Assuming that 1) the playoff report has our true talent level pegged, and 2) you get a return of approximate value in wins for your total financial/player investment going the other way it would cost us in the neighborhood of a 32-35 million dollar investment to get us from 86 wins to 94 wins for this year only. That's an incredibly significant (and unlikely) investment. We may pick up a couple of wins worth (~8-9 million worth), or maybe even three for a (relatively realistically) affordable price if we get lucky...but the reality of the situation is that no matter what we do this year, there's still going to be a significant chance that we're not going to make the playoffs. With that in mind, you need to do what you can for next year (and beyond) as well.Maclowery wrote: I don't expect the sweeping changes to our lineup that my initial ideas - and most of the other Armchair GMs in this thread - to happen. Hence the thread title - it of course won't be reality, but it's what we as fans specifically would like to see happen, hopefully somewhat grounded in reality.
The issue that I take, currently, is that I say Pecota be damned. I loved our April, but I feel that between our unfortunate injuries, and our glaring holes in healthy players, I feel like we'll be a 3rd place team for this season. Which - again, personally - makes me want to barf. If the playoffs started today, and we were magically in them, I would be absolutely stunned if we won the first series. Against, well, just about any team.
Too Long Didn't Read summary: We might win 86, but screw that, we could win 94 and a pennant.
June Armchair GM thread
- EastonBlues22
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 4799
- Joined: May 7 06, 11:31 pm
Re: June Armchair GM thread
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 10619
- Joined: May 18 06, 10:09 pm
- Location: East of the middle of West Tennessee
Re: June Armchair GM thread
Not knocking you, Easton, or any stat-heads, because you are definitely more logical and analytical about the game and that's what you enjoy, but all of the ROI and other percentages take the fun out of it for me. I find it more enjoyable to think about a trade for a big time bat and what it could mean. I don't want the facts, I just want a big bat for third base. I guess I wouldn't keep a GM job for long.EastonBlues22 wrote:Assuming that 1) the playoff report has our true talent level pegged, and 2) you get a return of approximate value in wins for your total financial/player investment going the other way it would cost us in the neighborhood of a 32-35 million dollar investment to get us from 86 wins to 94 wins for this year only. That's an incredibly significant (and unlikely) investment. We may pick up a couple of wins worth (~8-9 million worth), or maybe even three for a (relatively realistically) affordable price if we get lucky...but the reality of the situation is that no matter what we do this year, there's still going to be a significant chance that we're not going to make the playoffs. With that in mind, you need to do what you can for next year (and beyond) as well.Maclowery wrote: I don't expect the sweeping changes to our lineup that my initial ideas - and most of the other Armchair GMs in this thread - to happen. Hence the thread title - it of course won't be reality, but it's what we as fans specifically would like to see happen, hopefully somewhat grounded in reality.
The issue that I take, currently, is that I say Pecota be damned. I loved our April, but I feel that between our unfortunate injuries, and our glaring holes in healthy players, I feel like we'll be a 3rd place team for this season. Which - again, personally - makes me want to barf. If the playoffs started today, and we were magically in them, I would be absolutely stunned if we won the first series. Against, well, just about any team.
Too Long Didn't Read summary: We might win 86, but screw that, we could win 94 and a pennant.
- skmsw
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 6344
- Joined: April 18 06, 7:12 pm
- Location: The Hub
Re: June Armchair GM thread
Richie, just to sort of level-set the discussion -- do you disagree with the idea that no matter how talented any given catcher may be, catchers get fewer opportunities than most other positions to use their defensive talent in ways that make a difference to the outcome of the game?I seriously think some of these overused catchphrases that are being worn out by some stat geeks, "catcher D is way overrated" for one, has the potential to cloud sound judgment. Before you know it "catcher defense doesn't mean anything" is being bounced around.
And do you disagree with the idea that because it is difficult to do and only certain people can play it at all, the spread in defensive talent between good and bad defensive catchers is generally somewhat less than it is for other positions?
- robbotis
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 4849
- Joined: April 18 06, 7:05 am
- Location: Minneapolis
Re: June Armchair GM thread
On the radio, they're throwing out Ankiel, Perez, and Walters for Holliday? Would that really get it done?
- TheoSqua
- Next Gen Wart
- Posts: 8895
- Joined: April 22 06, 6:53 pm
- Location: St. Louis
- Contact:
Re: June Armchair GM thread
That can't be all Oakland would want. That'd be a steal.robbotis wrote:On the radio, they're throwing out Ankiel, Perez, and Walters for Holliday? Would that really get it done?
- robbotis
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 4849
- Joined: April 18 06, 7:05 am
- Location: Minneapolis
Re: June Armchair GM thread
On the radio, they're throwing out Ankiel, Perez, and Walters for Holliday? Would that really get it done?
- clevername
- Bringer of FRBG
- Posts: 10385
- Joined: April 16 06, 7:13 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Re: June Armchair GM thread
we can dream, can't we?
- Popeye_Card
- GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
- Posts: 29877
- Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am
Re: June Armchair GM thread
I would like to see better sOPS+ numbers out of the following:
Molina: 37
Duncan: 53
Ludwick: 22
Ankiel: 52
That's what we've seen out of these players in the last 28 days. You can acquire whatever players you want, but if the guys listed, who are supposed to be occupying the 4/5/6 spots in the order on most nights, hit like they're supposed to, this is an OK, maybe even good offensive team. If they hit like this, of course we are going to suck.
FTR, OPS+ since 2007 for these guys.
Molina 90
Duncan 103
Ludwick 131
Ankiel 112
Molina: 37
Duncan: 53
Ludwick: 22
Ankiel: 52
That's what we've seen out of these players in the last 28 days. You can acquire whatever players you want, but if the guys listed, who are supposed to be occupying the 4/5/6 spots in the order on most nights, hit like they're supposed to, this is an OK, maybe even good offensive team. If they hit like this, of course we are going to suck.
FTR, OPS+ since 2007 for these guys.
Molina 90
Duncan 103
Ludwick 131
Ankiel 112
- Radbird
- There's someone in my head but it's not me
- Posts: 57440
- Joined: April 18 06, 5:08 pm
- Location: LF Bleachers @ Busch II
Re: June Armchair GM thread
Really. Where do I sign?TheoSqua wrote:That can't be all Oakland would want. That'd be a steal.robbotis wrote:On the radio, they're throwing out Ankiel, Perez, and Walters for Holliday? Would that really get it done?
- Richie Allen
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 7268
- Joined: December 22 06, 1:06 am
Re: June Armchair GM thread
First, I would tend to agree with what you're hinting at here but I think it's too easy to just say fewer opportunities. Catchers have to bounce quickly on bunted balls and immediately decide if they can get the lead runner, they have to pull in difficult foul ball pop-ups, they have to make quick, perfect throws to nail base stealers, they have to position themselves, field and apply tags on plays at the plate, they have to block wild pitches, they have to avoid routine passed balls, they have to sell borderline pitches, they have to, again, make perfect timely throws to pick guys off. Ultimately, if good enough, they discourage baserunners from even thinking about taking an extra base if they're involved. I won't go into psychological things like calling a game and handling a pitching staff, although I'm 100% convinced they're very real as well. I think an untalented catcher, not excelling at the prior can still be effective at the latter but I do think being a guy that can handle the position like he knows what he's doing carries a little more weight in the "exude confidence" department.skmsw wrote:Richie, just to sort of level-set the discussion -- do you disagree with the idea that no matter how talented any given catcher may be, catchers get fewer opportunities than most other positions to use their defensive talent in ways that make a difference to the outcome of the game?I seriously think some of these overused catchphrases that are being worn out by some stat geeks, "catcher D is way overrated" for one, has the potential to cloud sound judgment. Before you know it "catcher defense doesn't mean anything" is being bounced around.
And do you disagree with the idea that because it is difficult to do and only certain people can play it at all, the spread in defensive talent between good and bad defensive catchers is generally somewhat less than it is for other positions?
Now, sure, these things above may happen less than a typical SS's (or even 3rd base) chances per game...but does that make them less important? 6 successful plays from the SS and 1 out of 2 botched plays from behind the plate. Do the 6 routine ground balls make up for or overcome the E2? Or, possibly, not even an error but simply an error in judgment. To think that you're going to get through a season with few enough of these opportunities that the catcher's defensive ability really won't make much of a difference in the W/L column...I don't know...it may be true. But I would tend to doubt it. I grew up in the Steve Swisher as a Cardinal era. I certainly don't think most catchers are about the same in all of the above aspects, regardless of what common sense reasoning might suggest. Perhaps you're convinced that they're the "same enough" that it won't effect the team overall but, again, I'd have my reservations.
But I suppose my main point originally was, despite not backing up catcher defense importance with numbers, I personally like to watch excellent defense behind the plate. This simply being entertainment, after all, the priorities that we all favor are ultimately a subjective matter. That said, one would have a difficult time convincing me that we should sacrifice Yadi's D behind the plate in favor of "league average" D and the promise of another 50 to 75 points of slugging.