarloos does better this year and is awhole lot cheaper.

Wow. Just wow.

Weaver will return to his sucky self moving (back) into the better hitting AL.

thatcoolguy_22
01-27-2007, 01:59 PM
jojo-


where do you find all of the projected stats at? I would love to peruse them... :pimp: (thats a good smiley)

Also- I remember someone on this site that found where you could insert; sample A, B, and C into function D to get outcome E. What I'm saying is the site where I could have the ballparks figured into the projected stats. I'm really just curious as to what Weaver's numbers would look like in coors field, err i mean great american...

jojo
01-27-2007, 02:50 PM
jojo-


where do you find all of the projected stats at? I would love to peruse them... :pimp: (thats a good smiley)

Also- I remember someone on this site that found where you could insert; sample A, B, and C into function D to get outcome E. What I'm saying is the site where I could have the ballparks figured into the projected stats. I'm really just curious as to what Weaver's numbers would look like in coors field, err i mean great american...

pecota (www.baseballprospectus.com)

marcels (http://www.hardballtimes.com/)

bill james: bill james handbook

CHONE (http://lanaheimangelfan.blogspot.com/2007/01/chone-21.html)

ZIPS (http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/)

Ltlabner
01-27-2007, 05:21 PM
The five gold standard projections systems think Weaver in St. Louis would be clearly better than Saarloos in Oakland in '07. Intuitively these systems would've like Weaver even better if they'd considered he'd be in Safeco and Saarloos would be in GABP.

There is no reason to believe that Saarloos will be especially adept at keeping fly balls from sailing away in GABP in '07. On the other hand, Weaver would be expected to give up fewer HR in Safeco.

You continue to use the concept of Weaver being better in Safeco over Captain Kirk in GABP. However, neither pitcher will pitch every game in those respective parks. Now, being in Wrigley, Minuite Maid, New Bush Stadium more often than not is not much help to Kirky. However, Weaver will at some point have to make pitches in less forgiving ballparks over the course of 2007.

The highlighted part is especially interesting to me. With the number of homers surrendered in GABP it appears no one is especially adept at keeping fly balls from sailing away at GABP. However, his main skill, a 54% ground ball percentage both fills a glaring need on the Reds rotation and fits the new defensive scheme being employed. Also, it's real hard for a ground ball to skip over the wall and become a homerun.

So we (1) filled a need on the pitching staff (2) put a pitcher in that complements the defensive scheme instead of conflicting with it (3) did this for a reasonable amount of money that doesn't handcuff the team.

With Weaver you have a pitcher who (1) doesn't fill a need on the pitching staff (2) conflicts with the defensive scheme (3) conflicts with the nature of his home park and many of the divisional rivals parks (4) is not a reasonable amount of money.

jojo
01-27-2007, 07:11 PM
You continue to use the concept of Weaver being better in Safeco over Captain Kirk in GABP. However, neither pitcher will pitch every game in those respective parks. Now, being in Wrigley, Minuite Maid, New Bush Stadium more often than not is not much help to Kirky. However, Weaver will at some point have to make pitches in less forgiving ballparks over the course of 2007.

Yes but since the Mariners are division rivals with the Angels and As, they have a disproportionate number of games in extreme pitchers parks. In fact considering their schedule as a whole, 72% of their games will be played in pitchers parks as indicated by BBTF's three year averages (82 in Safeco, 10 each in both Anahiem and Oakland, 6 in Detroit, and 3 each in Petco, Tampa and Cleveland). The Reds obviously play a more hitter friendly schedule.

Nice nickname for Saarloos BTW.....I bet it sticks.


The highlighted part is especially interesting to me. With the number of homers surrendered in GABP it appears no one is especially adept at keeping fly balls from sailing away at GABP. However, his main skill, a 54% ground ball percentage both fills a glaring need on the Reds rotation and fits the new defensive scheme being employed. Also, it's real hard for a ground ball to skip over the wall and become a homerun.

Yes concerning the FB at GABP-that was my point. There isn't a great chance he will be able to count on another extremely low HR/FB ratio like he benefitted from in '05.

Concerning the GB, if you look at Saarloos, GB% is his ONLY redeeming quality. Like I said earlier, all pitchers are aggregate compromises relative to the ideal pitching type but Saarloos is essentially missing two key skills of the pitching skillset (strikeouts and command). That's not really how I'd compromise if given a choice. I mean, really, his only redeeming quality is that he'll yield fewer chances for a flyball to leave the park and frankly we're not talking about a great many fewer flyballs than a pitcher with neutral tendencies. Assuming a league average HR/FB rate, we're talking maybe Saarloos would have a 5 HR advantage versus a neutral pitcher assuming 400 balls put into play. However, since that's all he brings to the table, thats not enough.

Anyway, the biggest need of the rotation IMHO is for reasonable quality innings at the backend of the rotation (i.e near league average would be great). Saarloos at least doesn't project to answer that need based upon a consensus of objective projection systems.


With Weaver you have a pitcher who (1) doesn't fill a need on the pitching staff (2) conflicts with the defensive scheme (3) conflicts with the nature of his home park and many of the divisional rivals parks (4) is not a reasonable amount of money.

I think it needs to be pointed out that Weaver is not an extreme fly ball pitcher like some may be assuming. For Weaver's career, he's basically a neutral pitcher (GO/AO=1.08; FB%=37; GB%=41). His batted-ball-type tendencies would in no way conflict with the Reds defensive scheme or the nature of GABP. In fact, if you agree with my assessment of the biggest need of the rotation, Weaver, based upon the consensus projections, has a reasonable chance to meet that need.

Finally, the idea of a reasonable amount of salary is a fair one to bring up and it's been alluded to a few times in this thread. As I tried to illustrate in an earlier post, sure Weaver will be paid more but he's also projected to perform significantly better (probably 3 wins better over the course of the season given the scenarios the two are in during '07) so that extra salary is actually a good value ($2.3M/win). If nothing else, the '06 season taught us the value of three additional wins.


Anyway, GO REDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:rockband: