Dickey to Jays almost done

[dougdirt]

It is an estimate based on the dips theory, which we know doesn't work nearly as well with knuckleballers. We also know that unlike every known knucleballer in the past, Dickey throws significantly harder. Using FIP with a guy like him to suggest he may not be as good as his ERA seems awful silly.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Brutus

Being an effective starter and being worth one or two of your best prospects aren't one in the same. I don't doubt he'll put up another year or two of being effective. I truly doubt he'll be anything like he was this past season or worth giving up your best prospects for.

It depends on what you mean by "anything like he was this past season".

When it comes to ERA vs. FIP, that's almost entirely a function of his low BABIP. But that low BABIP is something he's sustained: .276, .278, .275 the last three seasons. While pitchers have relatively little control over BABIP compared to hitters, they still do have some, particularly certain kinds of pitchers. Charlie Hough had a .250 BABIP. Tim Wakefield has a career .274 BABIP. Both Niekro brothers a .270 career BABIP. Tom Candiotti, .280. Steve Sparks had a .290 BABIP. I can't find any knuckleballer who stayed in the majors for any length of time who didn't have a lower than normal BABIP.

There's every reason to believe he can sustain that BABIP. Of course, the real concern should be the strikeout rate, as you've mentioned. WHile he added 1 MPH on the knuckler, that doesn't really explain the 60% jump in K%, from 15% to 25%. That is what accounts for half a run dip in FIP. Between regression of that K% and moving to the much tougher league, I'd expect something like 3.50 ERA from him next year.

He's only getting traded to the Jays for that package if he accepts an extension, so the question is whether that package is worth a few years of weak #1/strong #2 pitching. Hard for me to argue its not.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

It is an estimate based on the dips theory, which we know doesn't work nearly as well with knuckleballers. We also know that unlike every known knucleballer in the past, Dickey throws significantly harder. Using FIP with a guy like him to suggest he may not be as good as his ERA seems awful silly.

Again, "as well" doesn't mean "doesn't work." If I could predict precipitation 70% of the time, it doesn't mean I can't predict it because I'm not predicting it as well as someone doing it 80% of the time.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

It depends on what you mean by "anything like he was this past season".

When it comes to ERA vs. FIP, that's almost entirely a function of his low BABIP. But that low BABIP is something he's sustained: .276, .278, .275 the last three seasons. While pitchers have relatively little control over BABIP compared to hitters, they still do have some, particularly certain kinds of pitchers. Charlie Hough had a .250 BABIP. Tim Wakefield has a career .274 BABIP. Both Niekro brothers a .270 career BABIP. Tom Candiotti, .280. Steve Sparks had a .290 BABIP. I can't find any knuckleballer who stayed in the majors for any length of time who didn't have a lower than normal BABIP.

There's every reason to believe he can sustain that BABIP. Of course, the real concern should be the strikeout rate, as you've mentioned. WHile he added 1 MPH on the knuckler, that doesn't really explain the 60% jump in K%, from 15% to 25%. That is what accounts for half a run dip in FIP. Between regression of that K% and moving to the much tougher league, I'd expect something like 3.50 ERA from him next year.

He's only getting traded to the Jays for that package if he accepts an extension, so the question is whether that package is worth a few years of weak #1/strong #2 pitching. Hard for me to argue its not.

If he's back to striking out less than 6 batters per nine innings, I surmise no one is going to think he's worth those prospects even if he is signed for 2-3 more years (and especially since he'll be signed for 2-3 more years into his 40s).

I just think this deal has failure written all over it. I'm not predicting a sudden demise, but I don't think he's going to be worth the haul.

[Edd Roush]

Originally Posted by Brutus

I agree in principle, though Dickey's age and lack of any sort of consistent track record makes this extremely risky. I'll be very surprised if he comes close to replicating his 2012 performance, personally.

I agree with doug's point below that Dickey does have a pretty well-established track record since he started throwing a knuckle ball. He has had an ERA of 3.28 or less for the last three years, and as doug said below, FIP isn't as useful for knuckleballers.

Either way, Dickey is definitely an upgrade to the Jays rotation and I think this was a risk worth taking considering the Yankees and Red Sox certainly seem beatable at this time.

[Edd Roush]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

It depends on what you mean by "anything like he was this past season".

When it comes to ERA vs. FIP, that's almost entirely a function of his low BABIP. But that low BABIP is something he's sustained: .276, .278, .275 the last three seasons. While pitchers have relatively little control over BABIP compared to hitters, they still do have some, particularly certain kinds of pitchers. Charlie Hough had a .250 BABIP. Tim Wakefield has a career .274 BABIP. Both Niekro brothers a .270 career BABIP. Tom Candiotti, .280. Steve Sparks had a .290 BABIP. I can't find any knuckleballer who stayed in the majors for any length of time who didn't have a lower than normal BABIP.

There's every reason to believe he can sustain that BABIP. Of course, the real concern should be the strikeout rate, as you've mentioned. WHile he added 1 MPH on the knuckler, that doesn't really explain the 60% jump in K%, from 15% to 25%. That is what accounts for half a run dip in FIP. Between regression of that K% and moving to the much tougher league, I'd expect something like 3.50 ERA from him next year.

He's only getting traded to the Jays for that package if he accepts an extension, so the question is whether that package is worth a few years of weak #1/strong #2 pitching. Hard for me to argue its not.

I'm not sure if I could type up a better argument. Completely concur, Rick.

[Gallen5862]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

Blue Jays, Dickey Agree To Extension
By Ben Nicholson-Smith [December 17 at 10:52am CST]
10:52am: Dickey landed in Florida to undergo his physical, ESPN.com's Buster Olney reports (Twitter links). Some of the two-year, $25MM extension will be a signing bonus.

10:42am: The sides are in agreement on a two-year, $25MM deal, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reports (Twitter links). The agreement is pending a physical, and the trade will be official if and when Dickey passes. The two-year deal would cover the 2014-15 seasons.


Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/#TTYVeewHF32yOqBi.99

[RedsManRick]

I think this offseason has seen a fascinating correction on the treatment of prospects. Yes, prospects can have incredible value. Cheap all-stars win championships. And many trades of top prospects are a boon for the team giving up the "proven vet".

But remember when people thought the Rangers overpaid for Cliff Lee? Justin Smoak was the next Raffy Palmiero. Prospects are just that. Few reach or exceed their supposed ceiling. Many fall short. Many fall way short. I say good on the Jays. With the Yankees aging, the Red Sox turning back in to the pre-Theo Sox, the Rays retooling and the Jays already having made one "all-in" move, there has never been a better time for them to take this kind of a risk.

Would I have traded Mesoraco and Stephenson for Dickey? Nope. But from the Jays position, I think it's a reasonable risk to take.

[RANDY IN INDY]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

I think this offseason has seen a fascinating correction on the treatment of prospects. Yes, prospects can have incredible value. Cheap all-stars win championships. And many trades of top prospects are a boon for the team giving up the "proven vet".

But remember when people thought the Rangers overpaid for Cliff Lee? Justin Smoak was the next Raffy Palmiero. Prospects are just that. Few reach or exceed their supposed ceiling. Many fall short. Many fall way short. I say good on the Jays. With the Yankees aging, the Red Sox turning back in to the pre-Theo Sox, the Rays retooling and the Jays already having made one "all-in" move, there has never been a better time for them to take this kind of a risk.

Would I have traded Mesoraco and Stephenson for Dickey? Nope. But from the Jays position, I think it's a reasonable risk to take.

Good post, Rick! Agree.

[HotCorner]

I beg a headline writer to use this one ... "BJ's Extend Dickey"

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by HotCorner

I beg a headline writer to use this one ... "BJ's Extend Dickey"

I don't get it.

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

I think this offseason has seen a fascinating correction on the treatment of prospects. Yes, prospects can have incredible value. Cheap all-stars win championships. And many trades of top prospects are a boon for the team giving up the "proven vet".

But remember when people thought the Rangers overpaid for Cliff Lee? Justin Smoak was the next Raffy Palmiero. Prospects are just that. Few reach or exceed their supposed ceiling. Many fall short. Many fall way short. I say good on the Jays. With the Yankees aging, the Red Sox turning back in to the pre-Theo Sox, the Rays retooling and the Jays already having made one "all-in" move, there has never been a better time for them to take this kind of a risk.

Would I have traded Mesoraco and Stephenson for Dickey? Nope. But from the Jays position, I think it's a reasonable risk to take.

Good observation. I think over the past decade almost, prospects have become the most over rated commodity in all of baseball. Teams were so reluctant to trade them and often held onto them long after their value had deteriorated. Teams going for it this season have come off their top prospects for talented big league players. There is no way I would have traded the likes of Mesoraco and Stephenson for Dickey, but I can see where some teams are ok with that.

I think an important part of trading prospects is being able to correctly project how each prospect will pan out. Over the course of his career as a GM Jocketty has done a great job in deciding which prospects to hold onto and which ones to trade. I still remember the Eric Bedard thread where the likes of Cueto and Votto were being thrown out as what it would take to acquirer Bedard and even Joe Blanton.

[RANDY IN INDY]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

I don't get it.

A clean mind you have.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by RANDY IN INDY

A clean mind you have.

Nah, he is just a fibber.

[UKFlounder]

I wonder if part of it is how confident teams are they can develop new prospects. A few years ago, there was no way the Reds would trade a Homer Bailey because they had not had a prospect like him in many years and having such a prospect was kind of a new sensation. Last year, though, they tranded Gandel, Boxburger, Sappelt, Torreyes, etc. and though it hurt the farm system, it did not devestate it. Now, they just traded Gregorious too.

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

Good observation. I think over the past decade almost, prospects have become the most over rated commodity in all of baseball. Teams were so reluctant to trade them and often held onto them long after their value had deteriorated. Teams going for it this season have come off their top prospects for talented big league players. There is no way I would have traded the likes of Mesoraco and Stephenson for Dickey, but I can see where some teams are ok with that.

I think an important part of trading prospects is being able to correctly project how each prospect will pan out. Over the course of his career as a GM Jocketty has done a great job in deciding which prospects to hold onto and which ones to trade. I still remember the Eric Bedard thread where the likes of Cueto and Votto were being thrown out as what it would take to acquirer Bedard and even Joe Blanton.