Turn Off Ads?
Page 19 of 33 FirstFirst ... 915161718192021222329 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 285 of 481

Thread: Zach Stewart's progress

  1. #271
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    All around
    Posts
    7,579

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    Defining good process is pretty easy. Good process occurs when decisions are made using the greatest amount of the best available data as a matter of course.

    Sometimes this is easy to discern. It's pretty clear for instance that Bavasi failed this as he often made moves that flew in the face of reasonable arguments that countered his moves. I think "The Trade" was pretty easy to evaluate just using sabermetics etc too. Sometimes it's much trickier.

    I agree that the premise should be that an organization has better and more data upon which to base their conclusions than fans and studies like Wang's are just very crude biomarkers (i.e. using BA's scouting opinion to rank players). In fact, its very possible (probable?) that weighing things like Wang's work very lightly is in fact good process at this point. That said, if after a while, such approaches are shown to correlate meaningfully to major league performance, they're useful.

    It's just that those kind of studies (and i'd argue using sabermetrics in general) and surveying resources like BA and Sickels etc are the best that we as fans can do when trying to evaluate the process employed by the FO of our favorite teams.

    BTW, no one is arguing that assigning values based upon prospect rankings is the only metric that an organization should use. Even if that was an airtight method for assigning the value of a prospect, an organization would still have to use a multitude of methods to judge the likelihood that a prospect would achieve the high end or the low end of the error bars or that the prospect was ranked appropriately etc (one would have to assume that the Braves list of the top 100 differs than BA's for instance).




    I think the real problem is that we'll never really have access to the actual evidence that we'd need to make the proper conclusion given we don't actually know the true rational for the trade (i.e. the logic the Reds used). So it's all supposition....

    But as a matter of principle, I'd still argue that often the evidence (results) can cloud the proper conclusion especially when dealing with prospects.
    None of us certainly saw Mike Leake coming, nor the contribution that Bryan Price may have had on the Starting rotation, nor the turnaround by Arroyo the second half of last year leading to his ability to pitch the way he has his last 4 starts. Perhaps Walt did, though, and actually thought that in 2010 we could contend for the playoffs. There's no reason to make the trade for Rolen unless you think you can reach the playoffs in 2010. A 2011 Rolen will be handcuffing the growth of a better, younger player. Walt's certainly showed signs of being able to recognize great things in players.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #272
    Please come again pedro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    portland, oregon
    Posts
    14,747

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Quote Originally Posted by Kingspoint View Post
    None of us certainly saw Mike Leake coming, nor the contribution that Bryan Price may have had on the Starting rotation, nor the turnaround by Arroyo the second half of last year leading to his ability to pitch the way he has his last 4 starts. Perhaps Walt did, though, and actually thought that in 2010 we could contend for the playoffs. There's no reason to make the trade for Rolen unless you think you can reach the playoffs in 2010. A 2011 Rolen will be handcuffing the growth of a better, younger player. Walt's certainly showed signs of being able to recognize great things in players.
    I'm not convinced Rolen will be blocking anyone who could outplay him in 2011. I'm just not sold that Francisco or Frazier are going to be all that good. I hope I'm wrong though.
    Get your nunchucks and the keys to your dad's car. I know where we can get a gun

  4. #273
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,179

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    I think the real problem is that we'll never really have access to the actual evidence that we'd need to make the proper conclusion given we don't actually know the true rational for the trade (i.e. the logic the Reds used). So it's all supposition....

    But as a matter of principle, I'd still argue that often the evidence (results) can cloud the proper conclusion especially when dealing with prospects.
    "Proper conclusion"? At the moment a trade is made? Like, is this a good trade or not? Look, teams always have their own rationale, and it always makes sense from a certain perspective. You can like it, or not, but at that moment of the trade the conclusion one draws is a matter of how one *chooses" to see it (which priorities to have, essentially).

    To judge the *success* of a trade, one needs time to see how the players perform on their new teams and what other moves might be facilitated by the trade. It's really that simple, and the only objective means to making a summary judgment about a deal. And even if one buys a team's rationale for a trade, the trade can fail. Happens all the time, because we're talking about human beings here, not robots.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  5. #274
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,095

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve View Post
    "Proper conclusion"? At the moment a trade is made? Like, is this a good trade or not? Look, teams always have their own rationale, and it always makes sense from a certain perspective. You can like it, or not, but at that moment of the trade the conclusion one draws is a matter of how one *chooses" to see it (which priorities to have, essentially).

    To judge the *success* of a trade, one needs time to see how the players perform on their new teams and what other moves might be facilitated by the trade. It's really that simple, and the only objective means to making a summary judgment about a deal. And even if one buys a team's rationale for a trade, the trade can fail. Happens all the time, because we're talking about human beings here, not robots.
    And that's why the results aren't as important as the process. If a good decision can fail but a poor decision be successful based upon results, the results really only cloud the interpretation of the job the FO is doing.

    Was it a good decision or not? The results really only color the conclusion-they aren't the deciding factor. The results aren't needed to be objective BTW.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  6. #275
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,179

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Was it a good decision or not? The results really only color the conclusion-they aren't the deciding factor. The results aren't needed to be objective BTW.
    The results are what we, as fans, are left with because, as you yourself have said, we do not have access to all the information a FO has nor to its decision-making process. To render a negative judgment on a trade is thus based on one of two criteria:

    1. You don't think the future performance of the players in the trade will provide a net benefit to the team in question.

    My response: Let's wait and see how it works out -- you could be wrong about this.

    2. You don't like the rationale for the trade.

    My response: Matter of preference. There are no correct or incorrect rationales. There are only choices based on sometimes competing priorities within an organization. To say that one knows which priorities an organization should have, when one has no access to the inner workings of a front office, is untenable. If the rationale comes down to nothing more than a preference for the players acquired over those dealt, see my response to #1.

    In the end, the calculus/thinking/rationale of a deal is not subjective to any absolute scale of right/wrong or good/bad, given the many priorities an organization must juggle. Further, what the team says about a deal is not necessarily revelatory of the true thought process that brought it to fruition. Because we know so little about the underpinnings of a trade, it is really a product of our own biases and assumptions to render a judgment about a trade when it happens.

    You can say you like or don't a deal when it happens for a variety of reasons, but you're really just stating a preference or making a prediction. If you're truly objective, you'll wait and see how it works out -- acknowledging that it takes a lot more than a few transactions in either the "win" or "loss" column to know whether a GM is doing his job well.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  7. #276
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,095

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve View Post
    The results are what we, as fans, are left with because, as you yourself have said, we do not have access to all the information a FO has nor to its decision-making process. To render a negative judgment on a trade is thus based on one of two criteria:

    1. You don't think the future performance of the players in the trade will provide a net benefit to the team in question.

    My response: Let's wait and see how it works out -- you could be wrong about this.

    2. You don't like the rationale for the trade.

    My response: Matter of preference. There are no correct or incorrect rationales. There are only choices based on sometimes competing priorities within an organization. To say that one knows which priorities an organization should have, when one has no access to the inner workings of a front office, is untenable. If the rationale comes down to nothing more than a preference for the players acquired over those dealt, see my response to #1.

    In the end, the calculus/thinking/rationale of a deal is not subjective to any absolute scale of right/wrong or good/bad, given the many priorities an organization must juggle. Further, what the team says about a deal is not necessarily revelatory of the true thought process that brought it to fruition. Because we know so little about the underpinnings of a trade, it is really a product of our own biases and assumptions to render a judgment about a trade when it happens.

    You can say you like or don't a deal when it happens for a variety of reasons, but you're really just stating a preference or making a prediction. If you're truly objective, you'll wait and see how it works out -- acknowledging that it takes a lot more than a few transactions in either the "win" or "loss" column to know whether a GM is doing his job well.
    Again, that's not really an appropriate standard for objectivity (and maybe we're tripping on semantics a bit?).

    Objectivity is forming a conclusion based upon the best available information-i.e. having reasons for your opinion- and then being willing to revise the conclusions as additional or better information becomes available.

    Objectivity doesn't really require a moratorium on discussion until all of the results are in. What's more, the results can often cloud the issue. Also, fans actually have a great many tools available to help fuel such discussions.

    Finally, its kind of an implicit understanding that the best case a fan can make for an opinion won't be based upon all of the facts a GM has isn't it? There are decisions that are made that defy the on the field calculus for sure (ie. Jr/Sweeney as DH). That doesn't mean that fans are incapable of forming opinions that are pretty accurate nonetheless.
    Last edited by jojo; 05-18-2010 at 11:27 AM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  8. #277
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,179

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Finally, its kind of an implicit understanding that the best case a fan can make for an opinion won't be based upon all of the facts a GM has isn't it? There are decisions that are made that defy the on the field calculus for sure (ie. Jr/Sweeney as DH). That doesn't mean that fans are incapable of forming opinions that are pretty accurate nonetheless.
    I wish it were so. I get impatient with Internet GMs who form immediate opinions about deals as if they were rendering a final judgment.

    When it comes to trades, there's not a whole lot of gradation among opinions. So, I have a hard time understanding how one's opinion could be "pretty accurate." Often, folks like to say they love or hate a trade, and in some cases they sit on that stance no matter what happens. The objectivity is sacrificed in order to preserve the illusion that one's opinion was right "at the time."
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  9. #278
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,095

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve View Post
    I wish it were so. I get impatient with Internet GMs who form immediate opinions about deals as if they were rendering a final judgment.

    When it comes to trades, there's not a whole lot of gradation among opinions. So, I have a hard time understanding how one's opinion could be "pretty accurate." Often, folks like to say they love or hate a trade, and in some cases they sit on that stance no matter what happens. The objectivity is sacrificed in order to preserve the illusion that one's opinion was right "at the time."
    That's a pretty blanket statement that surely mischaracterizes a great many voices IMHO.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  10. #279
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Because there are so many factors that effect the results of a trade that are outside the control of the GM, it is impossible to judge them correctly on just the results of their moves.

    This is true for all human decision making. In the end, we control maybe 10% the results of our actions. Circumstance, luck and that great dynamic that exists when everyone is trying to do their own thing has a far greater influence on the results of our actions than our actual actions do. Depressing, I know, but true.

    Because of this, when judging decisions, the best we can do is judge them based on what the decider knew at the time of the decision. That is how we evaluate decisions, not on their results, but on how they were made.

    We can after the fact say that these decisions were successful or not, but that is different from saying whether or not the decisions were smart ones. And even there, that is cloudy.

    For instance, the Red Sox traded Hanley Ramirez, Anibal Sanchez and two other minor leaguers to the Marlins for Josh Beckett, Mike Lowell and reliever. How do you judge the results? The Red Sox won a World Series after that trade, probably because of that trade, but the Marlins clearly got more value out of the players they received. The result don't clearly tell us if this was a smart trade or not for either team.

    The best way, a clearer, more decisive way, is to judge both GM's based on what they knew at the time about all the players involved and their own teams situation at the time. Did they make a smart move? Did they make a move that if made over and over again would be likely to pay off more often than not? To me that is the only way to judge a GM's decision.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein

  11. #280
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    270

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Except guys like JJ Cooper at Baseball America or John Sickels, who both openly questioned what the heck the Reds were thinking with the move. Not so much to acquire Rolen, which everyone was on board with, but giving up what they gave up to acquire him.
    So did Stewart get the win for us today or was it Rolen? LOL.

    I love the the whole overvaluing players thing by fans of teams. Every fan thinks *their* player is THE guy. If a fan sees a prospect listed by any Joe Schmo on some lists for tearing it up in all of Double A then - gezads! - we should be getting Pujols or ARod for that!

    You keep gnashing your teeth over your rose colored glasses about what a you thought we gave up to get a future Hall of Famer, and being totally and utterly incorrect, and I'll enjoy the Reds in first as of today. K thx.

  12. #281
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,013

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    While I was for the trade I find crowing about it after a win almost as unbearable as the other side claiming they were so right a minute after the deal was confirmed.

  13. #282
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,419

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Is trolling bannable or that not considered trolling?

  14. #283
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    270

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    While I was for the trade I find crowing about it after a win almost as unbearable as the other side claiming they were so right a minute after the deal was confirmed.
    Hey, I didn't start it. The only trolling is coming from the guy who responding to me being a smart you-know-what. So I'm not allowed to be after another awesome Rolen moment? The guy has been nothing but gold. Like I said, these guys can worry about their lists of prospects when barely any on those lists become even solid MLB players, I'll worry about being in first. The only thing I wish is that we could have gotten this guy about three years ago.

    Keep on Rolen baby.

  15. #284
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,179

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    The best way, a clearer, more decisive way, is to judge both GM's based on what they knew at the time about all the players involved and their own teams situation at the time. Did they make a smart move? Did they make a move that if made over and over again would be likely to pay off more often than not? To me that is the only way to judge a GM's decision.
    You're asking for knowledge that is unattainable to anyone here. We can't know what a GM knows about his players, his team, or how the move would play out in a thousand incarnations. That kind of evaluation process is misguided. It is a product of the "Look-at-me, I-can-be, a GM" (apologies to JFogarty) delusion that afflicts some commentators, mainly bloggers, in the age of Everybody's an Expert.

    We are fans. That is all. We have our feelings, our opinions, and our numbers. No matter how hard we try, they cannot transport us into that sanctum where we could know the decision-making processes that a front office goes through as it shapes its team. All we can know is what happens on the field. For me, that tells me all I'll pretend to know when I say a trade has succeeded or failed.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  16. #285
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,520

    Re: Zach Stewart's progress

    .
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25