PDA

View Full Version : Greinke Dealt To The Brew-Crew



RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2010, 10:03 AM
Now that it's official.. I thought it deserved a fresh thread

RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2010, 10:04 AM
Royals get: Odorizzi, Cain, Escobar and Jeffress
Brewers Get: Greinke, Betencourt, and 2Mil

Jpup
12-19-2010, 10:31 AM
I think the Reds could have topped that. I'm not extremely upset, but I don't like the thought of going with the same guys as last season and expecting to win.

reds1869
12-19-2010, 10:45 AM
I don't like the idea of facing Greinke multiple times per season. Oh well, life goes on.

remdog
12-19-2010, 10:49 AM
"Of all the gin joints, in all the world, he had to walk into Milwaukee."

Rem

RedsManRick
12-19-2010, 10:56 AM
Brewers certainly needed him more than just about anybody us. Not a cheap price.

I(heart)Freel
12-19-2010, 11:00 AM
Royals get: Odorizzi, Cain, Escobar and Jeffress
Brewers Get: Greinke, Betencourt, and 2Mil


Two interesting nuggets from www.mlbtraderumors.com:


Peter Gammons of the MLB Network indicates (via Twitter (http://twitter.com/pgammo/status/16505850445172736)) that a player to be named later, rather than Jeffress, is heading to Kansas City. Escobar, Cain, and Odorizzi are still involved in the deal.

Heyman adds (via Twitter (http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman/status/16513631600517123)) that the Royals were close to an agreement with Washington, but Greinke told the team he wouldn't accept a deal to the Nationals, who were on his no-trade list.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 11:04 AM
From a glass half-full point of view, glad to see Cain out of the division. He impressed me last season when the Reds played the Brewers.

reds1869
12-19-2010, 11:11 AM
From a glass half-full point of view, glad to see Cain out of the division. He impressed me last season when the Reds played the Brewers.

I agree. I am also glad to see Escobar go, he could blossom into a top tier shortstop.

HotCorner
12-19-2010, 11:12 AM
This is disappointing.

redsmetz
12-19-2010, 11:18 AM
It doesn't surprise me that Washington was in on the Greinke talks. They're working overtime to improve that club.

forfreelin04
12-19-2010, 11:26 AM
Is anyone else mildly scared that the Reds in 2011 will mildly turn into the Bengals of 2010?

Two totally different run organizations, but the Bengals were more then a bit secure in that they could repeat the same success of 2009 with the same players.

The team may be two injuries away from a very mediocre year. But.... I also know that we Reds fans are scarred due to so many losing seasons so it may be just fear instead of reality.

kpresidente
12-19-2010, 11:32 AM
^ Yeah, but we're so young and the rotation is so deep. Injuries are always there, and a lot went right last year. Rolen and the catchers may not reapeat, but there's a lot of room for improvement, too. What if Volquez and Bailey put it all together, and Bruce breaks out? That's not all wishful thinking, you expect those guys to get better.

westofyou
12-19-2010, 11:36 AM
Is anyone else mildly scared that the Reds in 2011 will mildly turn into the Bengals of 2010?


No, because Baseball is different animal, scheduled different, wrapped in a completely different development scale, not a slave to process and dissemination of that process.

Apples and rolling pins.

alexad
12-19-2010, 11:39 AM
Did Grienke approve the trade?

I(heart)Freel
12-19-2010, 11:44 AM
Did Grienke approve the trade?

www.mlbtraderumors.com, via Jon Heyman twitter:

Heyman tweets (http://twitter.com/#%21/SI_JonHeyman/status/16518298757763072) that Greinke approved the Brewers and not the Nats because he believes Milwaukee is closer to serious contention. He's also apparently fond of the city.

forfreelin04
12-19-2010, 11:47 AM
No, because Baseball is different animal, scheduled different, wrapped in a completely different development scale, not a slave to process and dissemination of that process.

Apples and rolling pins.

I hope your right WOY.

Baseball is a different animal, but like all things there is a bit of fate/luck that takes its toll over the course of a 162 game season. I'd just be happier with Walt stepping on the gas when he's in the lead instead of cruise control.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 12:05 PM
I hope your right WOY.

Baseball is a different animal, but like all things there is a bit of fate/luck that takes its toll over the course of a 162 game season. I'd just be happier with Walt stepping on the gas when he's in the lead instead of cruise control.

You could say the same for the other teams in the Central. Every team is a few players having injuries away from free falling.


We had multiple injuires last year, especially to the starting rotation, and our depth saved us.

We have similiar depth this year, better than any team in the Central.

cincinnati chili
12-19-2010, 12:15 PM
For the prospect mavens, what do you think of Odorizzi and Jeffress? If Cain is the best player in the deal, I think the Royals got swindled. And I like Cain.

Caveat Emperor
12-19-2010, 12:20 PM
I'm genuinely not worried or concerned. The Reds have more than enough pitching to win the division again this year and the ability to advance in the post-season provided one of their young starters (Bailey, Wood, Leake, Chapman) takes the proverbial "next step" and/or Volquez returns to the dominance he was showing pre-injury.

Milwaukee needed this deal much more than the Reds did.

_Sir_Charles_
12-19-2010, 12:21 PM
I hope your right WOY.

Baseball is a different animal, but like all things there is a bit of fate/luck that takes its toll over the course of a 162 game season. I'd just be happier with Walt stepping on the gas when he's in the lead instead of cruise control.

Using your metaphor...I'd like it if he slowly accelerates. Going all in for Greinke will probably end up hurting us in the long run. This club is built for a long sustained run. Not a one year and done, flash in the pan. Fill a void when you can if it doesn't hurt the long term plans, allow for the growth of the kids when you can't fill a void. IMO, starting pitching is NOT a void right now. I don't get the desire to overpay for a Greinke. Getting a solid offensive player for LF who doesn't have a glove that's made of cast iron will net us more bang for the buck over the long haul IMO. And it'll come MUCH cheaper in terms of prospects, cash, etc.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 12:27 PM
Am I crazy to still think the best transaction made by a NL Central team this offseason was the Bruce extension?

mth123
12-19-2010, 01:15 PM
Am I crazy to still think the best transaction made by a NL Central team this offseason was the Bruce extension?

Yes.

Getting Shawn Marcum for a player who contributed nothing to the major league team in 2010 is the biggest single upgrade that any team in the NL central made so far this winter.

Adding Greinke is also an improvement and while it hurts for sure to lose Escobar's defense, the pitchers were non-factors in 2010 and the drop from Cain to Gomez/Dickerson is minimal. Gomez and Dickerson are both better defenders and Cain is far from a sure thing at the plate. Gomez was a much more highly touted minor leaguer and prospect and is only 5 months older than Cain. Just because Gomez was in the big leagues (after being the main man in a deal for Johann Santana) when Cain was just starting out in high A doesn't mean that Gomez is a bust already. IMO, Gomez is the better long term bet.

IMO, the Brewers are the favorite in the NL Central now. Their number 4 starter put up 215 IP of 4.17 ERA which is about what the Reds should expect from their probable opening day guy who just got the contract extension. In fact, I'd say that the only Reds starter who might be any better than any of Milwaukee's top 3 would be Homer Bailey if he becomes what we all hope. Of course if its more of the same from Homer, he'd be number 5 on either team.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 01:22 PM
Bear in mind mth that I did not say upgrade, nor do I just have 2011 in mind.

RedsManRick
12-19-2010, 01:37 PM
I will say this, I don't like having to run out Arroyo against the likes of Halladay, Greinke and Wainwright. Our staff might be deep, but it sure lacks the punch of the Brewers, Cards, Phillies and Giants.

RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2010, 01:41 PM
I think getting Greinke tops a signing. So if Albert Pujols signed a long term deal with the Cards is that considered the best move out of the division? I love the Jay Bruce signing but getting a young Ace like Grienke who some say was the best potential player available this winter means the Brewers are going for blood. This team is solid in the rotation and offense.

As a Reds fan I can't stand sitting by year after year and relying on what we have and not trying to better ourselves with moving blocked prospects who are stuck at the AAA level.

jojo
12-19-2010, 01:43 PM
For the prospect mavens, what do you think of Odorizzi and Jeffress? If Cain is the best player in the deal, I think the Royals got swindled. And I like Cain.

I'd pull the trigger from a Brewer's perspective.

TheNext44
12-19-2010, 02:01 PM
I'd pull the trigger from a Brewer's perspective.

I would too, but only because they had no shot of making the playoffs in 2011 without this trade. I think the Brewers could contend after this trade, but it takes a lot of "ifs" to fall into place. If they don't, they can always trade Greinke get back close to what they gave up. Of course, they will also be trading Fielder, Weeks, Hart, and anyone else that doesn't fit into their plans three years from now.

However, I am always reluctant to like any trade that brings a team Y. Bentencourt. ;)

TheNext44
12-19-2010, 02:06 PM
For the prospect mavens, what do you think of Odorizzi and Jeffress? If Cain is the best player in the deal, I think the Royals got swindled. And I like Cain.

Royals got more than I expected, when you consider Greinke's contract and unwillingness to play for a big city team or non-contender.

They didn't get a real big impact player, but they got solid pieces to fill holes, three if which are MLB ready, and cheap fo a long time, plus one possible big impact pitcher who is in Single A.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 02:06 PM
The Brewers have a much smaller window than the Reds do to contend. I'd have made the deal from the Brew standpoint too.

Allowing Zack to be shined up in the National League could also allow Milwaukee to create a Cliff Lee-like trading frenzy at the trade deadline.

Sea Ray
12-19-2010, 02:11 PM
I hope your right WOY.

Baseball is a different animal, but like all things there is a bit of fate/luck that takes its toll over the course of a 162 game season. I'd just be happier with Walt stepping on the gas when he's in the lead instead of cruise control.

Walt dealing for Greinke isn't stepping on the gas. It'd more like taking his capital to the craps table and rolling the dice

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 02:15 PM
Walt dealing for Greinke isn't stepping on the gas. It'd more like taking his capital to the craps table and rolling the dice

Well said Sea Ray. As I mentioned in the unceremoniously cut-short other Greinke thread, going 0-2 on Lee and Greinke is nothing to get upset about. The offseason is young.

mth123
12-19-2010, 02:23 PM
One thing about this thread is that I think people are highly over-rating the loss of Cain to the Brewers. He wasn't a top propect. He's a decent young player in a Chris Heisey kind of way, but he didn't project to be an All Star caliber player.

TheNext44
12-19-2010, 02:34 PM
One thing about this thread is that I think people are highly over-rating the loss of Cain to the Brewers. He wasn't a top propect. He's a decent young player in a Chris Heisey kind of way, but he didn't project to be an All Star caliber player.

While he might be an All-Star candidate, Cain projects to be a league average CF next season. He's much closer to Stubbs than Heisey.

He's well above average defensively, but struggles to make contact at the plate. Still, he was a 1.2 WAR player in just 43 ganes last season. That projects to a 4 WAR over a full season. I doubt he'll be that good, but he really is a solid starting CF.

The big problem for the Brewers is that Gomez, unless he suddenly "finds it" after three years in the bigs, is basically Willy Taveras. Decent defense, can't find first base with a map. And we all know how reliable Dickerson is.

I see this as the Brewers losing at least 2 wins at this position next season.

And that's not the worst of it for the Brewers. SS is an even bigger downgrade, IMO.

Mario-Rijo
12-19-2010, 02:42 PM
While he might be an All-Star candidate, Cain projects to be a league average CF next season. He's much closer to Stubbs than Heisey.

He's well above average defensively, but struggles to make contact at the plate. Still, he was a 1.2 WAR player in just 43 ganes last season. That projects to a 4 WAR over a full season. I doubt he'll be that good, but he really is a solid starting CF.

The big problem for the Brewers is that Gomez, unless he suddenly "finds it" after three years in the bigs, is basically Willy Taveras. Decent defense, can't find first base with a map. And we all know how reliable Dickerson is.

I see this as the Brewers losing at least 2 wins at this position next season.

And that's not the worst of it for the Brewers. SS is an even bigger downgrade, IMO.

WAR is all well and good but the Brewers now have their stopper. In another thread someone suggested (may have been you not sure) Justin Upton and Stephen Drew were projected to be worth more WAR than Votto in '11. I ask anyone would they really rather have Drew and Upton in the lineup than Votto? Legit ACES and Middle of the order anchors are worth something way more than face value. Greinke to the Brewers despite what they paid will be much better a team for it.

dougdirt
12-19-2010, 02:49 PM
WAR is all well and good but the Brewers now have their stopper. In another thread someone suggested (may have been you not sure) Justin Upton and Stephen Drew were projected to be worth more WAR than Votto in '11. I ask anyone would they really rather have Drew and Upton in the lineup than Votto? Legit ACES and Middle of the order anchors are worth something way more than face value. Greinke to the Brewers despite what they paid will be much better a team for it.

I would absolutely trade Joey Votto for both Stephen Drew and Justin Upton. Wouldn't think twice about it.

jojo
12-19-2010, 02:53 PM
I would too, but only because they had no shot of making the playoffs in 2011 without this trade. I think the Brewers could contend after this trade, but it takes a lot of "ifs" to fall into place. If they don't, they can always trade Greinke get back close to what they gave up. Of course, they will also be trading Fielder, Weeks, Hart, and anyone else that doesn't fit into their plans three years from now.

However, I am always reluctant to like any trade that brings a team Y. Bentencourt. ;)

The Brewers don't have to keep Yuni.

TheNext44
12-19-2010, 03:04 PM
The Brewers don't have to keep Yuni.

I completely agree, but then why trade for him? Unless that was part of the Royals demands?

Regardless, they are most likely going to have a replacement level starting SS next season. Maybe they think that's all Escobar was going to give then, but I think he would be at least league average next season.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 03:04 PM
The Brewers with the addition of Marcum and Greinke are now in contention to win the Central Division.

I don't understand how anyone can honestly claim this is a bad move by Milwaukee.

dfs
12-19-2010, 03:27 PM
As a Reds fan I can't stand sitting by year after year and relying on what we have and not trying to better ourselves with moving blocked prospects who are stuck at the AAA level.

How quickly we forget. For years if somebody had a decent year in AA ball he was often on the major league roster the next year. This is really the first year where the reds have had anybody blocked.

Yonder and Maloney and.....well, that's kind of it isn't it? I guess you could consider Danny Dorn blocked, but every else passed on him during the rule v draft so more likely the major league collective just doesn't think he's very good. It's pretty easy to overvalue your own prospects.

Good move by both teams. The brew-crew are now favorites and the Royals got some building blocks.

mth123
12-19-2010, 03:30 PM
While he might be an All-Star candidate, Cain projects to be a league average CF next season. He's much closer to Stubbs than Heisey.

He's well above average defensively, but struggles to make contact at the plate. Still, he was a 1.2 WAR player in just 43 ganes last season. That projects to a 4 WAR over a full season. I doubt he'll be that good, but he really is a solid starting CF.

The big problem for the Brewers is that Gomez, unless he suddenly "finds it" after three years in the bigs, is basically Willy Taveras. Decent defense, can't find first base with a map. And we all know how reliable Dickerson is.

I see this as the Brewers losing at least 2 wins at this position next season.

And that's not the worst of it for the Brewers. SS is an even bigger downgrade, IMO.

Disagree. Both Gomez and Dickerson are better defenders than Cain in CF. Gomez is only 5 months older than Cain (and youinger than Stubbs) and its way too early to call him a bust. While I generally don't go for the Gomez mostly speed types, I think he and Dickerson can combine to produce what you should expect from Cain while being better defensively. Gomez is 6-4, 215 pounds and will play 2011 as a 25 year-old. I'm generally a "show me" type, but this is a guy who was rushed to the big leagues after he was dealt as the primary guy in a deal for Johann Santana. He was much more highly touted as a prospect. Gomez is the guy with the impressive size/speed combo and pure defense in CF while Cain was considered more a corner and advanced more slowly. I'd say Gomez is more likely to be Stubbs than Cain is and Cain looks a lot like Heisey.

Don't get me wrong, Cain (and Heisey) are decent options for CF, but the Brewers had depth and alternatives there and giving him-up in a Greinke deal isn't going to turn a strength into a hole. Its probably going to lead to approximately the same production and the defense will be better with Gomez out there than with Cain.

jojo
12-19-2010, 03:33 PM
I completely agree, but then why trade for him? Unless that was part of the Royals demands?

The Royals probably didn't want to pay him and the Brewers probably didn't want to pay more in minor leaguers and they just traded away their shortstop.

edabbs44
12-19-2010, 03:43 PM
Keith Law, insider content, says that this makes Milwaukee contenders but not favorites for the Central.

Doesn't say who the fav is, though.

Strikes Out Looking
12-19-2010, 04:02 PM
Here is what I think about this deal and how it affects the three top contenders in the NL Central:

This deal basically says that the Brewers have decided to play for 2011 and not worry about the long term. Their core of talented players (Braun, Hart, Fielder) are getting older which means they are getting more expensive -- if the Brewers didn't go all in for the upcoming season, they would probably have to start a rebuilding project (i.e trade the fat Prince to Bel Air), so they are hoping they can contend now. I believe they are in a completely different place than both the Reds and the Cardinals.

The Reds aren't at the place where time has run out on their talent as to its payroll -- meaning they have at least a couple of seasons where they must win before starting to rebuild. So, getting Grienke wasn't nearly as important for the Reds -- not to say he wouldn't have been a great addition to the staff -- I just believe the long term implications of adding him may not have been to the benefit of the team and that is why the Reds may not have gotten into any bidding war for him.

The Cardinals are basically being held hostage by the future of Albert. Until they can figure out that piece of the long term puzzle, they will continue to sign fat Pumas and let La geniuses to dictate player moves. They have talent -- but as we saw in 2010, they also have holes which they really can't fix on a long term basis until they know how much payroll they have to figure in at 1b.

Just my two cents on Grienke and the division.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 04:03 PM
Thought I'd share this from Ken Rosenthal.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/brewers-chose-greinke-over-prospects

traderumor
12-19-2010, 04:03 PM
Milwaukee went from having no pitching to now at least having a competitive rotation. Still a lot of holes on that roster, the D is still awful, and the bullpen still stinks. They're better, but still a lot of work to do for the Brew Crew.

KronoRed
12-19-2010, 04:37 PM
Am I crazy to still think the best transaction made by a NL Central team this offseason was the Bruce extension?

Yes. ;)

This is a bummer, last thing we need in the NL is more top pitching.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 05:03 PM
Yes. ;)

This is a bummer, last thing we need in the NL is more top pitching.

I agree this presents a huge problem for Cincy.

But in making my comment I was thinking, "In the year 2020, looking back, would I have rather the Reds acquired Greinke or Marcum or sign Jay Bruce for 7 yr 51 Million.

I've got a funny feeling it will be the latter.

LoganBuck
12-19-2010, 05:08 PM
Grienke, Gallardo, and Marcum looks alot like Carpenter, Wainright and Garcia to me.

It isn't just about how the Reds match up with the Brewers. The Pirates, Cubs, and Astros will not do very well at all against that troika. The reason the Reds won last year was because they beat the ever living snot out of the rest of the NL Central.

This is very disappointing to me. At this point the Reds, Brewers and Cardinals are about equal in my eyes. The Reds odds of winning the NL Central this year just got worse.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 05:11 PM
Grienke, Gallardo, and Marcum looks alot like Carpenter, Wainright and Garcia to me.

It isn't just about how the Reds match up with the Brewers. The Pirates, Cubs, and Astros will not do very well at all against that troika. The reason the Reds won last year was because they beat the ever living snot out of the rest of the NL Central.

This is very disappointing to me. At this point the Reds, Brewers and Cardinals are about equal in my eyes. The Reds odds of winning the NL Central this year just got worse.


Sad but true.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 06:09 PM
Grienke, Gallardo, and Marcum looks alot like Carpenter, Wainright and Garcia to me.



And how did that work out for the Cards last year?

Brutus
12-19-2010, 06:14 PM
And how did that work out for the Cards last year?

The difference is that the Brewers had one of the top 2-3 offenses in the league last year. So they're adding a great rotation to a stellar offense.

The Cards had one of the worst offenses in the league with their rotation.

That's a pretty glaring difference.

Braun, Fielder, Weeks, McGehee and Hart now have a pitching rotation. That's a big old ouch.

OnBaseMachine
12-19-2010, 06:19 PM
If this doesn't make the Brewers the favorites in the Central then at the very least it makes them serious contenders. Greinke/Gallardo/Marcum is an impressive 1-2-3.

The Reds have to improve LF.

dougdirt
12-19-2010, 06:25 PM
The difference is that the Brewers had one of the top 2-3 offenses in the league last year. So they're adding a great rotation to a stellar offense.

The Cards had one of the worst offenses in the league with their rotation.

That's a pretty glaring difference.

Braun, Fielder, Weeks, McGehee and Hart now have a pitching rotation. That's a big old ouch.

How are they going to replace Escobar and Cain in their offense though? That is a really big question. If it is with Betancourt and Gomez, sure, they have some big bats in their lineup, but they also have 3 automatic outs every time through the line up if we count the pitcher as well.

TheNext44
12-19-2010, 06:32 PM
How are they going to replace Escobar and Cain in their offense though? That is a really big question. If it is with Betancourt and Gomez, sure, they have some big bats in their lineup, but they also have 3 automatic outs every time through the line up if we count the pitcher as well.

Plus their terrible defense just got worse.

This Brewers team reminds me of the Reds in the mid 90's. They keep going for it all each year, only to destroy their farm system for over a decade to follow. This Brewer team is better offensively, but has a much worse defense and bullpen.

Greinke and Marcum makes them better, but they had many more holes to fill besides starting pitching, and this trade creates two more.

TheNext44
12-19-2010, 06:34 PM
If this doesn't make the Brewers the favorites in the Central then at the very least it makes them serious contenders. Greinke/Gallardo/Marcum is an impressive 1-2-3.

The Reds have to improve LF.

The Reds had to improve LF before this move. This trade really doesn't change much for the Reds

jojo
12-19-2010, 06:39 PM
UZR suggests the Brewers defense was basically average (neutral) last year.

Escobar's offense was basically nonexistent though Yuni for Escobar is a downgrade. Cain's offense was only a tick above average last season.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 06:45 PM
Plus their terrible defense just got worse.

This Brewers team reminds me of the Reds in the mid 90's. They keep going for it all each year, only to destroy their farm system for over a decade to follow. This Brewer team is better offensively, but has a much worse defense and bullpen.

Greinke and Marcum makes them better, but they had many more holes to fill besides starting pitching, and this trade creates two more.

How so?

I don't think Milwaukee misses any of the prospects they traded to get C C Sabathia. We don't know for sure that they will miss any of the prospects they traded for Greinke. We do know the Brewers are a better Team today than they were yesterday.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 06:53 PM
How so?

I don't think Milwaukee misses any of the prospects they traded to get C C Sabathia. We don't know for sure that they will miss any of the prospects they traded for Greinke. We do know the Brewers are a better Team today than they were yesterday.

The Brewers traded two players who were going to be starters for them, both in premium positions.

They will be missed.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 06:56 PM
UZR suggests the Brewers defense was basically average (neutral) last year.



The Brewers DER ( Defensive Efficiency Rating) was .678 last year, 2nd last in the majors.

32.2% of all balls hit into play resulted in the batter landing on base in some fashion.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 07:03 PM
The Brewers traded two players who were going to be starters for them, both in premium positions.

They will be missed.

I doubt it but we'll see.

jojo
12-19-2010, 07:05 PM
The Brewers DER ( Defensive Efficiency Rating) was .678 last year, 2nd last in the majors.

32.2% of all balls hit into play resulted in the batter landing on base in some fashion.

The Brewers pitching staff also had the second worst LD% which could speak to their second worst BABIP.

HokieRed
12-19-2010, 07:28 PM
Looks to me like a complete steal for the Brewers, who are now much stronger. The guys they traded were an SS with a .614 OPS (and we're debating Paul Janish) and an outfielder with 1 HR in 147 AB's. Dickerson ought to be able to replace that pretty ably. Hard news is Brewers are much better. We need a serious step-up from one of the young pitchers to keep pace.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 07:51 PM
Looks to me like a complete steal for the Brewers, who are now much stronger. The guys they traded were an SS with a .614 OPS (and we're debating Paul Janish) and an outfielder with 1 HR in 147 AB's. Dickerson ought to be able to replace that pretty ably. Hard news is Brewers are much better. We need a serious step-up from one of the young pitchers to keep pace.

While I agree that the Brewers did well to acquire to get Greinke for what they gave up, that is some serious cherry picking of stats my friend.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 07:58 PM
....and an outfielder with 1 HR in 147 AB's.

Greinke had 10 wins.

See I can play too.

HokieRed
12-19-2010, 08:15 PM
Greinke had 10 wins.

See I can play too.

I wasn't playing and I don't consider taking a representative statistic that is very meaningful about an outfielder--his power numbers--to be cherry picking. It's absurd to suggest Greinke has no more established record than Lorenzo Cain. The Brewers didn't trade for the kind of production he had last year. Cain's 1 in 147 is, incidentally, quite consistent with his 0 in 100 for AAA in 2009. I stick by my point. I see absolutely nothing in Cain or Escobar that makes me think they aren't completely replaceable and hardly reasonable compensation for Greinke. Brewers made their second really good deal for a starting pitcher this offseason.

jojo
12-19-2010, 08:18 PM
Greinke had 10 wins.

See I can play too.

Wasn't he suggesting that Cain doesn't have power in his skillset (which is a fair statement)? He has contact issues and little power.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 08:20 PM
I wasn't playing and I don't consider taking a representative statistic that is very meaningful about an outfielder--his power numbers--to be cherry picking.

That's the very definition of cherry picking. Picking one stat to prove something when other (better) stats are readily available.

Ozzie Smith averaged about 2 HR's per season. I guess he stunk too.

TheNext44
12-19-2010, 08:20 PM
How so?

I don't think Milwaukee misses any of the prospects they traded to get C C Sabathia. We don't know for sure that they will miss any of the prospects they traded for Greinke. We do know the Brewers are a better Team today than they were yesterday.

Had the Brewers not traded Brantly, Jackson and LaPorta for Sabathia, they would have been able to acquire Grienke without giving up their starting SS, starting CF, and top ptiching prospect.

They were forced to fill a hole by create more holes. The next time the Brewers need to fill a hole, they won't even be able to do that.

It's like buying inventory at $10 an item, and selling them for $9 an item. That one dollar per item lost might not hurt you at first, but eventually, you will go broke.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 08:26 PM
I wasn't playing and I don't consider taking a representative statistic that is very meaningful about an outfielder--his power numbers--to be cherry picking. It's absurd to suggest Greinke has no more established record than Lorenzo Cain. The Brewers didn't trade for the kind of production he had last year. Cain's 1 in 147 is, incidentally, quite consistent with his 0 in 100 for AAA in 2009. I stick by my point. I see absolutely nothing in Cain or Escobar that makes me think they aren't completely replaceable and hardly reasonable compensation for Greinke. Brewers made their second really good deal for a starting pitcher this offseason.

Lorenzo Cain had a 1.2 WAR in 43 games played. That's good for a top-10 MLB CF over a full season. Very small sample size of course.

That is a much better evaluation though than your "he only hit 1 HR" remark. You chose the 1 HR stat because it helped your case.

Since when is HR the way we evaluate players folks?

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 08:29 PM
Wasn't he suggesting that Cain doesn't have power in his skillset (which is a fair statement)? He has contact issues and little power.

He was suggesting that Cain was little more than table scraps.

Joey Votto had a higher K rate than Cain last year by 4 percent. And a very comparable K rate in the minors. Last I checked Joey doesn't have contact issues.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 08:32 PM
Had the Brewers not traded Brantly, Jackson and LaPorta for Sabathia, they would have been able to acquire Grienke without giving up their starting SS, starting CF, and top ptiching prospect.

They were forced to fill a hole by create more holes. The next time the Brewers need to fill a hole, they won't even be able to do that.

It's like buying inventory at $10 an item, and selling them for $9 an item. That one dollar per item lost might not hurt you at first, but eventually, you will go broke.

I don't believe trading any of those guys for Sabathia hurt the Brewers at all. I doubt trading their starting SS (Escobar) and starting CF (Cain) will hurt them either.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 08:41 PM
I have a feeling that...If it were some how possible for the Reds to trade these very same players for Greinke. Those of you saying the Brewers made a bad deal would be singing the praises of Walt Jocketty from the mountain tops.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 08:47 PM
I don't believe trading any of those guys for Sabathia hurt the Brewers at all. I doubt trading their starting SS (Escobar) and starting CF (Cain) will hurt them either.

Benacourt and Gomez may well be two of the worst starting players in the majors.

And I wonder if Benacourt can continue hitting HR's considering he doubled his HR/FB rate last year. Because other than HR's he had nothing last year.

Scrap Irony
12-19-2010, 08:49 PM
I have a feeling that...If it were some how possible for the Reds to trade these very same players for Greinke. Those of you saying the Brewers made a bad deal would be singing the praises of Walt Jocketty from the mountain tops.

Will this quote engender anything aside from anger, resentment, and a willfull disregard for another's opinion? It's entirely unfair and juvenile.

It smacks of elitism.

That said, if the Reds dealt Drew Stubbs, Paul Janish, Kyle Lotzkar, and Homer Bailey for Greinke, I'd be hesitant to call that a win for the Reds, no matter who was GM.

If two of my starting eight were now Yuni Betancourt and the duo of Chris Gomez and Chris Dickerson, I'd also be less than thrilled.

That said, there's a lot of off-season left to go. Perhaps the Brewers find another CF and/or SS. Perhaps the Reds do something to make you happy.

Y'know, anything's possible.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 08:52 PM
I have a feeling that...If it were some how possible for the Reds to trade these very same players for Greinke. Those of you saying the Brewers made a bad deal would be singing the praises of Walt Jocketty from the mountain tops.

No one is saying they made a bad mistake. The question is whether the Brewers gave up anything of value.

If the Reds had traded Stubbs, Janish and two top prospects for Greinke, how would everyone feel? Knowing that Benacourt and Heisey would now be regulars?

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 08:53 PM
Benacourt and Gomez may well be two of the worst starting players in the majors.

And I wonder if Benacourt can continue hitting HR's considering he doubled his rate last year. Because other than HR's he had nothing last year.

What exactly have Ecobar and Cain proven?

I understand it's hard for us Reds Fans to give any credit to division rivals but the Brewers made a pretty good deal here.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 08:57 PM
Will this quote engender anything aside from anger, resentment, and a willfull disregard for another's opinion? It's entirely unfair and juvenile.

It smacks of elitism.

That said, if the Reds dealt Drew Stubbs, Paul Janish, Kyle Lotzkar, and Homer Bailey for Greinke, I'd be hesitant to call that a win for the Reds, no matter who was GM.

If two of my starting eight were now Yuni Betancourt and the duo of Chris Gomez and Chris Dickerson, I'd also be less than thrilled.

That said, there's a lot of off-season left to go. Perhaps the Brewers find another CF and/or SS. Perhaps the Reds do something to make you happy.

Y'know, anything's possible.

I'm sorry I meant no offense to anyone with my post.

mth123
12-19-2010, 09:08 PM
Will this quote engender anything aside from anger, resentment, and a willfull disregard for another's opinion? It's entirely unfair and juvenile.

It smacks of elitism.

That said, if the Reds dealt Drew Stubbs, Paul Janish, Kyle Lotzkar, and Homer Bailey for Greinke, I'd be hesitant to call that a win for the Reds, no matter who was GM.

If two of my starting eight were now Yuni Betancourt and the duo of Chris Gomez and Chris Dickerson, I'd also be less than thrilled.

That said, there's a lot of off-season left to go. Perhaps the Brewers find another CF and/or SS. Perhaps the Reds do something to make you happy.

Y'know, anything's possible.

If the Reds made the deal you are describing I'd hate it, but that isn't the deal the Brewers made. Lorenzo Cain isn't remotely in the same stratosphere as Drew Stubbs and neither of the pitchers dealt has anything close to the future that Homer Bailey has. Escobar will be a very good SS for a lot of years IMO, the rest wasn't really all that much.

We are seriously off base here with the Gomez/Cain comparison. Gomez has as much if not more chance of developing into a top CF than Cain does. He's a better defender, he's bigger, stronger and faster. Gomez was rushed due to the Santana deal and has struggled for two years while Cain was in the minors so everyone wants to write him off, but both players will be playing in their age 25 season in 2011. Not sure how Cain is an up and comer and Gomez is a bust under that scenario. Neither of these guys are really my cup of tea as OF go, but Gomez is much more likely to become that IMO and the Brewers lose nothing defensively (they are actually better-off) in CF.

Scrap Irony
12-19-2010, 09:09 PM
What exactly have Ecobar and Cain proven?

I understand it's hard for us Reds Fans to give any credit to division rivals but the Brewers made a pretty good deal here.

Neither Cain nor Escobar has proven a thing.

But Cain was a 1.5 WAR in just over 40 games last season. He's a 300/350/425 minor league guy with plus defensive abilities in CF. He's a legitimate above average CF starter.

Escobar was Milwaukee's number one prospect two years ago and the number eight prospect overall. He started all sesaon as a 22-year-old.

Add Jeffress (one of the minor league's hardest throwers, but a guy with a questionable past) and the prospect pitcher (a MOR prospect putting up pretty good numbers) and it's not the slam dunk good deal you may think it is.

Ron Madden
12-19-2010, 09:22 PM
Neither Cain nor Escobar has proven a thing.

But Cain was a 1.5 WAR in just over 40 games last season. He's a 300/350/425 minor league guy with plus defensive abilities in CF. He's a legitimate above average CF starter.

Escobar was Milwaukee's number one prospect two years ago and the number eight prospect overall. He started all sesaon as a 22-year-old.

Add Jeffress (one of the minor league's hardest throwers, but a guy with a questionable past) and the prospect pitcher (a MOR prospect putting up pretty good numbers) and it's not the slam dunk good deal you may think it is.

We'll have to wait awhile to really know for sure but as of right now I honestly believe The Brewers made a good trade. So I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. :)

Scrap Irony
12-19-2010, 09:25 PM
If the Reds made the deal you are describing I'd hate it, but that isn't the deal the Brewers made. Lorenzo Cain isn't remotely in the same stratosphere as Drew Stubbs and neither of the pitchers dealt has anything close to the future that Homer Bailey has. Escobar will be a very good SS for a lot of years IMO, the rest wasn't really all that much.

We are seriously off base here with the Gomez/Cain comparison. Gomez has as much if not more chance of developing into a top CF than Cain does... Gomez is much more likely to become that IMO and the Brewers lose nothing defensively (they are actually better-off) in CF.

You keep saying that, but Cain outplayed Gomez last season in Milwaukee by a fairly wide margin. He owned a 107 OPS+ and played solidly in CF (as evidenced by various scouting reports, which discuss his plus range, speed, and arm).

John Sickels said the following on Cain:

Cain hit .324/.409/.434 with 21 steals in 23 attempts over 244 at-bats for Double-A Huntsville this year, followed by a .299/.384/.425 mark with five steals in six attempts over 87 at-bats for Triple-A Nashville. He saw considerable playing time for the Brewers, hitting .306/.348/.415 with seven steals in eight attempts, nine walks with 28 strikeouts in 147 at-bats.

I wrote that he needed another 400 at-bats in the minors to work out his swing and shake the injury rust off. He ended up getting 331, and looked pretty good in the majors. His plate discipline still needs some work, but his walk rate in the minors was fine, and with more experience I think it will increase in the majors as well.

He hit just three homers in the minors this year and has never been a big home run guy, but he's good for doubles and triples, and I do think he'll develop more pop as he matures. He uses his speed very well, on the bases as well as the outfield, where he's a very strong defender.

I don't expect Cain to hit .300+ every year, but I can see him as a consistent .270-.290 hitter with some seasons that get beyond that. If he boosts is isolated patience a bit, maintains his polish on the bases, his offensive and defensive skills will make him quite valuable.


His comps are wide and varied-- Scott Podsnednik, Rafael Furcal, Andrew McCutcheon, Angel Pagan, Mike Aviles, and Jose Tabata.

Meanwhile, Gomez's obp in the majors? Less than 300. Last season (the same in which Cain went 107 OPS+, remember), Gomez went for a 78 OPS+. Which was his career high.

That'd be like trading Drew Stubbs' offense for Orlando Cabrera.

jojo
12-19-2010, 09:29 PM
He was suggesting that Cain was little more than table scraps.

Joey Votto had a higher K rate than Cain last year by 4 percent. And a very comparable K rate in the minors. Last I checked Joey doesn't have contact issues.

Actually Votto has below average Krates. But that's besides the point. When your K% is 20% and your ISO hovers around .1 as Cain's minor league numbers frame his true skill, you're neither hitting for contact nor power and that can become a problem against major league pitchers.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 09:31 PM
What exactly have Ecobar and Cain proven?



They aree good enough to be regulars on the Brewers coming into 2011.

And considered better than the guys who will now be regulars.

Brutus
12-19-2010, 09:31 PM
How are they going to replace Escobar and Cain in their offense though? That is a really big question. If it is with Betancourt and Gomez, sure, they have some big bats in their lineup, but they also have 3 automatic outs every time through the line up if we count the pitcher as well.

Is this tongue-in-cheek?

Escobar had a .614 OPS last year. Cain was a solid .763, but it remains to be seen if that's where he would have been this year and going forward on offense.

I definitely think there's an issue of what this does defensively, but I doubt they'll need to worry about replacing their bats.

PuffyPig
12-19-2010, 09:38 PM
Is this tongue-in-cheek?

Escobar had a .614 OPS last year. Cain was a solid .763, but it remains to be seen if that's where he would have been this year and going forward on offense.

I definitely think there's an issue of what this does defensively, but I doubt they'll need to worry about replacing their bats.



Escobar was considered one of the best young SS in the majors coming into 2010, though he hit little. He's still consideed a premium propsect/player.

They aren't chaff, as many are suggesting.

BTW, it also remains to be seen if Escobar remains at .614. His potential going into 2010 suggests he could hit.

kaldaniels
12-19-2010, 09:39 PM
Actually Votto has below average Krates. But that's besides the point. When your K% is 20% and your ISO hovers around .1 as Cain's minor league numbers frame his true skill, you're neither hitting for contact nor power and that can become a problem against major league pitchers.

Drew Stubbs has contact issues to me...32.7% K rate.

Cain has below average contact...my ballpark guess looking at his numbers is a 22-23% professional career K rate. (19% in 140-some big league AB's last year)

I guess it is just semantics then. Cain does have power issues. No question to me about that.

Care to put holes in his 1.2 WAR in 43 games last year? That shows he is able to produce, despite lack of power. As Brutus said, we don't know it that will be sustained though.

jojo
12-19-2010, 09:47 PM
Care to put holes in his 1.2 WAR in 43 games last year? That shows he is able to produce, despite lack of power. As Brutus said, we don't know it that will be sustained though.

Dickerson had 1.4 WAR in 12 fewer games for the Reds in 2008....

Can't Cain be considered a player who has a lot to prove or does opinions about him have to be confined to he's either a "can't miss" or a "scrub"?

I see Cain as anywhere between a 4th outfielder and a starting centerfielder but I have trouble seeing a guy who is a consistent 4+ WAR player (i.e. extrapolating his 43 games). Unfortunately his lack of power isn't mitigated by plus contact. Can he draw walks in the majors?

Brutus
12-19-2010, 10:09 PM
Escobar was considered one of the best young SS in the majors coming into 2010, though he hit little. He's still consideed a premium propsect/player.

They aren't chaff, as many are suggesting.

BTW, it also remains to be seen if Escobar remains at .614. His potential going into 2010 suggests he could hit.

It's certainly possible he could, but he hasn't done it much. He's got a .633 OPS in nearly 700 plate appearances in the majors and he had a .700 OPS in 2,700 PAs in the minors.

So there's a bigger chance that Escobar would likely not be much of a hitter than there is Cain dropping off and being unable to make the transition to the majors.

Regardless, Escobar's 'potential' is based more off his defense than his bat.

RedsManRick
12-19-2010, 10:35 PM
Not great contact, no power, decent walk rate but lives on a high BABIP. If Cain were a Red, everybody would be talking his low ceiling and about how he's going to get exposed when he faces more major league pitching.

savafan
12-19-2010, 11:04 PM
*Rose colored glasses on*

I like Aroldis Chapman's ceiling over Greinke's.

bucksfan2
12-20-2010, 09:29 AM
*Rose colored glasses on*

I like Aroldis Chapman's ceiling over Greinke's.

I like Greinke's floor much better than Chapman's.

I don't really know what to think about this trade. Its Milwaukee's version of going all in for 2011 and if they don't succeed I expect to see a fire sale and rebuilding project going on late 2011 or after the season is complete. I don't know if they have the payroll to fund the team going into 2011 and see the Prince Fielder situation becoming a distraction early on next year.

A couple of other thoughts:
-Greinke is a great pitcher but a risk to go all in on.

-I don't really like the WAR stat but if you count on Dickerson to be an everyday player your in trouble.

-It makes the NL Central much tougher this season.

-It looks as if the Reds are going to count on in house improvements and that is risky business.

Scrap Irony
12-20-2010, 09:35 AM
Not great contact, no power, decent walk rate but lives on a high BABIP. If Cain were a Red, everybody would be talking his low ceiling and about how he's going to get exposed when he faces more major league pitching.

Perhaps. Or they could look at his solid BB rate, his tools, his defense, and conclude he's a good bet to be a solid everyday player.

I think Greinke is obviously an outstanding pitcher-- an ace, even. His addition improves Milwaukee's pitching a great deal. Add in Marcum and that starting staff went from weak link to strength. They match up 1-4 with anyone in the division.

But the Brewers have no answer at CF currently, as Carlos Gomez is a much worse player than Cain showed last season. His offensive numbers are replacement level. Add in Betancourt's iron glove at SS on a team filled with iron gloves and his lack of obp (obp is less than 300), plus bullpenner Jeffress' 10+ K rate and less than 7 H/9 IP in the minors, and you've lost some significant value at three spots where Milwaukee has no answer.

They have improved pitching a great deal, replacing Dave Bush's 9 wins, 4.5 ERA, and 4.98 xFIP with Greinke's 10 wins, 4.17 ERA, and 3.76 xFIP, not to mention the 50 inning difference. But I don't know if they've improved their team as much as others seem to think.

Perhaps Marcum and Greinke together add 8 wins in the pitching department (though an 80-run difference between those two and the 2010 versions of Dave Bush and the Doug Davis/ Chris Narveson duo from last season [213 earned runs] was only 32 runs last season). The loss of Cain, Jeffress, and Escobar (and the "addition" of Betancourt) will likely temper that improvement.

Of course, this assumes that Milwaukee will stay pat as is and not promote anyone nor deal for other help.

REDREAD
12-20-2010, 10:22 AM
While he might be an All-Star candidate, Cain projects to be a league average CF next season. He's much closer to Stubbs than Heisey.

He's well above average defensively, but struggles to make contact at the plate. Still, he was a 1.2 WAR player in just 43 ganes last season. That projects to a 4 WAR over a full season. I doubt he'll be that good, but he really is a solid starting CF.

The big problem for the Brewers is that Gomez, unless he suddenly "finds it" after three years in the bigs, is basically Willy Taveras. Decent defense, can't find first base with a map. And we all know how reliable Dickerson is.

I see this as the Brewers losing at least 2 wins at this position next season.

And that's not the worst of it for the Brewers. SS is an even bigger downgrade, IMO.


I agree. This is a risky contention plan for the Brewers. Sure, they have their ace, but they created potential holes at SS and CF.. Both these spots are tough to fill.

I wouldn't say that the Brewers got ripped off, but this would've been a tough trade for the Reds to top , without giving up Stubbs. (I doubt Heisley would've cut it).. The Reds didn't really have the young middle infielder to give up either, so I guess we would've had to sub a young pitcher in .

I think KC did well. Obviously, the team giving up the proven vet usually gets less total talent, but that's not a bad haul for them.

Benihana
12-20-2010, 11:01 AM
As an aside, does anyone else LOVE what the Royals have been up to lately? With all their top prospects arriving at about the same time, they strike me as perhaps a better-positioned version of the 2008 Reds...

2-3 years from now, they should have:

1B Hosmer
2B Colon
SS Escobar
3B Moustakas
LF Gordon
CF Cain
RF Myers
DH Butler

SP Lamb
SP Montgomery
SP Duffy/Dwyer/Crow/Odirizzi
SP Duffy/Dwyer/Crow/Odirizzi
SP Duffy/Dwyer/Crow/Odirizzi

Really, all they have to add is a C and maybe a SP or 2, and they can still deal Soria if Jeffress pans out to acquire one or more of those pieces. Granted, some of these prospects may not pan out, but especially the position players are all pretty far along in their advancement. After the Greinke trade, Kevin Goldstein proclaimed the Royals farm system is now "the best he's ever seen." If I were an Indians fan, I'd be relatively concerned. So long as they don't mess it up, they should be the Devil Rays of the next decade.

Benihana
12-20-2010, 11:07 AM
I agree. This is a risky contention plan for the Brewers. Sure, they have their ace, but they created potential holes at SS and CF.. Both these spots are tough to fill.

I wouldn't say that the Brewers got ripped off, but this would've been a tough trade for the Reds to top , without giving up Stubbs. (I doubt Heisley would've cut it).. The Reds didn't really have the young middle infielder to give up either, so I guess we would've had to sub a young pitcher in .

I think KC did well. Obviously, the team giving up the proven vet usually gets less total talent, but that's not a bad haul for them.

The Reds had the C to give up instead of the MI. We could have offered Hanigan, Mesoraco, or Grandal- all of which would be of similar value to Escobar. Obviously though, this is all water under the bridge at this point.

GoReds
12-20-2010, 12:00 PM
In a roundabout way, I'm a bigger Nationals fan today than I was yesterday. For Grienke to dis the Nationals and choose the Brewers because he feels the Brewers are closer to contending makes me want to see the Nationals in the playoffs before the Brewers (not a huge shift in position, in any case).

At the very least, I would like to see the Brewers denied a playoff appearance while Grienke wears their colors.

Nothing against Zack, per se, but choosing the Brewers because they are contenders? Really?

Patrick Bateman
12-20-2010, 12:03 PM
In a roundabout way, I'm a bigger Nationals fan today than I was yesterday. For Grienke to dis the Nationals and choose the Brewers because he feels the Brewers are closer to contending makes me want to see the Nationals in the playoffs before the Brewers (not a huge shift in position, in any case).

At the very least, I would like to see the Brewers denied a playoff appearance while Grienke wears their colors.

Nothing against Zack, per se, but choosing the Brewers because they are contenders? Really?

I don't see what is so wrong about a guy who earned a STC in his contract decided to use it to fit a personal preference. That's why it's there.

westofyou
12-20-2010, 12:09 PM
Nothing against Zack, per se, but choosing the Brewers because they are contenders? Really?

Who has a better record the past 5 years?

The Brewers

Who has the players that are performing in MLB right now?

The Brewers

Who has the team that plays the Phillies 18 times a season?

The Nationals.

Doesn't seem so silly to me.

Caveat Emperor
12-20-2010, 12:12 PM
Who has a better record the past 5 years?

The Brewers

Who has the players that are performing in MLB right now?

The Brewers

Who has the team that plays the Phillies 18 times a season?

The Nationals.

Doesn't seem so silly to me.

Milwaukee is also comfortably outside of the NE Corridor and the accompanying media spotlight. Might be a bit more liveable for a guy with a history of anxiety issues.

Scrap Irony
12-20-2010, 12:22 PM
Wil Myers will catch. The Royals also have Luke May, a 25-year-old who's beat up AAA pitching for a couple years now, but, beyond that, the cupboard's pretty bare.

I'm guessing KC will put him at catcher four days a week, then get his bat in the lineup in RF the other two. What's even more ridiculous is that you left Clint Robinson, another 25-year-old, off your list of future Royals. All he did was OPS 1.000+ in AA. I think he's your DH as early as this season. (Though Kila could supplant him, as he's been a monster in AAA for, like, three years now.)

That makes Butler an OFer, something he struggled to do a couple years ago, though, as a LFer, he'd have value, especially with Cain and Gordon at the other OF spots.

A lineup like the following will sure be fun to watch, as early as 2012:
1. Cain CF
2. Colon 2B
3. Moustakas 3B
4. Hosmer 1B
5. Butler LF
6. Robinson DH
7. Myers C
8. Gordon RF
9. Escobar SS

That lineup is indeed scary, assuming all the prospects pan out. It's a bit defensive-challenged at C, 3B, and LF, but the SS and CF are plus gloves, as is 1B. (And Myers has the athletic ability to get much, much better very quickly.)

There's a lot to like in KC these days.

jojo
12-20-2010, 01:02 PM
Wil Myers will catch. The Royals also have Luke May, a 25-year-old who's beat up AAA pitching for a couple years now, but, beyond that, the cupboard's pretty bare.

I'm guessing KC will put him at catcher four days a week, then get his bat in the lineup in RF the other two. What's even more ridiculous is that you left Clint Robinson, another 25-year-old, off your list of future Royals. All he did was OPS 1.000+ in AA. I think he's your DH as early as this season. (Though Kila could supplant him, as he's been a monster in AAA for, like, three years now.)

That makes Butler an OFer, something he struggled to do a couple years ago, though, as a LFer, he'd have value, especially with Cain and Gordon at the other OF spots.

A lineup like the following will sure be fun to watch, as early as 2012:
1. Cain CF
2. Colon 2B
3. Moustakas 3B
4. Hosmer 1B
5. Butler LF
6. Robinson DH
7. Myers C
8. Gordon RF
9. Escobar SS

That lineup is indeed scary, assuming all the prospects pan out. It's a bit defensive-challenged at C, 3B, and LF, but the SS and CF are plus gloves, as is 1B. (And Myers has the athletic ability to get much, much better very quickly.)

There's a lot to like in KC these days.

Lineups that you can dream upon are always scary and that's the rub for KC. I'd love to plunder their farm system but I'd hate for the fate of the franchise to solely rest upon it.

Scrap Irony
12-20-2010, 01:34 PM
Lots of questions, sure, but exciting. Myers, Moustakas, and Hosmer are all "can't-miss" guys with both production and pedigree. That would be similar to depending on Dunn and Kearns-- which worked out well for Cincinnati a decade ago (in terms of offensive production).

Those three-- added to Gordon, Butler, Cain, and Escobar-- make the offense above average and the defense fair enough to play.

Sure, the highway to Cooperstown is littered with former phenoms; but, were I a KC fan or the KC GM, I'd hold onto all of them.

REDREAD
12-20-2010, 03:21 PM
The Reds had the C to give up instead of the MI. We could have offered Hanigan, Mesoraco, or Grandal- all of which would be of similar value to Escobar. Obviously though, this is all water under the bridge at this point.

That's true, but in my opinion, I am not trading Stubbs for starting pitching. Stubbs is a crucial part of the team, that can not be replaced.
As I said somewhere else, giving up Stubbs is not worth the upgrade of Grienke replacing our #5 starter.

Ron Madden
12-20-2010, 05:29 PM
I think this is an interesting article. I'm not saying I agree with everything written in the article but I found it interesting none the less.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/112160939.html

MattyHo4Life
12-20-2010, 09:08 PM
I like this trade a lot for the Brewers. I always love it when small and mid market teams stop hiding behind the money issue and makes a big plunge. The Brewers did it by trading for Sabathia, and they put a good offer on the table for Sabathia before being beaten by the Yankees. Trading for Greinke is another big push to get that Ace. I'm not going to knock a team for going out and making a big splash to improve their team and make it more fun for the fans. They did give up a lot, but that's the way it should be. Some of the recent trades for Ace caliber pitchers hasn't brought the type of return that they should have. The Brewers had a horrible pitching staff last year, so they are doing what they needed to do... getting some good arms to right the ship. Afterall, the Brewers didn't make such a smart move a few years ago by signing Jeff Suppan. So the trade route has worked better for them.

MattyHo4Life
12-20-2010, 09:16 PM
Nothing against Zack, per se, but choosing the Brewers because they are contenders? Really?

Isn't that what players do every year during free agency? Players choose a team based on many reasons including money and playing for a contender. I doubt many players would choose to play for the Pirates even if they offered the most money. Nobody was wants to play for a loser.

Blitz Dorsey
12-20-2010, 11:16 PM
Well, that stinks. I was just starting to think the Brewers were going to allow their "window of opportunity" to close ... and then they go out and land the best pitcher still on the trade market. (If there is a better one, I don't know of him.)

Dammit. I still like the Reds' chances in 2011, but this makes the Brew Crew legit contenders. I was getting ready to say they don't have enough pitching to contend (just like last year). But now with Greinke and Gallardo at the top of their rotation -- and with the offense they'll have led by Braun and Fielder -- they will be legit contenders for the Central crown. Reds, Brewers, Cardinals ... and then everyone else. Cubs will stink again, so will the 'Stros ... and the Pirates are the Pirates.

mth123
12-21-2010, 03:00 AM
You keep saying that, but Cain outplayed Gomez last season in Milwaukee by a fairly wide margin. He owned a 107 OPS+ and played solidly in CF (as evidenced by various scouting reports, which discuss his plus range, speed, and arm).

John Sickels said the following on Cain:


His comps are wide and varied-- Scott Podsnednik, Rafael Furcal, Andrew McCutcheon, Angel Pagan, Mike Aviles, and Jose Tabata.

Meanwhile, Gomez's obp in the majors? Less than 300. Last season (the same in which Cain went 107 OPS+, remember), Gomez went for a 78 OPS+. Which was his career high.

That'd be like trading Drew Stubbs' offense for Orlando Cabrera.

You overrate Cain based on a small sample size. A 70 point drop in BABIP and he's Willyesque. I don't completely buy that BABIP is all luck, but in this case it seems to be a lot of luck.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/escobar-and-cain/

Milwaukee sold high. Smart move IMO.

TheNext44
12-21-2010, 03:32 AM
You overrate Cain based on a small sample size. A 70 point drop in BABIP and he's Willyesque. I don't completely buy that BABIP is all luck, but in this case it seems to be a lot of luck.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/escobar-and-cain/

Milwaukee sold high. Smart move IMO.

Good article.

It does reinforce what other have been saying that Cain probably won't be a 4 win player ever. However, it also makes a strong suggestion that Escobar should be much better than he was last year.

I think because of their 2010 seasons, people are confusing Cain and Escobar as to who was the key impact player in the deal. It clearly is Escobar.

Escobar was the Brewers top prospect and a top 20 overall MLB prospect twice. He already is a well above average defensive SS, probably a top 5 in the league defensive SS. It's hard to judge his offensive numbers because he has always been very young for his league, including last year in the majors. If he can just get his OPS to above .650, he should be at least a league average SS. He has the potential to be an over .700 OPS, which would make him an above average SS with his defense. Above average SS are hard to find, as Reds fans can attest.

mth123
12-21-2010, 03:45 AM
Good article.

It does reinforce what other have been saying that Cain probably won't be a 4 win player ever. However, it also makes a strong suggestion that Escobar should be much better than he was last year.

I think because of their 2010 seasons, people are confusing Cain and Escobar as to who was the key impact player in the deal. It clearly is Escobar.

Escobar was the Brewers top prospect and a top 20 overall MLB prospect twice. He already is a well above average defensive SS, probably a top 5 in the league defensive SS. It's hard to judge his offensive numbers because he has always been very young for his league, including last year in the majors. If he can just get his OPS to above .650, he should be at least a league average SS. He has the potential to be an over .700 OPS, which would make him an above average SS with his defense. Above average SS are hard to find, as Reds fans can attest.

No question. This deal comes down to Escobar for Greinke. The other three guys are for the mix in KC and they'll likely get at least one decent bullpen arm and a useful 4th OF type who helps while he's cheap and could start if other options don't work out. It just isn't the gutting of the system that its being portrayed as here.

Its a promising young player in exchange for an already establish award winning arm with three secondary pieces added to even the scales a bit, but those three are replaceable and hardly the crippling loss to the organization that some are claiming. Many are comparing dealing Cain to the Reds dealing Stubbs in this deal. My point is that its not at all like including Stubbs but more like including Heisey. Actually, that is probably selling Heisey a little short IMO. Heisey has more power than Cain ever will have.

kpresidente
12-21-2010, 08:27 AM
You overrate Cain based on a small sample size. A 70 point drop in BABIP and he's Willyesque. I don't completely buy that BABIP is all luck, but in this case it seems to be a lot of luck.

Yeah, but his walk rate was way down in the small sample, too. Take away the lucky singles, but give him back something close to his minor league walk rate and he's back to being as good as he was last year.

Scrap Irony
12-21-2010, 09:59 AM
I do like Cain more than others.

I look past his injury-riddled 2009 and see the player he was before. I shrug at many of the Florida League A+ season, as I remember doug explaining those numbers can be taken with a grain of salt.

Last season, I saw a kid fully healthy for the first time in two years. He was a true plus glove in CF with an outstanding arm. He had very good speed. His swing was short, and he made good contact.

Not only that, his minor league numbers support the assertion that he's a high obp guy with doubles and triples power and 25+ SBs. He's a 780-ish OPS plus defensive CF.

That's not a throw-in player, IMO.

If he OPSes over 750 (and that's certainly possible), he's a 3.5-win player. I suspect his BA will drop 15-20 points, due to the switch of leagues and some luck. I also suspect his BB rate will rise precipitously, to around 10-12%. Around a 285/350/400 line in KC over the course of the year would provide serious value.

Throw in Escobar's 2.5 WAR, Jeffress' 1.0 WAR, and the promise of Ondruzzi and the Royals did okay on the deal.

lollipopcurve
12-21-2010, 10:11 AM
Good deal for both teams, IMO. All 4 players going to KC are high ceiling. Escobar and Cain will provide good defense up the middle, at the very least. Odorizzi fits great with their stable of young lefties. Jeffress should slot in well in front of Soria.

We'll find out first hand what Greinke does for Milwaukee. If the Reds lineup doesn't improve, several of those games will be short and decidedly unsweet.

Ron Madden
12-21-2010, 03:17 PM
From Mark Sheldon.

http://reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101220&content_id=16348454&vkey=news_cin&c_id=cin

traderumor
12-21-2010, 06:35 PM
I was really surprised to see what I saw with Greinke's track record. He had one lights out year, the others were above average, and last season was average. I think I might have been struggling with a little buyers remorse about now depending on what the Reds would have needed to give up to get him. Sure, he stumped our guys for a game last season, but what about the whole body of work?

Brutus
12-21-2010, 07:25 PM
I was really surprised to see what I saw with Greinke's track record. He had one lights out year, the others were above average, and last season was average. I think I might have been struggling with a little buyers remorse about now depending on what the Reds would have needed to give up to get him. Sure, he stumped our guys for a game last season, but what about the whole body of work?

The whole body of work is pretty darn good. I don't know if I'm terribly upset the Reds didn't get him, given it was at least a decent haul the Royals got, but I'm pretty upset that Jocketty admittedly didn't even try.

However, Greinke's career numbers:

3.82 ERA (3.59 FIP)
7.56 K/9 to 2.22 BB/9 (3.4:1 ratio)
0.91 HR/9
40% GB rate

I'd say that's a terrific body of work.

traderumor
12-21-2010, 08:23 PM
The whole body of work is pretty darn good. I don't know if I'm terribly upset the Reds didn't get him, given it was at least a decent haul the Royals got, but I'm pretty upset that Jocketty admittedly didn't even try.

However, Greinke's career numbers:

3.82 ERA (3.59 FIP)
7.56 K/9 to 2.22 BB/9 (3.4:1 ratio)
0.91 HR/9
40% GB rate

I'd say that's a terrific body of work.

I think "terrific" is an overstatement considering that you have provided career numbers thus far skewed by one outstanding season. Notice I didn't say he was dog meat, but which Greinke was received? The Cy Young career year Greinke or the 2010 average starter year? I'd say "will the real Zack Greinke please stand up." Should be fun seeing which one he is.

Brutus
12-21-2010, 08:50 PM
I think "terrific" is an overstatement considering that you have provided career numbers thus far skewed by one outstanding season. Notice I didn't say he was dog meat, but which Greinke was received? The Cy Young career year Greinke or the 2010 average starter year? I'd say "will the real Zack Greinke please stand up." Should be fun seeing which one he is.

Skewed by one outstanding season? That 2008 year accounts for only 20% of his career innings. How is that skewing his entire numbers? By that same logic, I could argue his terrible 2005 year is skewing what otherwise would be a tremendous career.

jojo
12-21-2010, 09:02 PM
I think "terrific" is an overstatement considering that you have provided career numbers thus far skewed by one outstanding season. Notice I didn't say he was dog meat, but which Greinke was received? The Cy Young career year Greinke or the 2010 average starter year? I'd say "will the real Zack Greinke please stand up." Should be fun seeing which one he is.

Grienke was a significantly above average pitcher in 2010.

PuffyPig
12-21-2010, 09:23 PM
No question. This deal comes down to Escobar for Greinke. The other three guys are for the mix in KC and they'll likely get at least one decent bullpen arm and a useful 4th OF type who helps while he's cheap and could start if other options don't work out. It just isn't the gutting of the system that its being portrayed as here.

Its a promising young player in exchange for an already establish award winning arm with three secondary pieces added to even the scales a bit, but those three are replaceable and hardly the crippling loss to the organization that some are claiming. Many are comparing dealing Cain to the Reds dealing Stubbs in this deal. My point is that its not at all like including Stubbs but more like including Heisey. Actually, that is probably selling Heisey a little short IMO. Heisey has more power than Cain ever will have.

No one says Cain equals Stubbs. There is some suggestion that Stubbs and Janish might equal Cain and Escobar.

mth123
12-22-2010, 02:44 AM
Yeah, but his walk rate was way down in the small sample, too. Take away the lucky singles, but give him back something close to his minor league walk rate and he's back to being as good as he was last year.

We'll see. Chris Dickerson has high walk rates. I actually think Cain and Dickerson are good comps for each other. Useful 4th OF with starter if necessary type talent, good speed and defense, some on base skill, debut that raised expectations to levels above what he actually is. If Cain was a LH Hitter, he'd be a smaller, less powerful version of Dickerson. Nice player to have, but not some one that cripples your team to deal away.

traderumor
12-22-2010, 07:43 AM
Grienke was a significantly above average pitcher in 2010.A league average ERA and a WHIP of about 1.25 over 200 innings is not "significantly above average." He was the ace on his team, a bad team.

Brutus, you can have the last word.

Patrick Bateman
12-22-2010, 11:01 AM
A league average ERA and a WHIP of about 1.25 over 200 innings is not "significantly above average." He was the ace on his team, a bad team.

Brutus, you can have the last word.

I have no idea why people continue to use stuff like ERA and WHIP to try to contradict a poster when you know that's not what they are talking about, and are clearly inferior methods of valuing a player.

jojo
12-22-2010, 12:09 PM
He was the ace in front of his defense, a very very bad defense.

Fixed that for ya....

Ron Madden
12-22-2010, 12:46 PM
Trade for Greinke paying off in Brewers' sales.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/112287699.html

MattyHo4Life
12-22-2010, 12:58 PM
Trade for Greinke paying off in Brewers' sales.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/112287699.html

Good... I like seeing small/medium midwest teams improve themselves and having it pay off with ticket sales.

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 01:37 PM
I have no idea why people continue to use stuff like ERA and WHIP to try to contradict a poster when you know that's not what they are talking about, and are clearly inferior methods of valuing a player.

Well, to be honest, both posters are correct, IMO.

Greinke provided league average results for the Royals in 2010. Stats like ERA and WHIP are actually superior stats than DIPS for understanding what actual results a pitcher provided for his team. In that sense he was a league average pitcher.

However, K rates, BB rates, and HR rates show that in the areas that he had total control over, Greinke was an above average pitcher, and is likely to provide better results on a team with a better defense.

jojo
12-22-2010, 01:57 PM
Greinke provided league average results for the Royals in 2010. Stats like ERA and WHIP are actually superior stats than DIPS for understanding what actual results a pitcher provided for his team. In that sense he was a league average pitcher.

Actually the correct way to interpret this issue is that despite being significantly above average in things Grienke could control (i.e. his peripherals), a bad Royals team only got the equivalent of a tick above average production from him on a global level (AL ave ERA and WHIP for starting pitchers: 4.26; 1.34) that includes the effects of a myriad of things beyond his control such as the impact of their roster etc.

So really his average year as muddied by his teammates obfuscates the reality that he was just merely exceptional rather than superhuman guy he was in 2009.

Mario-Rijo
12-22-2010, 02:01 PM
Actually the correct way to interpret this issue is that despite being significantly above average in things Grienke could control (i.e. his peripherals), a bad Royals team only got the equivalent of a tick above average production from him on a global level (AL ave ERA and WHIP for starting pitchers: 4.26; 1.34) that includes the effects of a myriad of things beyond his control such as the impact of their roster etc.

So really his average year as muddied by his teammates obfuscates the reality that he was just merely exceptional rather than superhuman guy he was in 2009.

The price of boredom.

Patrick Bateman
12-22-2010, 02:04 PM
Well, to be honest, both posters are correct, IMO.

Greinke provided league average results for the Royals in 2010. Stats like ERA and WHIP are actually superior stats than DIPS for understanding what actual results a pitcher provided for his team. In that sense he was a league average pitcher.


That's actually very incorrect.

ERA is agood way of measuring the amount of runs a pitcher has given up. It tells little story about understanding the results one individual player did for their team. It shows how good a player did, with the help of his teammates, strenght of opponent, park, etc.

So basically it is a horrendous way of evaluating "the actual results a pitcher provided for his team".

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 02:57 PM
That's actually very incorrect.

ERA is agood way of measuring the amount of runs a pitcher has given up. It tells little story about understanding the results one individual player did for their team. It shows how good a player did, with the help of his teammates, strenght of opponent, park, etc.

So basically it is a horrendous way of evaluating "the actual results a pitcher provided for his team".


You are conflating skill level with results, which was my entire point.

The results a pitcher provided for his team are the hits and runs that he gave up. Period. It makes no difference whether they were in his control or not. Results are results.

If my job is to deliver packages, and I deliver 80% of them on time, those are the results that I provided. It makes no difference that I could have provided 100% on time had there not been a major accident on the freeway that day, the 80% on time was the result that I provided. Of course I could argue that I might have provided better results had their not been an accident, and that the 80% does not reflect my true talent level in delivering packages, but none if that changes that for that day, I only provided 80% results.

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 02:59 PM
Actually the correct way to interpret this issue is that despite being significantly above average in things Grienke could control (i.e. his peripherals), a bad Royals team only got the equivalent of a tick above average production from him on a global level (AL ave ERA and WHIP for starting pitchers: 4.26; 1.34) that includes the effects of a myriad of things beyond his control such as the impact of their roster etc.

So really his average year as muddied by his teammates obfuscates the reality that he was just merely exceptional rather than superhuman guy he was in 2009.

Thank you Mr. Fancypants. :p:

jojo
12-22-2010, 03:07 PM
Thank you Mr. Fancypants. :p:

It might seem like semantics but it's really not as the language speaks directly to the discussion of what to expect from Greinke going forward and what he'd be worth.

PuffyPig
12-22-2010, 03:09 PM
If my job is to deliver packages, and I deliver 80% of them on time, those are the results that I provided. It makes no difference that I could have provided 100% on time had there not been a major accident on the freeway that day, the 80% on time was the result that I provided. Of course I could argue that I might have provided better results had their not been an accident, and that the 80% does not reflect my true talent level in delivering packages, but none if that changes that for that day, I only provided 80% results.


But if you are only looking at the actual results (and ignoring what affect other people had on your performance) the results are meaningless.

In your example, if you delivered no packages on Tuesday because your truck was broken, how would you like to see a big goose egg put up in your results category with the statement "deleivered zero parcels that day"?

I'd say you didn't deliver zero results that day. Because you don't have 100%control over the results. Your company delivered zero results that day.

In the same way, saying that Greinke delivered league average pitching is also inaccurate when you know the impact of other things. It might be truthful to say that when Grienke pitched, the Royals achieved average pitching results. But Grineke didn't deliver average pitching results, regardless of the results his team achieved..

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 03:21 PM
It might seem like semantics but it's really not as the language speaks directly to the discussion of what to expect from Greinke going forward and what he'd be worth.

Well, that's my point. One only talks about what he did, while the other also includes what to expect from him.

jojo
12-22-2010, 03:53 PM
Well, that's my point. One only talks about what he did, while the other also includes what to expect from him.

One actually made his comment in the context of Greinke's true talent while talking about the past in terms of ERA. It's a flawed approach.

OnBaseMachine
12-22-2010, 03:58 PM
Team officials say they've added more than 1,500 new season-ticket holders since Sunday's trade with the Kansas City Royals, more than tripling the 400 new account holders the team had added in the first few months of the offseason.



http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5947435

traderumor
12-22-2010, 05:32 PM
I have no idea why people continue to use stuff like ERA and WHIP to try to contradict a poster when you know that's not what they are talking about, and are clearly inferior methods of valuing a player.I was providing the basis for my opinion. "Clearly inferior methods" begs the question for "what they are talking about."

So, remove all the defense noise, and the Brewers are going to give him very similar defense, so you have a pitcher who is gonna have very similar results for another team, but it just isn't his fault. Well, OK, but the guy is still allowing over 4 runs per 9 when he's out there and his team isn't winning the game he starts more than half the time. Sure am glad I know what a truly outstanding pitcher this is, if he could only find a defense. If only baseball worked that way.

Good to know when picking your Strat team, I guess.

jojo
12-22-2010, 06:10 PM
I was providing the basis for my opinion. "Clearly inferior methods" begs the question for "what they are talking about."

So, remove all the defense noise, and the Brewers are going to give him very similar defense, so you have a pitcher who is gonna have very similar results for another team, but it just isn't his fault. Well, OK, but the guy is still allowing over 4 runs per 9 when he's out there and his team isn't winning the game he starts more than half the time. Sure am glad I know what a truly outstanding pitcher this is, if he could only find a defense. If only baseball worked that way.

Good to know when picking your Strat team, I guess.

The Brewers team defense was essentially neutral and 44 runs better based upon UZR than the third worst defense in the majors that was the Royals defense.

ERA and WHIP are probably some of the worst metrics commonly used for evaluating a pitcher. Simply put, there are much better ways and its puzzling why they'd be rejected in favor of ERA etc.

The Royals averaged 5.22 R/G (ERA=4.97) for their season which was by far the worst in the AL last season and only barely better than the major league worst Pirates staff. When Greinke was on the mound, the Royals gave up 4.66 R/G (ERA=4.17) on average. So Grienke made the Royals almost .6 runs better per game or .8 earned runs better per game. Greinke is Hercules to the gods of pythag in that context.

So a pitcher's ERA doesn't even tell a very good story when defaulting to it on a macro level.

Patrick Bateman
12-22-2010, 08:04 PM
I was providing the basis for my opinion. "Clearly inferior methods" begs the question for "what they are talking about."

So, remove all the defense noise, and the Brewers are going to give him very similar defense, so you have a pitcher who is gonna have very similar results for another team, but it just isn't his fault. Well, OK, but the guy is still allowing over 4 runs per 9 when he's out there and his team isn't winning the game he starts more than half the time. Sure am glad I know what a truly outstanding pitcher this is, if he could only find a defense. If only baseball worked that way.

Good to know when picking your Strat team, I guess.

Your describing the reason for why the Brewers may not be good this year, not the reason why Greinke might not be.
It's a fair point, but just pointed in the wrong decision.

Patrick Bateman
12-22-2010, 08:05 PM
You are conflating skill level with results, which was my entire point.



.....Actually, you are.

PuffyPig
12-22-2010, 08:08 PM
Your describing the reason for why the Brewers may not be good this year, not the reason why Greinke might not be.
It's a fair point, but just pointed in the wrong decision.


Presumably you meant the wrong "direction".

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 08:36 PM
.....Actually, you are.

I'm rubber, you're glue...

jojo
12-22-2010, 09:01 PM
I'm rubber, you're glue...

But it's not really a matter of agreeing to disagree....

PuffyPig
12-22-2010, 09:10 PM
I'm rubber, you're glue...

Actually, you're neither....

But maybe you could be my latex salesman....

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 09:32 PM
But it's not really a matter of agreeing to disagree....

I was just trying to be silly. But you are correct. Patrick was the one who conflated value with results, not me. I explained why. Still waiting on his explanation. I really can't do more than what I did until he does.

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 09:48 PM
Actually, you're neither....

But maybe you could be my latex salesman....

I have some joke to reply with, but this is a family site, (they involve XL size and a tailor) so I'll just give you credit for a good one. :)

traderumor
12-22-2010, 09:50 PM
Your describing the reason for why the Brewers may not be good this year, not the reason why Greinke might not be.
It's a fair point, but just pointed in the wrong decision.Which is really the point to me. The Brewers arguably gave up a lot to get someone that may not play a large part in plugging the leak. I really don't think it takes drilling down to the transaction level to make an educated guess at this. Some like to do that for free, I do enough of that on my job I get paid for. And condescendingly ridiculing me for doing so really wasn't appreciated.

BTW, please look back and show me where I am not impressed with Greinke. I simply think the adjectives used based on what I've reasoned through in evaluating his career were a bit hyperbolic. He's been an above average pitcher so far on a bad team. I am curious to see if the hype translates with another team. I'm just not sure the Brewers are the team with the current roster. Trying to pull a player out of his environment and use stat tricks in an attempt to create the theoretical sterile player evaluation laboratory interests me about as much as the results of tests on lab rats.

TheNext44
12-22-2010, 09:57 PM
Which is really the point to me. The Brewers arguably gave up a lot to get someone that may not play a large part in plugging the leak. I really don't think it takes drilling down to the transaction level to make an educated guess at this. Some like to do that for free, I do enough of that on my job I get paid for. And condescendingly ridiculing me for doing so really wasn't appreciated.

I do think it's both funny and sad that Greinke wanted out of KC so he could win, but the deal that gets him out, includes his new team taking one of the reasons why he was having trouble winning, Yancy Bentencourt. That alone should have been reason enough for him to veto the deal.

Patrick Bateman
12-23-2010, 11:31 AM
I was just trying to be silly. But you are correct. Patrick was the one who conflated value with results, not me. I explained why. Still waiting on his explanation. I really can't do more than what I did until he does.

The explanation has already been made by me, Jojo, and even my father.

The results of Greinke are not ERA. That's the results of Greinke based on having a horrendous defense, pitching in the AL, and pitching in a run scoring friendly environment.

The same stats that represent a strong future projection are the actual "results" that may be attributed to him, hence why it is a good predictor, because it shows his results. ERA does no such thing.

TheNext44
12-23-2010, 12:26 PM
The explanation has already been made by me, Jojo, and even my father.

The results of Greinke are not ERA. That's the results of Greinke based on having a horrendous defense, pitching in the AL, and pitching in a run scoring friendly environment.

The same stats that represent a strong future projection are the actual "results" that may be attributed to him, hence why it is a good predictor, because it shows his results. ERA does no such thing.

All you are doing here is conflating results with value again.

Let me make my point one more time, more clearly, and then I'll stop.

Earned runs are the result that Greinke provided for the Royals. They are runs that were scored against the Royals when he was on the mound (for the most part, but that is another discussion about why ERA is a bad predictor).
Runs decide games. They are absolute,concrete, real results that have a direct impact on winning and losing. Runs are the only results that the Royals care about, because they decide how many games they win, which is the entire purpose of the game.

K rates, BB rates, and HR rates, while being better at projecting future results and providing a better understanding of a pitcher's value, are not results that a pitcher provides for his team that directly decides who wins and who loses. These are not the results that a pitcher provides for his team.

Now, runs are not completely within a pitcher's control, which is why they are not good predictors, but that doesn't mean they are not the results that pitcher provides for his team. The results one provides in ones job are rarely completely within your control, but that doesn't mean that you don't provide them, or that they are not results My example of a deliveryman pointed that out.

PuffyPig
12-23-2010, 12:44 PM
Earned runs are the result that Greinke provided for the Royals. They are runs that were scored against the Royals when he was on the mound (for the most part, but that is another discussion about why ERA is a bad predictor).
Runs decide games. They are absolute,concrete, real results that have a direct impact on winning and losing. Runs are the only results that the Royals care about, because they decide how many games they win, which is the entire purpose of the game.



Except that Grienke didn't provide those results. His team did.

jojo
12-23-2010, 12:52 PM
Except that Grienke didn't provide those results. His team did.

Yes. A better analogy concerning the delivery man would be that the UPS guy delivered the package to the front desk of a hotel quicker on average that other couriers but for whatever reason, guest services didn't deliver a pile of packages to the guest's room until the next afternoon.

TheNext44
12-23-2010, 01:15 PM
Yes. A better analogy concerning the delivery man would be that the UPS guy delivered the package to the front desk of a hotel quicker on average that other couriers but for whatever reason, guest services didn't deliver a pile of packages to the guest's room until the next afternoon.

Not a perfect analogy, but let's go with it.

The only results UPS and the people receiving the packages care about are what packages actually get delivered to them on time. If 80% of the packages get delivered to the right people on time, then the results that the UPS driver delivered was 80% efficiency.

In determining how good of a job he did, he scored 100% efficiency. But his results were still 80%.

Results are results. It really is quite simple.

RedsManRick
12-23-2010, 01:32 PM
Not a perfect analogy, but let's go with it.

The only results UPS and the people receiving the packages care about are what packages actually get delivered to them on time. If 80% of the packages get delivered to the right people on time, then the results that the UPS driver delivered was 80% efficiency.

In determining how good of a job he did, he scored 100% efficiency. But his results were still 80%.

Results are results. It really is quite simple.

Yeah, but we aren't talking about the value of UPS. We're talking about hiring that specific carrier. Looking at the results of the entire organization is a pretty stupid way to evaluate the carrier. It really is quite simple.

Greinke's ERA is not his results. It's the results of the Royals when he was pitching, which includes the results of his fielders as well. Why in the world would give Greinke credit for his fielder's results?

You're using the same logic that says wins are the best measure of pitcher performance.

Patrick Bateman
12-23-2010, 01:32 PM
Not a perfect analogy, but let's go with it.

The only results UPS and the people receiving the packages care about are what packages actually get delivered to them on time. If 80% of the packages get delivered to the right people on time, then the results that the UPS driver delivered was 80% efficiency.

In determining how good of a job he did, he scored 100% efficiency. But his results were still 80%.

Results are results. It really is quite simple.

His K rate is a result. It is a result of how many people he struck out.
Just like his walks are, his groundballs, homeruns, etc. They are results.

Unlike ERA though, they don't conflate the results of other people's work, hence why your definition of results is compeltely non-sensical.

Seriously, based on your analaogy, if you are handing out Christmas bonuses, would you be basing it on results? Of course not, you would based on his efficiency.

To me, those are the REAL results, or at leas the results that are attributed to him. Isn't that what we are really trying to get at? Why are you trying to argue semantics on something that is CLEARLY obtuse?

It's really that simple.

PuffyPig
12-23-2010, 01:35 PM
Results are results. It really is quite simple.

Except you are attributing those results to one guy, the pitcher, when a whole team is responsible for them.

TheNext44
12-23-2010, 02:19 PM
Yeah, but we aren't talking about the value of UPS. We're talking about hiring that specific carrier. Looking at the results of the entire organization is a pretty stupid way to evaluate the carrier. It really is quite simple.

Greinke's ERA is not his results. It's the results of the Royals when he was pitching, which includes the results of his fielders as well. Why in the world would give Greinke credit for his fielder's results?

You're using the same logic that says wins are the best measure of pitcher performance.

I am not giving Greinke credit for his results. That is my point about conflating results with value. I am saying that that is what happened when he was pitching, hence, his results. it doesn't matter that he was not in complete control of the results, we never are are in complete control of our results,but they still happen.

TheNext44
12-23-2010, 02:31 PM
His K rate is a result. It is a result of how many people he struck out.
Just like his walks are, his groundballs, homeruns, etc. They are results.
Unlike ERA though, they don't conflate the results of other people's work, hence why your definition of results is compeltely non-sensical.

Seriously, based on your analaogy, if you are handing out Christmas bonuses, would you be basing it on results? Of course not, you would based on his efficiency.

To me, those are the REAL results, or at leas the results that are attributed to him. Isn't that what we are really trying to get at? Why are you trying to argue semantics on something that is CLEARLY obtuse?

It's really that simple.

Actually K rate, BB rate, and HR rate are not totally in his control. Nothing we do is totally in our control.

His K rate is dependent on batters swinging and missing, or taking called third strikes, or umpires making the right or wrong calls, or the weather. The same for BBs and HRs.

The difference is that it seems that over the course of a season, those factors even out, so it appears that a pitcher has control over them, but he really doesn't have any more or less control over those factors than he does his team's defense.

Patrick Bateman
12-23-2010, 03:08 PM
Actually K rate, BB rate, and HR rate are not totally in his control. Nothing we do is totally in our control.

His K rate is dependent on batters swinging and missing, or taking called third strikes, or umpires making the right or wrong calls, or the weather. The same for BBs and HRs.

The difference is that it seems that over the course of a season, those factors even out, so it appears that a pitcher has control over them, but he really doesn't have any more or less control over those factors than he does his team's defense.

That's to a very minor degree true. Every pitch is to a degree controlled by both the pitcher and the batter. That is inherent.
But considering the pitcher's job is to get the batter out, that inherecny is what we are trying to evaluate.

The difference is you are including the defensive players in this spectrum, rather than just batter vs. pitcher. It's batter vs. pitcher with the help of his surroundings, which is not a reasonable way to evaluate a player.

TheNext44
12-23-2010, 03:29 PM
That's to a very minor degree true. Every pitch is to a degree controlled by both the pitcher and the batter. That is inherent.
But considering the pitcher's job is to get the batter out, that inherecny is what we are trying to evaluate.

The difference is you are including the defensive players in this spectrum, rather than just batter vs. pitcher. It's batter vs. pitcher with the help of his surroundings, which is not a reasonable way to evaluate a player.

That's a good way of understanding it. But again, I'm not trying to use ERA to evaluate the pitcher.

Patrick Bateman
12-23-2010, 04:58 PM
That's a good way of understanding it. But again, I'm not trying to use ERA to evaluate the pitcher.

Then I'm not sure what the problem is.

You jsut wanted to argue the semantics that ERA is the result of a specific pitcher, but at the same time is a poor way to judge what a pitcher is done. That makes no sense.

Scrap Irony
12-23-2010, 05:32 PM
ERA shows the results of what happened to that team as to runs given up by that pitcher. Those results may not be indicative of "true talent", but they are results of what happened.

The Royals had a poor defense. The Brewers are likely to have one as well. (Iron gloves, at least according to BIS, across the infield-- more than 50 runs below average-- and a slightly below average OF does not make for an exceptionally improved D behind him.)

KC's infield defense actually graded out better than would Milwaukee's (with Betancourt as SS). To say Greinke will now be a world-beater because he escapes the putrid KC defense, you can see, is probably not going to happen.

mth123
12-27-2010, 10:23 PM
Brewers signed Takashi Saito today. In 2010 he had a 2.83 ERA in 54 IP with an 11.5 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 0.7 HR/9.

Solid vet for the back of the pen with Axford and Braddock. Brewers replaced about 500 awful innings with Greinke, Marcum and Saito. Most improved team in the NL by far.

RedsManRick
12-27-2010, 10:39 PM
That's a good way of understanding it. But again, I'm not trying to use ERA to evaluate the pitcher.

Ok. So let's use your funny logic of defining a person's results as anything that occurs in part due to said person's contributions. But you're not using ERA to evaluate him. So why are we talking about ERA?

If we're not going to evaluate Greinke on his results, what ARE we using them for? If we're only describing what happened last year, then what bearing does it have in this thread?

kaldaniels
12-27-2010, 10:51 PM
Someone hit on this earlier, so I'll bring this up.

Maybe this deserves a thread of its own, but I can't wrap my head around why a pitcher controls the HR he gives up, but apparently not line drive hits.

TheNext44
12-27-2010, 11:04 PM
Ok. So let's use your funny logic of defining a person's results as anything that occurs in part due to said person's contributions. But you're not using ERA to evaluate him. So why are we talking about ERA?

If we're not going to evaluate Greinke on his results, what ARE we using them for? If we're only describing what happened last year, then what bearing does it have in this thread?

First of all, it's not funny logic. It's sound logic and reasoning based on facts. In fact, this view is the view on which most of the world is run.

Second of all, this thread is about Greinke getting traded to the Brewers. I would think discussing what he did last year might be relevant.

Third of all, results are what ultimately matter. Results decides who wins and loses. It doesn't matter who's fault it was, or whose to blame the most or how much.

Fourth of all, my point is that stats have value even when they are not very predictive. I don't like ERA for a number of reasons. Its limited predictive power is near the bottom of the list. If these other reasons were eventually worked out, I would consider it a very valuable stat, even if it was still just as lousy at projecting the future.

PuffyPig
12-28-2010, 01:01 AM
Someone hit on this earlier, so I'll bring this up.

Maybe this deserves a thread of its own, but I can't wrap my head around why a pitcher controls the HR he gives up, but apparently not line drive hits.

If a pitcher could control his LD rate, he could control BAPIP.

thatcoolguy_22
12-28-2010, 08:54 AM
If a pitcher could control his LD rate, he could control BAPIP.

Wouldn't a pitcher with exceptional movement have a lower than normal ld rate? If a pitcher can't control his LD% then I should be able to sustain a similar LD%/BABIP to that of a mlb pitcher, in theory.

jojo
12-28-2010, 10:10 AM
Someone hit on this earlier, so I'll bring this up.

Maybe this deserves a thread of its own, but I can't wrap my head around why a pitcher controls the HR he gives up, but apparently not line drive hits.

It's currently thought that a pitcher doesn't control his HR rate per se. In other words a starting pitcher's HR/FB rate will tend to regress back to 10% over enough time (a reliever's HR/FB rate will tend to be a little lower) unless the pitcher is hurt, done, or below major league average quality (in which case he could maintain a HR/FB% above 10% if allowed to continue pitching to major league batters).

That said, a pitcher's HR/9 can be influenced by his batted ball tendencies as an extreme flyball pitcher would be expected to give up more HRs than an extreme ground ball pitcher given the same number of batter's faced (assuming the sample size is large enough). That's primarily because the flyball pitcher induces more flyballs.

Will M
12-28-2010, 01:02 PM
The Brewers aren't done. They signed Saito for $2M plus incentives for their bullpen.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/brewers-strengthen-bullpen-with-saito/

Ron Madden
12-28-2010, 01:17 PM
The Brewers aren't done. They signed Saito for $2M plus incentives for their bullpen.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/brewers-strengthen-bullpen-with-saito/


The Brewers are a legitimate threat to win the division.

I think those that say otherwise are in a state of denial.

TheNext44
12-28-2010, 01:38 PM
Wouldn't a pitcher with exceptional movement have a lower than normal ld rate? If a pitcher can't control his LD% then I should be able to sustain a similar LD%/BABIP to that of a mlb pitcher, in theory.

The issue isn't that pitchers can or can not control things like LD rates or BABIB, it's that generally their career stats on these factors fall within a very narrow range, with just a few outliers on either side, typical for a bell curve. HR rates, on the other hand, tend to fall into a much larger range.

This is just for MLB pitchers with enough innings pitched to qualify. If you or I were to pitch in the majors for an extended period of time, I think we would not be able to sustain the same rates that MLB pitchers have.

TheNext44
12-28-2010, 01:42 PM
The Brewers are a legitimate threat to win the division.

I think those that say otherwise are in a state of denial.

They were a legitimate threat before these moves. It's a wide open division. They are slightly more of a threat now. But until they fix their defense, they really haven't moved past anyone in the Central.

RedsManRick
12-28-2010, 01:54 PM
The Brewers are a legitimate threat to win the division.

I think those that say otherwise are in a state of denial.

They are certainly in the mix. Prior to Saito, the latest prediction I saw had the Reds at 91, Cards at 90, Brewers at 86. I find it hard to make a compelling case for or against any of the 3 teams.

The Cards are Brewers are actually interesting comps. There are a few similarities. Both have two #1 starters, a solid 3-4, and a black hole at #5 in the rotation. Both have premier offensive players at 1B and LF. Both are mediocre defensively up the middle.

I think Jocketty is smart to be playing this out the way he has. Both the Cards and Brewers have a whole bunch of uncertainty after this year. The Brewers now have one of the worst minor league systems in baseball and are clearly built for this year. The Cardinals have an extremely top heavy roster and will either lose Pujols or get even more top heavy next year. Their minor league system is basically Shelby Miller and a potential role players.

2011 is going to be a dog fight, but the Reds are poised for a long run of success with young talent making up the core of the current roster, impact talent in the pipeline and no onerous long term commitments, unless you feel the way I do about Arroyo -- which most don't.

It's easy to get whipped in to a win now mentality, but I'm glad to see Walt sticking with the plan and not getting caught up in the short term hype. We know he's capable and willing to make an impact move when the opportunity arises. We just need continued patience.

Ron Madden
12-28-2010, 02:05 PM
I'm not saying Milwaukee is a lock to win the division. We don't know who will win it.

I'm just saying that the Brewers have certainly improved their chances with the additions of Marcum, Greinke and Saito. They are a club that shouldn't be taken lightly.

bucksfan2
12-28-2010, 02:29 PM
I like what Milwaukee has done. Its an all in move that boost them right to the forefront of the division. The NL Central may have been down last season but I think it should be a competitive division this year.

I think the Brewers this off season look like a bigger market A's. Aggressive trades were made but those trades could be very short term trades. If the Brewers have a disappointing start to the season and are lagging come June I think the Brewers may trade off Grienke, Fielder, and Marcum in order to replenish their farm system. As long as you are a good evaluator of talent this strategy can work. But if you whiff you can set your franchise back for quite a few years.

buckeyenut
12-29-2010, 07:47 AM
...I think Jocketty is smart to be playing this out the way he has. Both the Cards and Brewers have a whole bunch of uncertainty after this year. The Brewers now have one of the worst minor league systems in baseball and are clearly built for this year. The Cardinals have an extremely top heavy roster and will either lose Pujols or get even more top heavy next year. Their minor league system is basically Shelby Miller and a potential role players.

2011 is going to be a dog fight, but the Reds are poised for a long run of success with young talent making up the core of the current roster, impact talent in the pipeline and no onerous long term commitments, unless you feel the way I do about Arroyo -- which most don't.

It's easy to get whipped in to a win now mentality, but I'm glad to see Walt sticking with the plan and not getting caught up in the short term hype. We know he's capable and willing to make an impact move when the opportunity arises. We just need continued patience.

I think this is dead on. We have a team built to win the next 5 years. Any move we make needs to keep that in mind. This division will be tough in 2011, but much easier in 2012 and enough of our kids will have matured to where that might be the ideal time to add that stud bat in LF/SS or top of rotation pitcher if we don't work out an answer this year. Risk playing it slow like this, but I like the odds and think it is the right play.

edabbs44
12-29-2010, 08:39 AM
It's easy to get whipped in to a win now mentality, but I'm glad to see Walt sticking with the plan and not getting caught up in the short term hype. We know he's capable and willing to make an impact move when the opportunity arises. We just need continued patience.

Agree 1000%. Chasing Milwaukee for a one-year dream is what ends up bankrupting you in the future.

Brutus
12-29-2010, 01:49 PM
The problem, as I see it, is that the Reds didn't have much they needed to do in order to make their club better for next year. There aren't a ton of positions needing upgrading, and thereby there's not an expectation that it would require adding $20 million in new payroll or trading away all the best prospects.

But despite that, the Reds still have not done anything to upgrade the roster, nor has it shown any signs of addressing those positions with anyone that will help. Brandon Webb was a worthwhile gamble and they struck out. Greinke they maintained was not a target. I'm sure there are a lot of intriguing LF targets out there that could be had if they're creative, but thus far - nodda. I recognize we're not even in January, so there are still 2-3 months to acquire someone, but the chances seem to be slim.

I really don't believe I have a win now mentality, other than to say the Reds are at a point where they should be looking to win now. They just made the playoffs and have a chance to get better without overhauling their club. Yet, despite very low expectations for what they could/should do, they've done nothing.

I'm a big Walt fan, though I shouldn't have to reiterate that. But I'm very disheartened by the approach this offseason. I wasn't expecting a laser light display and booming fireworks, but I've not even seen sparklers.

mth123
12-29-2010, 01:53 PM
I think the 5 year future is going to leave many disappointed. Young teams improve as older stop gaps leave and younger more talented guys step in to replace them. The Reds best guys are already here. When Rolen and Phillips leave town (the next 2 to go) the Reds replacements are massive downgrades. Votto will be at 8 figures probably as soon as 2012. Chapman and Bruce will start to escalate. Cueto is probably a $3 to $4 Million guy in 2011 and by 2012 will be pushing 8 figures himself. There is a massive balloon payment coming Arroyo's way in 2013 and by then guys like Stubbs, Bailey, Hanigan, Janish, Wood, Massett, Leake and Heisey will all be arb eligible. This team won't stay intact for more than the next couple years. They get some relief when Cordero goes and Mesoraco takes over for Hernandez, but this team doesn't have 5 years to win. I'd say that by 2013, the talent level will be lower than it is in 2011 and 2012.

Trying to win now has less to do with the Brewers and a lot more to do with taking a shot when the talent level is at its peak. The Reds have a couple guys in Votto and Bruce who should be MVP candidates in 2011 and 2012. The young pitchers, with the possible exception of Chapman, are probably going to be as good as they are going to get for the next two seasons. Rolen and Phillips have thier flaws, but both are plus players and when they go, there just aren't replacements who are close to them. Even if you keep Alonso and Leake to "extend the run" as they repalce Votto and Arroyo, both will still be a downgrade. Barring a massive infusion of cash, 2011 and 2012 are as good as its going to get with this group. Maybe late in the decade guys like Arias, Y-Rod, Guillon and Hamilton can come of age together to make another run, but the group in the majors and high minors won't get a lot better than what we should expect over the next two years. IMO, that is why you go for it now.

Ron Madden
12-29-2010, 01:55 PM
The problem, as I see it, is that the Reds didn't have much they needed to do in order to make their club better for next year. There aren't a ton of positions needing upgrading, and thereby there's not an expectation that it would require adding $20 million in new payroll or trading away all the best prospects.

But despite that, the Reds still have not done anything to upgrade the roster, nor has it shown any signs of addressing those positions with anyone that will help. Brandon Webb was a worthwhile gamble and they struck out. Greinke they maintained was not a target. I'm sure there are a lot of intriguing LF targets out there that could be had if they're creative, but thus far - nodda. I recognize we're not even in January, so there are still 2-3 months to acquire someone, but the chances seem to be slim.

I really don't believe I have a win now mentality, other than to say the Reds are at a point where they should be looking to win now. They just made the playoffs and have a chance to get better without overhauling their club. Yet, despite very low expectations for what they could/should do, they've done nothing.

I'm a big Walt fan, though I shouldn't have to reiterate that. But I'm very disheartened by the approach this offseason. I wasn't expecting a laser light display and booming fireworks, but I've not even seen sparklers.

This is pretty much my feelings in a nutshell.

edabbs44
12-29-2010, 02:15 PM
I think the 5 year future is going to leave many disappointed. Young teams improve as older stop gaps leave and younger more talented guys step in to replace them. The Reds best guys are already here. When Rolen and Phillips leave town (the next 2 to go) the Reds replacements are massive downgrades. Votto will be at 8 figures probably as soon as 2012. Chapman and Bruce will start to escalate. Cueto is probably a $3 to $4 Million guy in 2011 and by 2012 will be pushing 8 figures himself. There is a massive balloon payment coming Arroyo's way in 2013 and by then guys like Stubbs, Bailey, Hanigan, Janish, Wood, Massett, Leake and Heisey will all be arb eligible. This team won't stay intact for more than the next couple years. They get some relief when Cordero goes and Mesoraco takes over for Hernandez, but this team doesn't have 5 years to win. I'd say that by 2013, the talent level will be lower than it is in 2011 and 2012.

Trying to win now has less to do with the Brewers and a lot more to do with taking a shot when the talent level is at its peak. The Reds have a couple guys in Votto and Bruce who should be MVP candidates in 2011 and 2012. The young pitchers, with the possible exception of Chapman, are probably going to be as good as they are going to get for the next two seasons. Rolen and Phillips have thier flaws, but both are plus players and when they go, there just aren't replacements who are close to them. Even if you keep Alonso and Leake to "extend the run" as they repalce Votto and Arroyo, both will still be a downgrade. Barring a massive infusion of cash, 2011 and 2012 are as good as its going to get with this group. Maybe late in the decade guys like Arias, Y-Rod, Guillon and Hamilton can come of age together to make another run, but the group in the majors and high minors won't get a lot better than what we should expect over the next two years. IMO, that is why you go for it now.

I have a ton of faith in Walt in handling this situation properly. Tough decisions will have to be made and I am sure some of these guys will be goners. But if there is value to be had for some of them, they can be dealt for cheaper alternatives. The key is to deal off the correct players for proper returns.

mth123
12-29-2010, 02:18 PM
I have a ton of faith in Walt in handling this situation properly. Tough decisions will have to be made and I am sure some of these guys will be goners. But if there is value to be had for some of them, they can be dealt for cheaper alternatives. The key is to deal off the correct players for proper returns.

So you get value, tread water, stay on the edges of the play-offs that way. When do you win?

edabbs44
12-29-2010, 02:24 PM
So you get value, tread water, stay on the edges of the play-offs that way. When do you win?

What about 2011/2012?

edabbs44
12-29-2010, 02:27 PM
The problem, as I see it, is that the Reds didn't have much they needed to do in order to make their club better for next year. There aren't a ton of positions needing upgrading, and thereby there's not an expectation that it would require adding $20 million in new payroll or trading away all the best prospects.

But despite that, the Reds still have not done anything to upgrade the roster, nor has it shown any signs of addressing those positions with anyone that will help. Brandon Webb was a worthwhile gamble and they struck out. Greinke they maintained was not a target. I'm sure there are a lot of intriguing LF targets out there that could be had if they're creative, but thus far - nodda. I recognize we're not even in January, so there are still 2-3 months to acquire someone, but the chances seem to be slim.

I really don't believe I have a win now mentality, other than to say the Reds are at a point where they should be looking to win now. They just made the playoffs and have a chance to get better without overhauling their club. Yet, despite very low expectations for what they could/should do, they've done nothing.

I'm a big Walt fan, though I shouldn't have to reiterate that. But I'm very disheartened by the approach this offseason. I wasn't expecting a laser light display and booming fireworks, but I've not even seen sparklers.

If Walt has, say, $5MM or so to spend outside of his anticipated payroll, would you want him to set off sparklers now or an M-80 in July? Maybe he has limited money to spend and would rather use it for a legit upgrade at the deadline.

I think it is obvious that money is tight. They have to use it wisely.

Brutus
12-29-2010, 02:36 PM
If Walt has, say, $5MM or so to spend outside of his anticipated payroll, would you want him to set off sparklers now or an M-80 in July? Maybe he has limited money to spend and would rather use it for a legit upgrade at the deadline.

I think it is obvious that money is tight. They have to use it wisely.

I don't think it's an either/or proposition. Generally, the budget is based on opening day. If the Reds are in the race in July, it's likely they could add a bit more if the right player comes along. But honestly, I think it's a mistake to bank that money in belief (hoping) the right player will be there later. You don't know what the cost will be, nor who exactly will be available. If you can improve your club now, you do it, not wait and hope everything falls for you perfectly.

Mario-Rijo
12-29-2010, 02:38 PM
I have a ton of faith in Walt in handling this situation properly. Tough decisions will have to be made and I am sure some of these guys will be goners. But if there is value to be had for some of them, they can be dealt for cheaper alternatives. The key is to deal off the correct players for proper returns.

Let's hope Walt is up to that, he hasn't shown much of a history of doing so.

mth123
12-29-2010, 02:41 PM
What about 2011/2012?

Exactly. That is when the team has its best shot. So why not add some things to enhance the opportunity? The team is missing one bat in the middle, a guy to get on base at the top and could use an upgrade from a question mark to a sure thing in the rotation. I understand the budget not allowing all of these things (even told everyone last summer that the payflex everyone was salivating over wasn't there), but addresing at least one would be progress and enhance the situation that won't get any better.

I don't care if Alonso won't be around in 2013 to take over for Votto. Chances are he'll be an above average bat but just run of the mill compared to his 1B peer group. Those are out there every year and if Votto goes, he won't be able to replace him any better than the 2012 off-seasson versions of Berkman, Lee, Laroche, et al. Deal him for something that helps now.

edabbs44
12-29-2010, 02:57 PM
Let's hope Walt is up to that, he hasn't shown much of a history of doing so.

His Cardinal teams were consistently in contention. He must have been doing something right.

Scrap Irony
12-29-2010, 03:20 PM
Arbitration might make the team more expensive, but only if those arb-eligible guys perform at high levels. If they perform at high levels, it likely means the team has done well. If the team has done well, it's likely they've made the playoffs. If the team is successful, the attendance is likely to grow, meaning the payroll can go up.

edabbs44
12-29-2010, 03:23 PM
I don't think it's an either/or proposition. Generally, the budget is based on opening day. If the Reds are in the race in July, it's likely they could add a bit more if the right player comes along. But honestly, I think it's a mistake to bank that money in belief (hoping) the right player will be there later. You don't know what the cost will be, nor who exactly will be available. If you can improve your club now, you do it, not wait and hope everything falls for you perfectly.

That's an assumption and not a fact. Bob may be at his limit now and telling Walt that he can either use up his limited flexibility now or later. Maybe the options now aren't there and he'd rather wait to see if there is a difference maker available later on, whether that means January or July.

RedsManRick
12-29-2010, 03:30 PM
So you get value, tread water, stay on the edges of the play-offs that way. When do you win?

Going from in the playoff hunt to something just short guaranteeing a WS is a MASSIVE leap.

I'd put it this way, you have a better chance at winning the WS by getting to the playoffs 3 times with a 90 win team than you do by getting to the playoffs once with a 100 win team.

You can't buy a winner. You can only build a contender. The sell-out moon shot approach only makes sense when you can no longer sustain the consistent playoff caliber team.

A "win now" mentality is great, except for the 3-4 years afterwards if you didn't win. And no matter what you do, chances are you won't win.

edabbs44
12-29-2010, 04:22 PM
This thread could be really interesting to read in 3 years.

jojo
12-29-2010, 04:47 PM
This thread could be really interesting to read in 3 years.

The archives are one of the best places in the whole cyberworld. Lots of mental meat to chew upon and it's almost impossible to not be smarter for the chewing.

Brutus
12-29-2010, 04:49 PM
That's an assumption and not a fact. Bob may be at his limit now and telling Walt that he can either use up his limited flexibility now or later. Maybe the options now aren't there and he'd rather wait to see if there is a difference maker available later on, whether that means January or July.

How is what you said not an assumption?

You said, "If Walt has, say, $5MM or so to spend outside of his anticipated payroll, would you want him to set off sparklers now or an M-80 in July? Maybe he has limited money to spend and would rather use it for a legit upgrade at the deadline.

I think it is obvious that money is tight. They have to use it wisely."

None of that is a fact. It's all assumption. We don't know how much they have exactly. We don't know who's available. We don't have too much in the way of evidence who will be available in July and how realistic it is to expect the Reds could acquire such players.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Why wait until July to do something that can be done in January?

TheNext44
12-29-2010, 04:59 PM
So you get value, tread water, stay on the edges of the play-offs that way. When do you win?

The vast majority of the Reds trading chips that thay have now will be Reds property and very cheap for years to come. In fact, I think the Reds will have more excess value to trade in 2013-15 than they do now. Look at this years Reds Top 40 prospect list in the minor league forum. It's at #25 and doesn't even have every player on the 40 man roster.

A good organization doesn't think in terms of "windows.". It thinks in terms of a constant competitive team very year. Some years will be more competitive then others, but a good organization is constantly bringing in talent through the draft and international signings. You are assuming that the Reds never draft or sign another player or that players don't improve. Just from last year to this year, look at how many new names are on the Reds top prospect list.

mth123
12-29-2010, 06:05 PM
The vast majority of the Reds trading chips that thay have now will be Reds property and very cheap for years to come. In fact, I think the Reds will have more excess value to trade in 2013-15 than they do now. Look at this years Reds Top 40 prospect list in the minor league forum. It's at #25 and doesn't even have every player on the 40 man roster.

A good organization doesn't think in terms of "windows.". It thinks in terms of a constant competitive team very year. Some years will be more competitive then others, but a good organization is constantly bringing in talent through the draft and international signings. You are assuming that the Reds never draft or sign another player or that players don't improve. Just from last year to this year, look at how many new names are on the Reds top prospect list.

New names because guys graduate and you have to name somebody. There is no Bruce, Votto, Cueto or Bailey on that list. Chapman is already here for 2011. So are Leake, Stubbs, Heisey, Wood. Using 2010 as a baseline, I see 2 positions that can be upgraded from within. RF because Bruce will get better and Catcher when Mesoraco arrives. The pitching might be better in 2011, but it won't be any better in 2013 than it will be this year or in 2012. This group is at its zenith. Add more talent to go from play-off contender to powerhouse, or watch as they stay at the fringe of the play-offs for a couple years and slowly settle down to a third place team as Rolen and Phillips leave w/o credible replacements and Votto, Cueto, etc price themsleves out of town. Doing nothing is not the right plan. Even the Reds that won 108 games and the series in 1975 went out with a sense of urgency and acquired Bob Bailey and Mike Lum in an attempt to sure up weak areas. "We went to the play-offs last year, we don't need to do anything else" is a load.

traderumor
12-29-2010, 06:22 PM
New names because guys graduate and you have to name somebody. There is no Bruce, Votto, Cueto or Bailey on that list. Chapman is already here for 2011. So are Leake, Stubbs, Heisey, Wood. Using 2010 as a baseline, I see 2 positions that can be upgraded from within. RF because Bruce will get better and Catcher when Mesoraco arrives. The pitching might be better in 2011, but it won't be any better in 2013 than it will be this year or in 2012. This group is at its zenith. Add more talent to go from play-off contender to powerhouse, or watch as they stay at the fringe of the play-offs for a couple years and slowly settle down to a third place team as Rolen and Phillips leave w/o credible replacements and Votto, Cueto, etc price themsleves out of town. Doing nothing is not the right plan. Even the Reds that won 108 games and the series in 1975 went out with a sense of urgency and acquired Bob Bailey and Mike Lum in an attempt to sure up weak areas. "We went to the play-offs last year, we don't need to do anything else" is a load.The interesting thing about your view of the future is that you take what you know, or claim to know, today, project all things being equal, and then claim decline. I'm certain that there will be many twists and turns in the five year time frame you are projecting that will make most of your assumptions obsolete.

mth123
12-29-2010, 06:37 PM
The interesting thing about your view of the future is that you take what you know, or claim to know, today, project all things being equal, and then claim decline. I'm certain that there will be many twists and turns in the five year time frame you are projecting that will make most of your assumptions obsolete.

I hope so. That would mean that improvements were brought in from outside the organization.

TheNext44
12-29-2010, 06:56 PM
New names because guys graduate and you have to name somebody. There is no Bruce, Votto, Cueto or Bailey on that list. Chapman is already here for 2011. So are Leake, Stubbs, Heisey, Wood. Using 2010 as a baseline, I see 2 positions that can be upgraded from within. RF because Bruce will get better and Catcher when Mesoraco arrives. The pitching might be better in 2011, but it won't be any better in 2013 than it will be this year or in 2012. This group is at its zenith. Add more talent to go from play-off contender to powerhouse, or watch as they stay at the fringe of the play-offs for a couple years and slowly settle down to a third place team as Rolen and Phillips leave w/o credible replacements and Votto, Cueto, etc price themsleves out of town. Doing nothing is not the right plan. Even the Reds that won 108 games and the series in 1975 went out with a sense of urgency and acquired Bob Bailey and Mike Lum in an attempt to sure up weak areas. "We went to the play-offs last year, we don't need to do anything else" is a load.

First, there's an ocean between not doing anything and going all in. I would love to see the Reds add a LF, but I don't think they need to, nor should mortgage the future to do it.

Second, the Reds are as well placed as any major league team for 2012-15. Certainly better than any team in the NL Central. Most teams don't plan that far ahead because it is so far away, and so much can happen. The best plan is to build as strong of an organization as possible and keep building on it year after year.

You are stuck on this "window" mentality. I heard the same thing in 1998-2001, this is the only window with Casey and Larkin, then in 2002-5 this is the only window with Griffey, Dunn and Kearns, then in 2005-8, this is the only window with Harang and Arroyo...

Walk away from this concept of a "window." The Reds have opened a doorway through which many talented players will travel. Some will be better than others, but if as long as they don't panic, it will be a very wide door which should lead to a competitive team for years to come.

mth123
12-29-2010, 07:14 PM
First, there's an ocean between not doing anything and going all in. I would love to see the Reds add a LF, but I don't think they need to, nor should mortgage the future to do it.

Second, the Reds are as well placed as any major league team for 2012-15. Certainly better than any team in the NL Central. Most teams don't plan that far ahead because it is so far away, and so much can happen. The best plan is to build as strong of an organization as possible and keep building on it year after year.

You are stuck on this "window" mentality. I heard the same thing in 1998-2001, this is the only window with Casey and Larkin, then in 2002-5 this is the only window with Griffey, Dunn and Kearns, then in 2005-8, this is the only window with Harang and Arroyo...

Walk away from this concept of a "window." The Reds have opened a doorway through which many talented players will travel. Some will be better than others, but if as long as they don't panic, it will be a very wide door which should lead to a competitive team for years to come.

Define "mortgage the future." Dealing Zach Stewart for Rolen is much more in the catgory of mortgaging the future than anything I want them to do. I don't view dealing Alonso as mortgaging the future. I wouldn't mind dealing Leake but only for a real impact guy like Justin Upton. I wouldn't want to deal Votto, Bruce, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Stubbs, Cueto, Masset or Mesoraco. I'd rather not deal Cozart, Joseph, Heisey or Sappelt but would if need be. I Probably would resist on Y-Rod, Hamilton, Guillon, Correa, or Arias. But guys like David Dejesus, Josh Willingham and JJ Hardy were acquired w/o dealing anyone of that caliber. Packages of guys like Burton, Lecure, Valiquette, Smith etc. are getting guys that might increase the teams chances. I'd rate this team at about a 75 on a scale fo 1 to 100. A Powerhouse would probably be 90+. Adding a guy like Dejesus wouldn't put them in that category, but it may move them from 75 to 80 and increase their chances and no future would be mortgaged. Its all I'm really looking for this team to do. But when posters say things like the team won in 2010 so there is no urgency to improve, I just disagree. If anything, the system is deeper than its been in a long time, but it lacks guys who can make an impact by improving on guys that are already here. All the more reason to package several guys for an upgrade. That isn't mortgaging anything.

Mario-Rijo
12-29-2010, 09:25 PM
Define "mortgage the future." Dealing Zach Stewart for Rolen is much more in the catgory of mortgaging the future than anything I want them to do. I don't view dealing Alonso as mortgaging the future. I wouldn't mind dealing Leake but only for a real impact guy like Justin Upton. I wouldn't want to deal Votto, Bruce, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Stubbs, Cueto, Masset or Mesoraco. I'd rather not deal Cozart, Joseph, Heisey or Sappelt but would if need be. I Probably would resist on Y-Rod, Hamilton, Guillon, Correa, or Arias. But guys like David Dejesus, Josh Willingham and JJ Hardy were acquired w/o dealing anyone of that caliber. Packages of guys like Burton, Lecure, Valiquette, Smith etc. are getting guys that might increase the teams chances. I'd rate this team at about a 75 on a scale fo 1 to 100. A Powerhouse would probably be 90+. Adding a guy like Dejesus wouldn't put them in that category, but it may move them from 75 to 80 and increase their chances and no future would be mortgaged. Its all I'm really looking for this team to do. But when posters say things like the team won in 2010 so there is no urgency to improve, I just disagree. If anything, the system is deeper than its been in a long time, but it lacks guys who can make an impact by improving on guys that are already here. All the more reason to package several guys for an upgrade. That isn't mortgaging anything.

Well said, my thoughts exactly. :thumbup:

Scrap Irony
12-29-2010, 10:06 PM
New names because guys graduate and you have to name somebody. There is no Bruce, Votto, Cueto or Bailey on that list. Chapman is already here for 2011. So are Leake, Stubbs, Heisey, Wood. Using 2010 as a baseline, I see 2 positions that can be upgraded from within. RF because Bruce will get better and Catcher when Mesoraco arrives.

How about Stubbs? How about Phillips, who had a relatively poor offensive season largely because of his hand injury? LF with Sappelt? SS with Cozart? A super-sub role for Frazier? None of this mentions the pitching. Speaking of:



The pitching might be better in 2011, but it won't be any better in 2013 than it will be this year or in 2012. This group is at its zenith.

How do you figure that, mth? Isn't Chapman talented enough to make a huge jump from likely bullpen guy to rotaton member and possible ace? Don't most pitchers make their largest jumps in production between the ages of 25-28? Aren't four of the Red starters (Volquez, Cueto, Bailey, and Wood) entering those prime pitching years by 2012?

Insisting that an entire group of young hurlers are "at their zenith" seems more than a bit hyperbolic to me. You'd have to ignore almost all prior evidence as to pitching improvement and age prime seasons, not to mention what these pitchers have done up to now. (Which is to improve. Look at the ERA+ numbers of Bailey and Cueto over their careers. Look at guys who profile like Volquez and Chapman.)



Add more talent to go from play-off contender to powerhouse, or watch as they stay at the fringe of the play-offs for a couple years and slowly settle down to a third place team as Rolen and Phillips leave w/o credible replacements and Votto, Cueto, etc price themsleves out of town. Doing nothing is not the right plan. Even the Reds that won 108 games and the series in 1975 went out with a sense of urgency and acquired Bob Bailey and Mike Lum in an attempt to sure up weak areas. "We went to the play-offs last year, we don't need to do anything else" is a load.


And, once again, the season begins four months from now.

kaldaniels
12-29-2010, 10:55 PM
Define "mortgage the future." Dealing Zach Stewart for Rolen is much more in the catgory of mortgaging the future than anything I want them to do. I don't view dealing Alonso as mortgaging the future. I wouldn't mind dealing Leake but only for a real impact guy like Justin Upton. I wouldn't want to deal Votto, Bruce, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Stubbs, Cueto, Masset or Mesoraco. I'd rather not deal Cozart, Joseph, Heisey or Sappelt but would if need be. I Probably would resist on Y-Rod, Hamilton, Guillon, Correa, or Arias. But guys like David Dejesus, Josh Willingham and JJ Hardy were acquired w/o dealing anyone of that caliber. Packages of guys like Burton, Lecure, Valiquette, Smith etc. are getting guys that might increase the teams chances. I'd rate this team at about a 75 on a scale fo 1 to 100. A Powerhouse would probably be 90+. Adding a guy like Dejesus wouldn't put them in that category, but it may move them from 75 to 80 and increase their chances and no future would be mortgaged. Its all I'm really looking for this team to do. But when posters say things like the team won in 2010 so there is no urgency to improve, I just disagree. If anything, the system is deeper than its been in a long time, but it lacks guys who can make an impact by improving on guys that are already here. All the more reason to package several guys for an upgrade. That isn't mortgaging anything.

Are you projecting Stewart to end up more sucessful than Leake?

mth123
12-29-2010, 11:09 PM
Are you projecting Stewart to end up more sucessful than Leake?

Yes.

WebScorpion
12-30-2010, 02:58 AM
Yes.
Really?
He's a year older and pitched nearly the same season as Leake, while Leake did it his first time in the Majors and Stewart is on his second trip through AA. That's an interesting projection system, to say the least. I will give Stewart a slight handicap in that they sent him back to the rotation again, but it was Leake's first professional season ever.
Well, this season they may both be pitching a full season in AAA and we'll get our level playing field for comparison. My money is on Mike Leake. :thumbup:

edabbs44
12-30-2010, 09:30 AM
Define "mortgage the future." Dealing Zach Stewart for Rolen is much more in the catgory of mortgaging the future than anything I want them to do. I don't view dealing Alonso as mortgaging the future. I wouldn't mind dealing Leake but only for a real impact guy like Justin Upton. I wouldn't want to deal Votto, Bruce, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Stubbs, Cueto, Masset or Mesoraco. I'd rather not deal Cozart, Joseph, Heisey or Sappelt but would if need be. I Probably would resist on Y-Rod, Hamilton, Guillon, Correa, or Arias. But guys like David Dejesus, Josh Willingham and JJ Hardy were acquired w/o dealing anyone of that caliber. Packages of guys like Burton, Lecure, Valiquette, Smith etc. are getting guys that might increase the teams chances. I'd rate this team at about a 75 on a scale fo 1 to 100. A Powerhouse would probably be 90+. Adding a guy like Dejesus wouldn't put them in that category, but it may move them from 75 to 80 and increase their chances and no future would be mortgaged. Its all I'm really looking for this team to do. But when posters say things like the team won in 2010 so there is no urgency to improve, I just disagree. If anything, the system is deeper than its been in a long time, but it lacks guys who can make an impact by improving on guys that are already here. All the more reason to package several guys for an upgrade. That isn't mortgaging anything.

I think you might be overvaluing guys like Burton, Lecure, Valiquette and Smith.

mth123
12-30-2010, 09:56 AM
I think you might be overvaluing guys like Burton, Lecure, Valiquette and Smith.

Sam Lecure and Josh Ravin is about the Reds equivalent of what KC dealt Dejesus for.

Willingham was dealt for basically Carlos Fisher and Todd Frazier.

Hardy was dealt for a version of Jordan Hotchkiss and Jared Burton (but Burton is actually better than those guys).

Even if you disgree with those assessments, the point is that upgrades have been dealt for nothing that would mortgage the future.

I don't think that the Reds had the middle infelder or the money to get Greinke, but there have been players moved that would have filled a hole for the Reds w/o mortgaging anything.

traderumor
12-30-2010, 10:30 AM
I hope so. That would mean that improvements were brought in from outside the organization.But you started out this with a hypothesis that "Reds fans will be disappointed in the results over the next 5 years because they are peaking now." I would submit that any prediction such as this is flawed from the outset if one does not include as a given that there will be change in the organization. The change may be positive, it may be negative. Many of the changes will be outside of the control of the organization, such as injuries, prospect flops, personal problems with key players, etc. There will be drafts. Other orgs. will give up on guys that the Reds pick up and develop. Opportunities for key trades may present themselves. A surprise prospect or two may develop. That is just the way MLB works, so analysis that is based on all things being equal are good to identify shopping lists, but not so good for making bold predictions about the next five years of performance from the big league squad. Heck, this could be a party like 1999 for all we know.

mth123
12-30-2010, 12:14 PM
But you started out this with a hypothesis that "Reds fans will be disappointed in the results over the next 5 years because they are peaking now." I would submit that any prediction such as this is flawed from the outset if one does not include as a given that there will be change in the organization. The change may be positive, it may be negative. Many of the changes will be outside of the control of the organization, such as injuries, prospect flops, personal problems with key players, etc. There will be drafts. Other orgs. will give up on guys that the Reds pick up and develop. Opportunities for key trades may present themselves. A surprise prospect or two may develop. That is just the way MLB works, so analysis that is based on all things being equal are good to identify shopping lists, but not so good for making bold predictions about the next five years of performance from the big league squad. Heck, this could be a party like 1999 for all we know.

Fair point. Overall though, the players in this organization are more likely to win in 2011 and 2012 than in future years becuase the guys who will fall off or leave are better than the in house replacements. I don't think this crew as is is good enough to be that caliber of team, but my point is, you'll have to acquire even more talent in those future years to bridge the gap and make the Reds a serious contender for a championship than you will in 2011 and 2012, so why not do something now when the opportunity is at its best?

traderumor
12-30-2010, 01:50 PM
Fair point. Overall though, the players in this organization are more likely to win in 2011 and 2012 than in future years becuase the guys who will fall off or leave are better than the in house replacements. I don't think this crew as is is good enough to be that caliber of team, but my point is, you'll have to acquire even more talent in those future years to bridge the gap and make the Reds a serious contender for a championship than you will in 2011 and 2012, so why not do something now when the opportunity is at its best?In the end, your last statement is simply begging the question.

Ron Madden
01-20-2011, 09:57 AM
The Brewers ticket sales on the rise.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/114248654.html

kaldaniels
07-08-2011, 12:42 AM
Man...

Just peeked at Zack's stats as we are up against him tommorrow.

5.66 ERA thru 12 games. Yikes.

Can you say the Reds just might have been worse off (at this point in time) in the standings had they say, given up Stubbs to bring Greinke here? I'd still love to have him...but the dude has not performed this year.

Brutus
07-08-2011, 12:58 AM
Man...

Just peeked at Zack's stats as we are up against him tommorrow.

5.66 ERA thru 12 games. Yikes.

Can you say the Reds just might have been worse off (at this point in time) in the standings had they say, given up Stubbs to bring Greinke here? I'd still love to have him...but the dude has not performed this year.

His strikeout/walk ratio is bordering on ridiculously good. He's had a woefully unlucky LOB%, a very, very rough .340 BABIP and an unlucky 15% HR/FB rate.

I would wager any amount of money if that exact season he's having were done all over again, his ERA for any other team would probably be no worse than 3.25.

I'd take Greinke in an absolute eyelash and not be the least bit concerned. Greinke has been the absolute most unlucky pitcher in the majors this year.

Sometimes luck (or lack thereof) gets tossed around haphazardly. But in this case, it's totally applicable.

savafan
07-08-2011, 01:06 AM
Man...

Just peeked at Zack's stats as we are up against him tommorrow.

5.66 ERA thru 12 games. Yikes.

Can you say the Reds just might have been worse off (at this point in time) in the standings had they say, given up Stubbs to bring Greinke here? I'd still love to have him...but the dude has not performed this year.

The stat gurus among us will tell you that Greinke has pitched much better than his numbers indicate. We all should know by now that losses and ERA aren't good factors for evaluating pitchers. We have the knowledge today to make up new stats that will prove the argument that Greinke has just had bad luck, and you can't really hold bad luck against a guy, because it all evens out in the end. Someday they'll tell us that you shouldn't evaluate a pitcher simply on whether or not he has a pulse as well. ;)

757690
07-08-2011, 01:23 AM
Grienke's year so far is very interesting. He has pitched better than his ERA (5.66), but worse than his W-L record (7-3).

I would actually argue that he has pitched more in line with his ERA than his W-L or his FIP or xFIP or those other stats that no one really understands (lol).

First, his LD rate is way up, from around 18-19% to over 23%. I always think this gets underestimated by many. If you want to know how well a pitcher is pitching, I think you look at his line drive rate and HR rate. His HR rate is way up too, from around .8 per 9 innings, to 1.32 per 9 innings. I think his LD rate explains his high HR to flyball ratio, better than luck does. He simply is getting hit hard, when contact is made.

As for his K's, which are exceptional this year, around 12 per 9 innings as opposed to his normal 8 per 9 innings, a lot can be explained by his switching leagues. He is getting a 33% swing rate on balls outside the zone, well above his average of around 25%. That means a third of his pitches that are balls, are being swung at. Wow. I think this can best be explained by the fact that so many hitters have never seen his stuff, especially his breaking pitches.

So, unless he controls his LD rate, which he might, he is definitely in for a rough year, Even if he does, he will have to deal with hitters learning his stuff, laying off his breaking stuff, which is never good for a pitcher.

BTW, if you have watched any of his starts, he seems to be suffering from the Homer Bailey Syndrome. When anything bad happens, he falls apart for that inning.

PuffyPig
07-08-2011, 07:13 AM
So, unless he controls his LD rate, which he might, he is definitely in for a rough year, Even if he does, he will have to deal with hitters learning his stuff, laying off his breaking stuff, which is never good for a pitcher.



If you are a believer that a pitcher cannot control his BABIP, you have to be a believer that a pitcher cannot control his LD rate. SInce LD's become hits about 70% of the time (more than FB's or GB's), it follows that if a pitcher could control his LD rate, he could control BABIP.

Homer Bailey
07-08-2011, 10:08 AM
The stat gurus among us will tell you that Greinke has pitched much better than his numbers indicate. We all should know by now that losses and ERA aren't good factors for evaluating pitchers. We have the knowledge today to make up new stats that will prove the argument that Greinke has just had bad luck, and you can't really hold bad luck against a guy, because it all evens out in the end. Someday they'll tell us that you shouldn't evaluate a pitcher simply on whether or not he has a pulse as well. ;)

Right. ERA and W/L records are all we need to determine how well a pitcher is pitching! Everything else is a waste of time!

757690
07-08-2011, 12:12 PM
If you are a believer that a pitcher cannot control his BABIP, you have to be a believer that a pitcher cannot control his LD rate. SInce LD's become hits about 70% of the time (more than FB's or GB's), it follows that if a pitcher could control his LD rate, he could control BABIP.

Yes, I believe that pitchers can control their line drive rate. But that is a tired argument that has been rehashed over and over again on this board, so I will leave it at that.

More importantly, I believe after watching Greinke pitch many times this year, that he is responsible for the line drives he has given up this year, and not luck.

savafan
07-08-2011, 12:26 PM
Right. ERA and W/L records are all we need to determine how well a pitcher is pitching! Everything else is a waste of time!

That's a broad generalization. I wouldn't go that far. We should probably include strikeouts also. K's are sexy. :D

Will M
07-08-2011, 04:05 PM
I own Greinke & Marcum on my fantasy team. I've looked into their situations a bit. IMO Greinke has...
1) been unlucky
2) at times been very hittable
3) been a major victim of the Brewers "defense". they remind me of the Reds of a few years ago. way too many guys at positions that they just can't play.