PDA

View Full Version : Dave Cameron wants the Mariners to trade for Votto



dunner13
10-04-2011, 11:18 AM
http://www.ussmariner.com/2011/09/19/forget-prince-fielder-target-joey-votto-instead/

This may have already been talked about somewhere else, sorry if it has. But I think its interesting that he thinks it would take Pineda and prospects to get Votto. Depending on the prospects it does seem like theres potential of a trade with seattle.

REDREAD
10-04-2011, 11:30 AM
Articles like this just seem to reinforce to me that it's a good idea not to trade Votto.

Sure, Pineda is a nice young pitcher, but he's not an MVP.

I don't understand why there's such great fear about what the Reds are going to do in 2014.. Let's just enjoy Votto for 2 more years. We can "afford" to let him walk as a free agent. If that happens, we will have his payroll slot to add other talent (that seems to be the big sales pitch for trading Votto now).

IMO, the Reds have a better chance of getting their own Pineda (maybe Homer or Wood) than finding another Votto.

klw
10-04-2011, 11:45 AM
Felix for Votto?

Mario-Rijo
10-04-2011, 11:49 AM
Felix for Votto?

That is the only deal that works for me.

Scrap Irony
10-04-2011, 12:34 PM
If Votto's going to Seattle, not only should Pineda and League be coming back, but so should James Paxton and Taijuan Walker.

While that would weaken the major league club, the extra $10 million in cash could be used to improve other areas. Or be used with other cash to find another TOR starter.

Then the extra starters (at least two of which profile as MOR guys) could be used to get an above average offensive player at a position of need.

WVRed
10-04-2011, 01:48 PM
Another name: Dustin Ackley.

Then trade Phillips if you really want to reinvent the offense.

RedsManRick
10-04-2011, 01:57 PM
Another name: Dustin Ackley.

Then trade Phillips if you really want to reinvent the offense.

Not sure why the Mariners would trade for offense only to trade away their best hitter. I'd love to have Ackley, but it doesn't really make sense for the Mariners.

Reds1
10-04-2011, 02:08 PM
I think a lot of teams would trade for Votto. Reds could enjoy him and still trade him later for players if they wanted or maybe 1.5 years unless we are in the race. I think REds will keep Alonso to take his place after that unless they get a top of the line pitcher.

MikeS21
10-04-2011, 04:07 PM
Every day the Reds hang on to Votto, his trade value diminishes. Every team in baseball knows that there is a deadline with Votto. They are all hoping the Reds hang on to Votto because that means when the Reds are backed up against the wall and HAVE to trade Votto, meaning lesser propsects will get the deal done.

REDREAD
10-04-2011, 04:15 PM
Every day the Reds hang on to Votto, his trade value diminishes. Every team in baseball knows that there is a deadline with Votto. They are all hoping the Reds hang on to Votto because that means when the Reds are backed up against the wall and HAVE to trade Votto, meaning lesser propsects will get the deal done.

The same could be said for any player. Are the Rays panicing to trade Shields? I mean he will be gone eventually too. Should the Reds panic about Bruce and Cueto?

Now is the time to live in the moment. IMO, trading Votto does not make sense. Try to win with him and let the chips fall where they may. Plenty of time later to get prospects and worry about payflex.

Hopefully the Reds deal some prospects for reinforcements for 2012.

vic715
10-04-2011, 04:50 PM
The same could be said for any player. Are the Rays panicing to trade Shields? I mean he will be gone eventually too. Should the Reds panic about Bruce and Cueto?

Now is the time to live in the moment. IMO, trading Votto does not make sense. Try to win with him and let the chips fall where they may. Plenty of time later to get prospects and worry about payflex.

Hopefully the Reds deal some prospects for reinforcements for 2012.

Good post.Finally one that makes since when talking about Votto being traded.

dunner13
10-04-2011, 05:19 PM
I'm a big fan of Votto and would rather keep him then trade him, but if hes not going to sign here long term and we can get a package of players that helps us now and into the future thats built around a young ace pitcher I think we have to consider it. If Votto leaves to free agency after the 2013 season and we get nothing more then a couple of draft picks for an MVP caliber player that will be very disappointing.

jojo
10-04-2011, 05:46 PM
Not sure why the Mariners would trade for offense only to trade away their best hitter. I'd love to have Ackley, but it doesn't really make sense for the Mariners.

I find it difficult to envision any scenario where the Ms trade Ackley.

The Operator
10-04-2011, 06:59 PM
It's really sad that we have been conditioned as a fan base to the point where no sooner than The Reds develop an MVP type player like Votto, we just have to cash him in for prospects, further extending the endless rebuilding cycle we've been going through in Cincinnati for years and years and years.

Frankly, I'd much rather keep Votto for 2 years and try to win with his production in the lineup then to give in to the small market mentality and trade him away for unproven kids that will only further delay that magic year in the future when we're supposed to win. It really gets depressing how over the years, that year keeps getting pushed and pushed and pushed away. It's always "well, The Reds are being to win in {current year +2-3 years}" but other than 2010, that never seems to happen. I'm sick of waiting.

Cedric
10-04-2011, 09:05 PM
It's really sad that we have been conditioned as a fan base to the point where no sooner than The Reds develop an MVP type player like Votto, we just have to cash him in for prospects, further extending the endless rebuilding cycle we've been going through in Cincinnati for years and years and years.

Frankly, I'd much rather keep Votto for 2 years and try to win with his production in the lineup then to give in to the small market mentality and trade him away for unproven kids that will only further delay that magic year in the future when we're supposed to win. It really gets depressing how over the years, that year keeps getting pushed and pushed and pushed away. It's always "well, The Reds are being to win in {current year +2-3 years}" but other than 2010, that never seems to happen. I'm sick of waiting.

Most teams can't afford players like Votto. I would say the Reds are clearly not in the minority there. There are teams with MUCH smaller payrolls and in much harder division than the Reds that are winning every year by knowing exactly when to flip a player or let them walk for picks.

The Operator
10-04-2011, 10:03 PM
Most teams can't afford players like Votto. I would say the Reds are clearly not in the minority there. There are teams with MUCH smaller payrolls and in much harder division than the Reds that are winning every year by knowing exactly when to flip a player or let them walk for picks.I certainly understand that, but I'm not totally convinced the Reds can't afford Votto. I'm sure that's what we'll be told if he's traded and/or walks, but I think they could afford him if they really wanted to.

And I'd be willing to trade him if the package was right. But a lot of people are making proposed trades where he's basically treated as an average player in a run of the mill trade. If I'm trading an MVP, I want an absolute king's ransom in return. I'm talking an embarrassment of riches coming our way. If not, we hold onto him because we don't have to deal him. If he walks, he walks. I just hate how we feel like we have to deal him. That, imo, sets us up for getting a crappy return.

Reds/Flyers Fan
10-05-2011, 01:58 AM
It's really sad that we have been conditioned as a fan base to the point where no sooner than The Reds develop an MVP type player like Votto, we just have to cash him in for prospects, further extending the endless rebuilding cycle we've been going through in Cincinnati for years and years and years.



Welcome to the modern reality of Major League Baseball.

In the NFL, by far the most popular pro sports league, five of the last six champions have been from Green Bay, New Orleans, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis, while Baltimore and Tampa Bay have won it all within the past decade. It would be utterly ridiculous for anyone to think MLB could offer up a similar run. In fact, it would be borderline insane to even imagine the MLB team in a couple of those Super Bowl cities winning a World Series (Orioles, Pirates). Already this post-season, the small-market, low-budget, feel-good Rays have been squashed by the much larger payroll.

It would be laughable for anyone to suggest a post-season entirely free of just the Yankees and Red Sox, let alone the Phillies. And just wait til the Cubs have a competent front office. :thumbdown:

Scrap Irony
10-05-2011, 10:28 AM
To play devil's advocate, how many different teams have made the playoffs in the past five years? Sure, there are perennial teams like Boston and New York. But they not only have larger payrolls, they also have been run better. They deserve to go, most years, based on the little moves.

And, once you get into the playoffs, just about anything can happen.

TRF
10-05-2011, 10:55 AM
One thing that makes the next three years unique is that both the Yankees and Red Sox have long term solutions at 1B. That leaves very few teams with the ability to throw a lot of money around.

Dodgers
Angels
Mets
Rangers
Seattle
Giants
Cardinals
Phillies

These teams COULD afford Votto. The Phils don't have a spot, the Cardinals are waiting on Albert. The Dodgers are a financial mess. The Mets make a lot of sense, but they may not have the chips. The Rangers make a lot of sense, and they may have the chips. Toronto, who i did not list, may fit nicely, but they'd have to give up alot, just to even get him, then they have to retain him.

So, I keep him and keep talking to him and his agent.

IslandRed
10-05-2011, 10:57 AM
Every day the Reds hang on to Votto, his trade value diminishes. Every team in baseball knows that there is a deadline with Votto. They are all hoping the Reds hang on to Votto because that means when the Reds are backed up against the wall and HAVE to trade Votto, meaning lesser propsects will get the deal done.

The Reds don't have to trade Votto any more than the Brewers had to trade Prince Fielder or the Rays had to trade Carl Crawford.

In each case, the team had to judge the opportunity to win now versus restocking to win later. Sometimes "win now" wins, even in smaller markets.

lollipopcurve
10-05-2011, 11:37 AM
The Reds don't have to trade Votto any more than the Brewers had to trade Prince Fielder or the Rays had to trade Carl Crawford.

Neither the Brewers nor the Rays had a ready replacement for Fielder or Crawford. (Jennings wasn't ready until mid-2011.) Big difference between those situations and the Reds, who have Alonso ready to go.

kaldaniels
10-05-2011, 03:32 PM
To play devil's advocate, how many different teams have made the playoffs in the past five years? Sure, there are perennial teams like Boston and New York. But they not only have larger payrolls, they also have been run better. They deserve to go, most years, based on the little moves.

And, once you get into the playoffs, just about anything can happen.

Are you suggesting the deck isn't stacked?

REDREAD
10-05-2011, 05:23 PM
If Votto leaves to free agency after the 2013 season and we get nothing more then a couple of draft picks for an MVP caliber player that will be very disappointing.

Not to call you out, but I don't understand this.
So far, Votto helped us win a division title in 2009.
We can't predict the future, but St Louis and Milwaukee might be weakened by free agent defections, injuries, etc.

Wasn't the goal of our constant "rebuilding" since the 2000 Neagle trade to get a core of players that could content for the division title.
We have that now (although the team does have weaknesses). Let's kick back and enjoy it. If Votto leaves as a FA, then so be it.. That's 2 years away. I bet Milwaukee was glad they didn't trade Fielder this year, and StL was glad they didn't trade Pujolus..

REDREAD
10-05-2011, 05:27 PM
Neither the Brewers nor the Rays had a ready replacement for Fielder or Crawford. (Jennings wasn't ready until mid-2011.) Big difference between those situations and the Reds, who have Alonso ready to go.

Then trade Alonso then. He's more likely to net a "win now" player in return.
Trade him to a small market team that wants to unload a talented player for a cheap 1b/DH.

There's no way Alonso is going to come close to replacing Votto.

wlf WV
10-05-2011, 06:28 PM
To play devil's advocate, how many different teams have made the playoffs in the past five years? Sure, there are perennial teams like Boston and New York. But they not only have larger payrolls, they also have been run better. They deserve to go, most years, based on the little moves.

And, once you get into the playoffs, just about anything can happen.

I would venture to say you are dead wrong.I know the Red Sox spent almost twice what the Reds did per win.I would expect the Yankees spent even more per win.

I think the large payrolls out spend everyone per win.I don't think that is run better,just richer.

_Sir_Charles_
10-05-2011, 07:26 PM
Then trade Alonso then. He's more likely to net a "win now" player in return.
Trade him to a small market team that wants to unload a talented player for a cheap 1b/DH.

There's no way Alonso is going to come close to replacing Votto.

Bingo. I don't get this whole concept of Yonder being ready to replace Votto. He's had a small handful of MLB ab's...I'm not one to usually spout off about small sample sizes...but come on! He looks like he'll be a very good hitter who's either chained to first base or a DH role. He, to me, looks like our best trade piece.

As for Votto, everyone seems to be absolutely convinced that he doesn't want to be here long term and that he wants to go back to Toronto. I'm sorry, I just don't see that. He's never SAID anything even remotely like that. In fact he's spouted his preference for cities OUTSIDE of Canada. Just because he didn't want to commit to a deal over what he did doesn't mean he wants to leave or that he wants to test the FA market. I think it simply means that he doesn't know what the future holds and he wants to leave his options open. If the Reds do a crummy job of putting together a team and they start losing consistently, he'll probably be happy that he didn't commit to a longer deal. But if they do put a great team together, he could easily resign for a longer deal. Heck, he could meet the love of his life this off season and get married, settle down and live in Cincy. This automatic assumption that "he's gone" has reached epic proportions.

When you've got an MVP caliber players, you do everything you can to keep him. Period.

The Operator
10-05-2011, 07:53 PM
Then trade Alonso then. He's more likely to net a "win now" player in return.
Trade him to a small market team that wants to unload a talented player for a cheap 1b/DH.

There's no way Alonso is going to come close to replacing Votto.Thank you, thank you, thank you.

I like Alonso as much as the next guy, but there's no way I'm ready to trade the best hitter to come through this town in decades to make room for him when it's not necessary. As good Alonso has looked, he's still unproven. We have a guy locked up for the next two years who is one of the top 3-4 hitters in the game. Alonso may be "ready" but he's going to be a huge, huge drop off from Votto. A lot bigger than most people are assuming.

IslandRed
10-05-2011, 08:28 PM
Neither the Brewers nor the Rays had a ready replacement for Fielder or Crawford. (Jennings wasn't ready until mid-2011.) Big difference between those situations and the Reds, who have Alonso ready to go.

That still doesn't equate to "have to." Choosing to because it makes the team better is a different thing entirely.

REDblooded
10-05-2011, 11:55 PM
Pineda and Nick Franklin?

C-Ya Votto.

Mario-Rijo
10-06-2011, 01:56 AM
And I want a toilet made out of gold but it just isn't in the cards now is it.

WebScorpion
10-06-2011, 03:00 AM
Felix for Votto?That's the only type of trade I'd even consider for Votto. It would have to be a sure fire contender for the Cy Young award in 2012. After all, I'm trading an MVP caliber player who plays every day...I'm going to need more than an MVP caliber player who plays every 5th day, so I'd even ask for a decent prospect along WITH King Felix.

Slyder
10-06-2011, 03:39 AM
That's the only type of trade I'd even consider for Votto. It would have to be a sure fire contender for the Cy Young award in 2012. After all, I'm trading an MVP caliber player who plays every day...I'm going to need more than an MVP caliber player who plays every 5th day, so I'd even ask for a decent prospect along WITH King Felix.

Pitchers have as much influence over the course of a year as hitters. Especially someone of King Felix's caliber. It is just more concentrated than the hitters.

RedsManRick
10-06-2011, 11:01 AM
Pitchers have as much influence over the course of a year as hitters. Especially someone of King Felix's caliber. It is just more concentrated than the hitters.

Exactly. A pitcher who throws 225 innings will impact something like 900 plate appearances (3 outs and ~1 hit or walk per inning). In the NL, you can add his own PA at the plate (about 75). Plus he has some influence defensively (40-60 chances per year, depending on batted ball tendencies).

The biggest difference lies in the scope of defensive chances, as a SS is going to get something like 400 chances (balls in zone) over the course of the year. Though the difference between a really good SS and a really poor one one is only about a 10% conversion rate -- 40 plays (~20 plays between excellent or horrible and replacement). In CF it's about 300 chances, but only a 5% conversion difference -- though the value of each conversion is greater since you're talking about extra base hits.

All that said, at the end of the day, a starting pitcher who makes 30+ starts has a lot of influence. And really, that shows up in something like WAR. In a given year, the 30 best position players are going to be at around 5 WAR or better. The same cutoff is at about 4 WAR for SP, with about 15 at 5 WAR or greater. On balance the very best position player is going to be more valuable than the very best pitcher - but the difference in their opportunity to impact the team is more comparable than you may think.

klw
10-06-2011, 11:31 AM
Just FYI:
The last three years Felix has thrown 239 2/3, 249 2/3, and 233 2/3 innings and faced a total of 977, 1001, and 964 hitters.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hernafe02.shtml
http://espn.go.com/mlb/player/stats/_/id/6194/felix-hernandez

bucksfan2
10-06-2011, 11:33 AM
Exactly. A pitcher who throws 225 innings will impact something like 900 plate appearances (3 outs and ~1 hit or walk per inning). In the NL, you can add his own PA at the plate (about 75). Plus he has some influence defensively (40-60 chances per year, depending on batted ball tendencies).

The biggest difference lies in the scope of defensive chances, as a SS is going to get something like 400 chances (balls in zone) over the course of the year. Though the difference between a really good SS and a really poor one one is only about a 10% conversion rate -- 40 plays (~20 plays between excellent or horrible and replacement). In CF it's about 300 chances, but only a 5% conversion difference -- though the value of each conversion is greater since you're talking about extra base hits.

All that said, at the end of the day, a starting pitcher who makes 30+ starts has a lot of influence. And really, that shows up in something like WAR. In a given year, the 30 best position players are going to be at around 5 WAR or better. The same cutoff is at about 4 WAR for SP, with about 15 at 5 WAR or greater. On balance the very best position player is going to be more valuable than the very best pitcher - but the difference in their opportunity to impact the team is more comparable than you may think.

But at the end of the day, even the best pitching performances in recent history, have had a direct effect on some 30 odd starts and minimal to zero influence on the other 130 games in a season. The only impact a great SP will have on the days he has not pitched is a fresher bull pen.

A guy like Joey Votto made an appearance in 161 games this season. If you look at Verlander he had a direct influence in 34 games this season. That is a huge difference, a difference that I don't think properly is displayed in WAR. Comparing pitchers to every day players is apples and oranges if you ask me. At the end of the day when the season is based upon the amount of wins and losses give me the guy who has an impact on 160 games a season as opposed to someone who has an impact on 35.

RedsManRick
10-06-2011, 11:48 AM
But at the end of the day, even the best pitching performances in recent history, have had a direct effect on some 30 odd starts and minimal to zero influence on the other 130 games in a season. The only impact a great SP will have on the days he has not pitched is a fresher bull pen.

A guy like Joey Votto made an appearance in 161 games this season. If you look at Verlander he had a direct influence in 34 games this season. That is a huge difference, a difference that I don't think properly is displayed in WAR. Comparing pitchers to every day players is apples and oranges if you ask me. At the end of the day when the season is based upon the amount of wins and losses give me the guy who has an impact on 160 games a season as opposed to someone who has an impact on 35.

You're missing the point. You can't just look at the games count and ignore the scale of influence. A guy who has a MASSIVE impact on 30-35 has as much impact on overall wins & losses as a guy has some impact on 150.

Obviously you can choose whatever you want. But before you dismiss the WAR argument, can you tell me what it's doing wrong? By definition it accounts for amount of opportunity a guy has to produce or prevent runs (and how he does in those opportunities). The comparisons of impact fall where they may.

Felix Hernandez has averaged 6.2 WAR over the last 3 years. Votto has averaged 6.3 WAR.

At the end of the day, I care a lot less about some abstract, theoretical measure of how much influence a guy might have and more about how much production he's actually giving. And Votto and Felix are quite comparable on that front. And given that we have a quality 1B option in house but not a comparable SP option, I think there's a strong argument to be made.

bucksfan2
10-06-2011, 12:23 PM
You're missing the point. You can't just look at the games count and ignore the scale of influence. A guy who has a MASSIVE impact on 30-35 has as much impact on overall wins & losses as a guy has some impact on 150.

Obviously you can choose whatever you want. But before you dismiss the WAR argument, can you tell me what it's doing wrong? By definition it accounts for amount of opportunity a guy has to produce or prevent runs (and how he does in those opportunities). The comparisons of impact fall where they may.

Felix Hernandez has averaged 6.2 WAR over the last 3 years. Votto has averaged 6.3 WAR.

At the end of the day, I care a lot less about some abstract, theoretical measure of how much influence a guy might have and more about how much production he's actually giving. And Votto and Felix are quite comparable on that front. And given that we have a quality 1B option in house but not a comparable SP option, I think there's a strong argument to be made.

Felix could go out there and win all 35 starts he makes, he could strike out every single batter he faces in a season, and that would amount to a little over 20% of the season. No matter how massive an impact he had on those games change the fact that he is sitting on the bench for roughly 80% of the season.

When at the end of the day your W-L record determines who goes to the playoffs give me the superstar who is on the field for almost 100% of the at bats. Heck the Mariners at one point had two of the best pitchers in the game going yet they were miserable.

Roy Tucker
10-06-2011, 12:24 PM
Exactly. A pitcher who throws 225 innings will impact something like 900 plate appearances (3 outs and ~1 hit or walk per inning).


That is a very interesting point. I never thought of it that way. :thumbup:

The Justin-Verlander-for-MVP movement should point that out.

RedsManRick
10-06-2011, 12:37 PM
Felix could go out there and win all 35 starts he makes, he could strike out every single batter he faces in a season, and that would amount to a little over 20% of the season. No matter how massive an impact he had on those games change the fact that he is sitting on the bench for roughly 80% of the season.

When at the end of the day your W-L record determines who goes to the playoffs give me the superstar who is on the field for almost 100% of the at bats. Heck the Mariners at one point had two of the best pitchers in the game going yet they were miserable.

You do realize that when he's on the field, he's not involved in most of the plays -- or only involved in so far as he caught a throw? And at the plate, he's only involved once every few innings?

Yes, he's involved in more games. But he has a much, much less influence on the games he's involved in. What a given position players does in a given game has a relatively small influence on W-L. What a SP pitcher does in a given game has a huge influence on W-L. You can't keep ignoring this fact.

And the whole "a specific player didn't make your team great" argument is tired. No player, no matter how great, can make an otherwise horrible team good/great. He can make it merely poor. Your Mariners argument can be made on the position player side just as easily. Just ask ARod or Bonds.

Team W-L records are about a team of 25+ guys, none of whom can have an outsized opportunity. Using team W-L record to assess the contributions of a single player (or two) is just silly.

jojo
10-06-2011, 01:26 PM
Heck the Mariners at one point had two of the best pitchers in the game going yet they were miserable.

If the Ms would have had Votto at first instead of Felix in their rotation last year, they would have been just as miserable.

Patrick Bateman
10-06-2011, 01:50 PM
Felix could go out there and win all 35 starts he makes, he could strike out every single batter he faces in a season, and that would amount to a little over 20% of the season. No matter how massive an impact he had on those games change the fact that he is sitting on the bench for roughly 80% of the season.

When at the end of the day your W-L record determines who goes to the playoffs give me the superstar who is on the field for almost 100% of the at bats. Heck the Mariners at one point had two of the best pitchers in the game going yet they were miserable.

I'm pretty sure if a pitcher could be responsible for 35 wins in a year that he would be more valuable than Votto. To make the playoffs the rest of the team would need to win just 43% of their games, a feat that the Cubs and Royals accomplished.

wlf WV
10-06-2011, 01:50 PM
It's not the value,it's the risk of the asset involved.Pitchers are a lot more risky investment,therefore should be valued as such.

I don't think WAR tells the whole story.

RedsManRick
10-06-2011, 01:57 PM
It's not the value,it's the risk of the asset involved.Pitchers are a lot more risky investment,therefore should be valued as such.

I don't think WAR tells the whole story.

That's an argument that makes more sense than the contributions one. Of course, some would say that Felix is pretty much as close to certainty as you can possibly get when it comes to SP. If there's ever a SP you'd want to trade for, wouldn't it be a young, durable, extremely talented one?

bucksfan2
10-06-2011, 02:21 PM
You do realize that when he's on the field, he's not involved in most of the plays -- or only involved in so far as he caught a throw? And at the plate, he's only involved once every few innings?

Yes, he's involved in more games. But he has a much, much less influence on the games he's involved in. What a given position players does in a given game has a relatively small influence on W-L. What a SP pitcher does in a given game has a huge influence on W-L. You can't keep ignoring this fact.

Im not ignoring the fact. I understand this argument I just don't agree with it. I also firmly realize that a team is based upon the 25 men on the roster on a given night. Personally I tend to place more value upon every day position players than I do pitchers. I place more value in 4 out of every 5 games than 1 out of every 5. And I understand the different impact players and pitchers have on those games. A great position player may be able to make an impact at the plate every 2-3 innings, but that is every 2-3 innings of every game. A great pitcher has his chance to make an impact 9 innings every week.

wlf WV
10-06-2011, 02:47 PM
That's an argument that makes more sense than the contributions one. Of course, some would say that Felix is pretty much as close to certainty as you can possibly get when it comes to SP. If there's ever a SP you'd want to trade for, wouldn't it be a young, durable, extremely talented one?
Can't argue there.It's a shame we can't have Votto + a TOR.

That's why I don't like the financial structure of MLB. As pointed out before, one of the reasons why NFL is so popular.

osuceltic
10-06-2011, 02:48 PM
It's not the value,it's the risk of the asset involved.Pitchers are a lot more risky investment,therefore should be valued as such.

I don't think WAR tells the whole story.

That's why the Reds should have given whatever it took and opened the checkbook wide for Cliff Lee. Sure things like that -- right down to the low likelihood of injury -- just don't come around often and they're almost never available. That one still bugs me.

RedsManRick
10-06-2011, 03:31 PM
Im not ignoring the fact. I understand this argument I just don't agree with it. I also firmly realize that a team is based upon the 25 men on the roster on a given night. Personally I tend to place more value upon every day position players than I do pitchers. I place more value in 4 out of every 5 games than 1 out of every 5. And I understand the different impact players and pitchers have on those games. A great position player may be able to make an impact at the plate every 2-3 innings, but that is every 2-3 innings of every game. A great pitcher has his chance to make an impact 9 innings every week.

But that's 1 PA in each of those innings while the SP impacts 3 or 4.