Reds get Aaron Miles for Taveras and Rosales
in [Cincinnati Reds]
|
From: RJA on 3 Feb 2010 15:26 On Feb 3, 2:28 pm, Ron Johnson <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote: > On Feb 2, 2:17 pm, David Short > > <David.No.Sho...(a)Spam.wright.Please.edu> wrote: > > On 2/2/2010 12:32 PM, HTP wrote: > > > 220. You have to throw some serious leather out there in order to have a > > starting lineup slot handed to you if you hit 220. The difference > > between Cabrera and Janish in terms of runs scored is huge. > > Don't see it. Dan Szymborski has Janish at .239/.310/.340 (for a 72 OPS > +) > and Cabrera at .282/.326/.377 (OPS+ of 86). Both look eminently > reasonable > to me. > > Even making allowances for the transition to the NL, you're talking > 15 runs tops. > > There can't be a huge difference offensively because Cabrera isn't > good enough. Cabrera's slugging drops having moved from a good deal of time in Oakland to GABP? Don't think so. Janish's numbers look optimistic as well.
From: David Short on 4 Feb 2010 09:45 On 2/3/2010 3:26 PM, RJA wrote: > On Feb 3, 2:28 pm, Ron Johnson<john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote: >> On Feb 2, 2:17 pm, David Short >> >> <David.No.Sho...(a)Spam.wright.Please.edu> wrote: >>> On 2/2/2010 12:32 PM, HTP wrote: >> >>> 220. You have to throw some serious leather out there in order to have a >>> starting lineup slot handed to you if you hit 220. The difference >>> between Cabrera and Janish in terms of runs scored is huge. >> >> Don't see it. Dan Szymborski has Janish at .239/.310/.340 (for a 72 OPS >> +) >> and Cabrera at .282/.326/.377 (OPS+ of 86). Both look eminently >> reasonable >> to me. >> >> Even making allowances for the transition to the NL, you're talking >> 15 runs tops. >> >> There can't be a huge difference offensively because Cabrera isn't >> good enough. > > Cabrera's slugging drops having moved from a good deal of time in > Oakland to GABP? Don't think so. Janish's numbers look optimistic as > well. What's more, having implied that Janish is going to up his OPS+ by 10 points because he's a young player who is going to improve and then saying that despite moving from the AL and part of a season in Oakland that Cabrera won't hit any better in the NL central at GAB, you're still conceding 15 runs. It looks small. Only 15 runs. "Tops." When a team scores 700 runs, upping your total runs by 2% with a single roster move is pretty damn big. You do that at every starting roster slot and you've gone from 12th in the league in runs to darn near the best offense in the league. ..... Again, I'm not going to get too excited here "We�re just talking about different shades of suckitude." dfs
From: RJA on 5 Feb 2010 14:16 On Feb 4, 9:45 am, David Short <David.No.Sho...(a)Spam.wright.Please.edu> wrote: > On 2/3/2010 3:26 PM, RJA wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 3, 2:28 pm, Ron Johnson<john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote: > >> On Feb 2, 2:17 pm, David Short > > >> <David.No.Sho...(a)Spam.wright.Please.edu> wrote: > >>> On 2/2/2010 12:32 PM, HTP wrote: > > >>> 220. You have to throw some serious leather out there in order to have a > >>> starting lineup slot handed to you if you hit 220. The difference > >>> between Cabrera and Janish in terms of runs scored is huge. > > >> Don't see it. Dan Szymborski has Janish at .239/.310/.340 (for a 72 OPS > >> +) > >> and Cabrera at .282/.326/.377 (OPS+ of 86). Both look eminently > >> reasonable > >> to me. > > >> Even making allowances for the transition to the NL, you're talking > >> 15 runs tops. > > >> There can't be a huge difference offensively because Cabrera isn't > >> good enough. > > > Cabrera's slugging drops having moved from a good deal of time in > > Oakland to GABP? Don't think so. Janish's numbers look optimistic as > > well. > > What's more, having implied that Janish is going to up his OPS+ by 10 > points because he's a young player who is going to improve and then > saying that despite moving from the AL and part of a season in Oakland > that Cabrera won't hit any better in the NL central at GAB, you're still > conceding 15 runs. > > It looks small. Only 15 runs. "Tops." > > When a team scores 700 runs, upping your total runs by 2% with a single > roster move is pretty damn big. You do that at every starting roster > slot and you've gone from 12th in the league in runs to darn near the > best offense in the league. > > .... > > Again, I'm not going to get too excited here "Were just talking about > different shades of suckitude." > > dfs- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Wonder what those projections said about Bruce and Taveras last year.
From: Ron Johnson on 5 Feb 2010 16:10 On Feb 4, 10:45 am, David Short <David.No.Sho...(a)Spam.wright.Please.edu> wrote: > On 2/3/2010 3:26 PM, RJA wrote: > > > > > On Feb 3, 2:28 pm, Ron Johnson<john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote: > >> On Feb 2, 2:17 pm, David Short > > >> <David.No.Sho...(a)Spam.wright.Please.edu> wrote: > >>> On 2/2/2010 12:32 PM, HTP wrote: > > >>> 220. You have to throw some serious leather out there in order to have a > >>> starting lineup slot handed to you if you hit 220. The difference > >>> between Cabrera and Janish in terms of runs scored is huge. > > >> Don't see it. Dan Szymborski has Janish at .239/.310/.340 (for a 72 OPS > >> +) > >> and Cabrera at .282/.326/.377 (OPS+ of 86). Both look eminently > >> reasonable > >> to me. > > >> Even making allowances for the transition to the NL, you're talking > >> 15 runs tops. > > >> There can't be a huge difference offensively because Cabrera isn't > >> good enough. > > > Cabrera's slugging drops having moved from a good deal of time in > > Oakland to GABP? Don't think so. Those were Oakland numbers. Which is why I gave the OPS+. And it seems eminently reasonable that a guy who put up an OPS+ of 84 at 33 and 86 at 34 (and has a career OPS+ of 86) should be expected to turn in an OPS+ in that general range at 35. Assuming he doesn't crater. A pretty fair number of guys who played regularly at 34 were unable to retain their job at 35. > > Janish's numbers look optimistic as well. Could be. > > What's more, having implied that Janish is going to up his OPS+ by 10 > points because he's a young player Well no. The basis for the projection of improvement is that Janish's BABIP (batting average on balls in play) numbers are absurdly low. And that's probably at least partially bad luck. Dan's projecting a .281 BABIP. That's still very low, just not pitcher low (pitchers had a BABIP of .224 last year.) > who is going to improve and then > saying that despite moving from the AL and part of a season in Oakland > that Cabrera won't hit any better in the NL central at GAB, you're still > conceding 15 runs. Why on earth would you expect an OPS+ better than 87? And since Darnell McDonald produced an 84 OPS+ for his .306 OBP and .400 SLG we can make a pretty good guess at what that should come in at. Around a .320 OBP and a .395 SLG. > > It looks small. Only 15 runs. "Tops." > > When a team scores 700 runs, upping your total runs by 2% with a single > roster move is pretty damn big. It's still 15 runs. 1 win and change. > You do that at every starting roster > slot and you've gone from 12th in the league in runs to darn near the > best offense in the league. Which would be an important point if Cabrera was Janish's equal defensively. Do you believe this to be the case? > > .... > > Again, I'm not going to get too excited here "Were just talking about > different shades of suckitude." Which is my complaint. The money would be more usefully spent setting fire to it before the home opener. OK, fireworks would be even better. Cabrera's about as known a commodity as one can imagine. Spending money on him makes sense only in the context of a "this close to making the playoffs" kind of team. To be clear, I'm not arguing for Janish. Any GM who can't do better for (essentially) free is not competent. John McDonald is his upside and I've got no use for him.
From: Ron Johnson on 5 Feb 2010 16:21
On Feb 5, 3:16 pm, RJA <agentvau...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Wonder what those projections said about Bruce and Taveras last year. Well you can check easily enough. His spreadsheet is archived at Primer. http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/szymborski/ZiPS2009.xls ..276/.328/.522 for Bruce and .272/.318/.331 for Taveras And .228/.293/.347 for Janish |