BP: Reds Transaction Analysis-Wily Mo Pena, Ross etc.

[Johnny Footstool]

Originally Posted by Joseph

I tend to agree with you. How many more games would the Reds have won with just league average pitching last year?

That assumes a lot. That assumes that the bullpen and everyone else on the staff will suddenly rise to league average. You also assume that Arroyo will retain his effectiveness despite a scary dropoff in strikeout rate last season.

The Reds didn't acquire "league-average pitching." They acquired one league-average pitcher. And they overpaid to get him.

That's not a recipe for long-term (or even short-term) success.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by traderumor

BP overvaluing WMP as well.

Excellent point. The bottomline here is Krivsky doesn't think as highly of Wily Mo as this writer does and I'm not so sure very many GMs do either. I think Krivsky thinks of Wily Mo as a Steve Balboni or a Craig Wilson, not a Sammy Sosa.

[Golgafrinchan]

Ok, maybe I'm overvaluing Pena, too.

Pena's Top 10 most similar batters through age 23.

A LOT of big time sluggers on that list: Barfield, Colavito, Bobby Bonds, Horton, Killebrew, and Maris. If Wily Mo has a career like ANY of them, he will be -a lot- more valuable than Bronson Arroyo.

The other guys in Pena's list include Kingman, Incaviglia, Montanez, and Billy Conigliaro. Kingman's not bad, while the other three weren't that great.

Averaging those ten guys and adding their age 24-end of career numbers to Wily Mo's results in the following projected career line for Wily Mo: .259/.334/.470, 301 HR, 117 OPS+. Not a superstar, but not bad at all.

PECOTA mostly agrees with baseball-reference.com, pegging Barfield, Willie Stargell, and Incaviglia as Pena's top 3 comparables.

---

Bronson Arroyo's top comparables list includes names like Mike Harkey, Kevin Foster, Chad Ogea, Scott Sanders, Ted Lilly, Sean Bergman, and Brett Tomko.

PECOTA's top 3 comparables for Arroyo are Dick Ruthven, Esteban Loaiza, and Danny Darwin. Better than the guys above, but still mediocre: only Darwin had a career ERA+ better than 100.

--

To me, it's pretty obvious that Pena has a much better shot of being a valuable commodity in the future. Or am I also overrating him?

[Cyclone792]

Originally Posted by Golgafrinchan

Ok, maybe I'm overvaluing Pena, too.

Pena's Top 10 most similar batters through age 23.

A LOT of big time sluggers on that list: Barfield, Colavito, Bobby Bonds, Horton, Killebrew, and Maris. If Wily Mo has a career like ANY of them, he will be -a lot- more valuable than Bronson Arroyo.

The other guys in Pena's list include Kingman, Incaviglia, Montanez, and Billy Conigliaro. Kingman's not bad, while the other three weren't that great.

Averaging those ten guys and adding their age 24-end of career numbers to Wily Mo's results in the following projected career line for Wily Mo: .259/.334/.470, 301 HR, 117 OPS+. Not a superstar, but not bad at all.

PECOTA mostly agrees with baseball-reference.com, pegging Barfield, Willie Stargell, and Incaviglia as Pena's top 3 comparables.

---

Bronson Arroyo's top comparables list includes names like Mike Harkey, Kevin Foster, Chad Ogea, Scott Sanders, Ted Lilly, Sean Bergman, and Brett Tomko.

PECOTA's top 3 comparables for Arroyo are Dick Ruthven, Esteban Loaiza, and Danny Darwin. Better than the guys above, but still mediocre: only Darwin had a career ERA+ better than 100.

--

To me, it's pretty obvious that Pena has a much better shot of being a valuable commodity in the future. Or am I also overrating him?

With the exception of Conigliaro, all the rest of those players understood the difference between balls and strikes much better than Pena by that age. And it's safe to say that all of them played during an environment less conducive for offense than the one Pena's currently playing in.

If people want 35-40 home runs mixed with a .315 OBP, have fun, but I want nothing to do with it. Instead, give me the cheap arm, which we need badly.

[Caveat Emperor]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

Here's a thought: maybe you're undervaluing him. Maybe years of having below replacement level pitching has led us to overvalue mediocrity on the mound. Maybe witnessing the impotence of DanO has left us so hungry for any action that we're willing to throw support to an unnecessary and disadvantageous deal.

Just a thought.

Maybe I (along with others) am undervaluing Pena -- but his lifetime .303 OBP scares the bejesus out of me, because I don't see him in possession of the skills required to raise that. Any talk of Pena turning into a superstar or even a highly productive player require him becoming he's not: a hitter capable of showing discpline at the plate, working himself into hitters counts to see better pitches, and increaseing his walk rates. This has been a problem that has plagued Pena throughout his professional career -- yet there are many (on here, and elsewhere) who seemingly expect Pena to wake up tomorrow with this skill set and begin mashing the ball.

The only way his OBP goes up is if he ups his hit rate or his walk rate, and I see no evidence of either one happening. His walk-rates are remarkably unchanged over the past 3 years, and there's nothing to indicate that he's going to start getting more hits either. A potentially troubling "lurking indicator" for Pena is that, although he's a power hitter, he's played his entire career as a ground-ball hitter. For his career, Pena has a 1.44/1 GB/FB ratio. Last season, that number was 1.45, which was higher than any of the top 40 HR hitters in baseball. Most good power hitters lurk around the 1/1 ratio, with most dipping into the more flyball territory of .9/1 and .8/1 (Adam Dunn posting a robust .72/1). So, not only is Pena not making enough contact, he's making the wrong type of contact for the game he has to play.

From where I sit, Pena was highly overrated -- a powerball ticket appealing to someone who doesn't know any better, and the only question for the Reds was whether or not they were going to find someone willing to overrate him enough to pay any sort of ransom to get him. They ended up with Bronson Arroyo, and I'm happy with getting a league-average pitcher back (if he is, indeed, league average for the Reds) for someone I feel had nowhere to go but down in value. Maybe I am drinking the residue of kool-aid from the bottom of the Jimbo glass and maybe I am being too excited about mediocrity, but I'm also acutely aware that even mediocrity would've made last year (and the year before) fun seasons to watch the Reds instead of painful exercises that they became.

[Topcat]

Has anyone thought that Arroyo maybe flipped for prospects down the line? I have to belief that Bronson could fetch some decent prospect and be shipped back to the AL at the deadline. This could happen and to me that would more than take away any uncertainty about dealing Pena. ps. I loved the trade btw.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

Wait a minute...you used the "appeal to authority" technique to defend your support for the Wily Mo deal, citing the opinions of M2, registerthis, and several other RedsZoners. But when an independent, objective, and authoritative resource questions the deal, you brusquely dismiss them as "overvaluing" Pena?

Here's a thought: maybe you're undervaluing him. Maybe years of having below replacement level pitching has led us to overvalue mediocrity on the mound. Maybe witnessing the impotence of DanO has left us so hungry for any action that we're willing to throw support to an unnecessary and disadvantageous deal.

Just a thought.

You can throw out the "appeal to authority" argument if you wish, but I simply said that they had reasonable arguments and also have a track record of good calls on projecting future performance, therefore my opinion that it was a good deal would stand. Again, it is only a fallacious appeal if the authorities that one is appealing to have no right to be considered an authority. I think the mentioned parties' track record affords them that status on personnel exchanges such as this. Furthermore, there was no truth claim made to warrant a charge of presenting a fallacious argument. In other words, I never said "these people are right, the rest of you are wrong, case closed." But then, I already pointed that out in the trade thread itself.

As for WMP's value, I think the arguments have been presented and I have nothing to add. Those who read this article will agree or disagree based on that variable, so rehashing seems unprofitable at this point. So how about agreeing to disagree at this point and I'll let you tell us all "I told you so" at WMP's HOF induction ceremony.

[Johnny Footstool]

Originally Posted by traderumor

You can throw out the "appeal to authority" argument if you wish, but I simply said that they had reasonable arguments and also have a track record of good calls on projecting future performance, therefore my opinion that it was a good deal would stand. Again, it is only a fallacious appeal if the authorities that one is appealing to have no right to be considered an authority. I think the mentioned parties' track record affords them that status on personnel exchanges such as this. Furthermore, there was no truth claim made to warrant a charge of presenting a fallacious argument. In other words, I never said "these people are right, the rest of you are wrong, case closed." But then, I already pointed that out in the trade thread itself.

Even though I do respect the opinions of the authorities you cited, the fact is they're not nearly as authoritative as a group like BP. I just found it funny that when you read the opinions of those who make their living analyzing baseball, you tossed them out like so much trash without even addressing the arguments they made. "They're overvaluing Pena" is not what I'd call a well-constructed rebuttal.

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

"They're overvaluing Pena" is not what I'd call a well-constructed rebuttal.

Johnny, I think plenty of people have put out arguments far beyond that statement to show WHY they believe Pena is overvalued. His lack of plate discipline and inability to judge strikes, his poor defense and his lack of growth as a player over the past several seasons, along with the statistics to back up the assertions, were all presented as evidence. Those of us who choose not to view WMP in the same light as others on this Board aren't doing so merely because we like typing the phrase "Wily Mo Pena is overvalued." It's because we truly believe that he is.

[Heath]

Originally Posted by Cyclone792

Runs scored = 820
Runs allowed with average pitching and average defense = ~720

Pyt. winning percentage with 820 runs scored and 720 runs allowed = .565

.565 winning percentage = 91-92 wins

Cyclone - let's take it a step further - lets keep Harang & Claussen. We need three more starters on average - who might have been FA's last year. Clement was almost a Red - so add that one. Let's not add Milton. Now we need two starters that were FA's last year. So a Derek Lowe, Jon Lieber, Kevin Millwood, Russ Ortiz, Kris Benson, plus the lower-tiered guys that I have missed could be added.

That's a pennant race.

[princeton]

Originally Posted by pedro

I think a lot of people here are failing to appreciate the value of a league average pitcher who can throw 200 innings.

Brogliorroyo is not exactly an automatic 200.

[TRF]

Maybe I (along with others) am undervaluing Pena -- but his lifetime .303 OBP scares the bejesus out of me, because I don't see him in possession of the skills required to raise that.

By age 28, Sammy Sosa had never topped 45 walks in a season. At age 28 he hit 36 HR's and had a .300 OBP. Next year he exploded into everyones livingroom. Was he juicing? Who knows, but steroids don't get you more walks. Now the fear of power will get you more walks. Pena has that power, and can generate that fear naturally.

I keep hearing how the market is awash with corner power guys. Wanna know how many of the top 20 Power hitting LF's changed teams this year? 1 Coco Crisp. that's it. Of the top 20 power hitting RF's only Reggie Sanders and WMP found new homes. Hardly an oversaturation of the market.

People aren't over valuing power. They are over valuing average to below average pitching.

[westofyou]

People aren't over valuing power. They are over valuing average to below average pitching.

And undervaluing on base percentage and fielding, and hammy injuries and the inablility to hit RH's...

Pong is fun, but your POV isn't infalliable nor is the other side.

[TRF]

while overvaluing RH's that have trouble with LH hitters, flyball pitchers in a HR park and topping 200 ip once. at age 29.

Never said my opinion was infallible. IMO this arguement will be settled sometime in October. Thing is WMP is likely to still be playing meaningful games. playoff games.

I know WMP has a low OBP. I'm of the opinion that is something he can raise. He's said it was a problem area that he intends to work on, and I think he'll be around .325 this year. And yeah, that is still pretty bad, but he'll SLG over .500. Plus he has a strong Dominican contingent around him, which could help.

[Johnny Footstool]

Originally Posted by registerthis

Johnny, I think plenty of people have put out arguments far beyond that statement to show WHY they believe Pena is overvalued. His lack of plate discipline and inability to judge strikes, his poor defense and his lack of growth as a player over the past several seasons, along with the statistics to back up the assertions, were all presented as evidence. Those of us who choose not to view WMP in the same light as others on this Board aren't doing so merely because we like typing the phrase "Wily Mo Pena is overvalued." It's because we truly believe that he is.

My problem is with the quick dismissal of a real authority. I suspect the folks at BP know all about WMP's on-base percentage, etc., and factored those things into their opinion. Knowing that, they're still not in favor of the trade.

To simply dismiss their opinion as "overvaluing" WMP is pretty obtuse.