Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Sometimes I wonder why teams don't just sell their prospects for large amounts of cash. Why the player shuffling just to add some payroll flex? Instead of trading Alonso for a 3.5 million dollar closer to save 7 million from not signing Cordero, just sell the rights to Alonso for 14 million cash over 2 years and sign Cordero, or some other closer like Nathan. This is a hackneyed scenario, for sure, but still, if teams could obtain cash for guys like Alonso, it could really help them sign FA's that they like. Often the team that wants your prospect doesn't have what you want in return, so with cash you can shop around.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
757690
Again, we don't know that they don't. The data doesn't say that. That's a conclusion that one may draw from the data, but it by no means is the only logical or even the best one.
Wht is he most logical interpretation then?
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
schroomytunes
I dunno if the A's are willing to deal for offense than I say we go for it and offer this package:
Reds trade:
Juan Francisco(3b)
Yonder Alonzo(1b-Dh)
Homer Bailey(SP)
A's trade:
Andrew Bailey(Closer)
Trevor Cahill(SP)
Our rotation than becomes 1)Cueto 2)Cahill 3)Leake 4)Volquez/Wood 5)Arroyo
-by filling the closer role via trade, it will allow us to sign a mid-tier FA leftfielder like Ryan Ludwick.
Absolutely not on Cahill. He is a #4 at best in GABP. Take a close look at his stats over the last two years. He is a guy that needs a nice dose of luck, isn't a groundball machine, and doesn't miss bats. That doesn't work in the GABP.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Heyman says the Reds are interested in Huston Street as well.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tom Servo
Heyman says the Reds are interested in Huston Street as well.
I was afraid of that.
I wonder if they think a Street for Volquez and Cairo deal makes sense. Heyman thinks that they're looking for a pitcher, and they had interest in Martin Prado before.
FWIW, I'd rather focus on a lot of players before Houston Street, including guys like Seth Smith (who Colorado offered for Prado) and Drew Pomeranz from the Rockies.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Heyman says the Reds are interested in Huston Street as well.
Jocketty has had interest in Street before, if I remember correctly.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
I wonder if the Reds are really after Huston Street, or just trying to make nice with his agents, the Hendricks Brothers. After all, if the Reds lose out on Street, they can always tap Hendricks' agent Pedro Borbon, bringing him back for an encore some 40 years after his Big Red Machine heyday. :laugh:
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/201...r-is-priority/
Jocketty wouldn't specifically comment on Bailey, but said that obtaining a starting pitcher is his priority.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
savafan
To me, that says the story is true. Jocketty, like most GM's, will just shoot down a rumor if there's nothing to it. "No comment" is the ultimate affirmation.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jojo
Wht is he most logical interpretation then?
That in order to accrue enough innings to log meaningful data, a pitcher has to have certain skills, such as the ability to control line drives, BABIP, HR/FB ratios. Because of this, all the pitchers who qualify will have a narrow range of stats in those areas.
Pitchers who are bad at these skills, don't last long enough to give us meaningful data.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Here's another take about what could be a very real downside to the draft portion of this (as some here have already suggested):
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...l-market-clubs
It wouldn't shock me to see an agent/lawyer sue MLB and the Player's association for taking away rights of draftees. We'll see.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
757690
To me, that says the story is true. Jocketty, like most GM's, will just shoot down a rumor if there's nothing to it. "No comment" is the ultimate affirmation.
Jocketty CAN'T comment on another teams player. It is against the rules.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
757690
That in order to accrue enough innings to log meaningful data, a pitcher has to have certain skills, such as the ability to control line drives, BABIP, HR/FB ratios. Because of this, all the pitchers who qualify will have a narrow range of stats in those areas.
Pitchers who are bad at these skills, don't last long enough to give us meaningful data.
Pitchers can't really control BABIP and HR/FB. For the purposes of analyzing major league pitching, who cares about pitchers who arent major league quality?
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jojo
Pitchers can't really control BABIP and HR/FB. For the purposes of analyzing major league pitching, who cares about pitchers who arent major league quality?
Again, the stats don't tells us what they can control. They only tell us there is a small range of stats with those categories you mentioned.
It is a logical fallacy to conclude that just because there is a small range of stats in those areas, that pitchers can't control them.
One explanation of the stats is that pitchers can control them, and those that control them the best, stick around the long enough to provide meaningful data.
One example of how this approach can be helpful is a young pitcher who has good K and BB numbers, but gives up a lot of hits in his first season. If you assume that pitchers can't control BABIP, then you would assume that this pitcher will be a decent pitcher going forward and the only reason why he gave up so many hits is luck.
However, if you use the latter approach, you could argue that the reason why he is giving up so many hits is because he is not good at controlling BABIP, and until he does so he will not be productive.
Re: Reds Hot Stove Rumors
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dougdirt
Jocketty CAN'T comment on another teams player. It is against the rules.
But he often says things like, "that rumor is totally false," or even "I have not had any discussion with that team about that player." The fact that he's not saying something like that tells me he at least talked to the A's about Bailey.
