Blair, Davidi, Wilner round table discussion

[G-Snarls]

From earlier today. Over 40 minutes long.

 

I'm 15 minutes in and it's a good discussion. So far I also agree with pretty much everything they've said.

 

http://pmd.fan590.com/podcasts/jeff_blair/jb_20130930_105739--The-Jeff-Blair-Show---September-30---10am.mp3

[GD]

The three blind mice eh? Someone wanna give me the spark notes version?

[Angrioter]

"We all know Alex is a guy who likes to walk the line between being a numbers guy and an old-school guy"

 

- Jeff Blair

 

********......................He's AVG-Dingers-Ribeyes guy

[GD]

"We all know Alex is a guy who likes to walk the line between being a numbers guy and an old-school guy"

 

- Jeff Blair

 

lel

[Abomination]

They said one thing interesting, in that with the way the Jays do accounting, the Lind buyout would go on the books for this year if they chose to do so.

[G-Snarls]

So far

 

Defense big part of the problem

 

Lind needs a platoon partner

 

Bench needs to be upgraded - having Goins, DeRosa, Gose and a backup catcher is not good enough

 

Not enough SP depth in 2013

 

Gibbons not the problem

 

Most of the same stuff we've been saying

Edited September 30, 2013 by G-Snarls

[G-Snarls]

Good one by Wilner actually:

 

Edwin Encarnacion had the most plate appearances on the team this year. Guess who had the second most?

[GD]

Good one by Wilner actually:

 

Edwin Encarnacion had the most plate appearances on the team this year. Guess who had the second most?

 

Adam Lind.

[G-Snarls]

Adam Lind.

 

Wrong

[G-Snarls]

jpa.

 

Yep

[Abomination]

I really hope that's irrelevant as it concerns Lind.

 

Yeah, so do I, but our spreadsheets from Cot's contracts and stuff don't display it that way so I thought it would be worth mentioning for people.

[G-Snarls]

jpa.

 

So, we let a guy who ended up hitting under .200 get the second most plate appearances on the team. There is something just sooo wrong with that.

[G-Snarls]

Yeah, so do I, but our spreadsheets from Cot's contracts and stuff don't display it that way so I thought it would be worth mentioning for people.

 

It's important only to ownership and as it relates to luxury tax thresholds

[Abomination]

It's important only to ownership and as it relates to luxury tax thresholds

 

No, it also is for those of us who like to try to figure out payroll flexibility and off-season targets as well.

 

Another interesting thing they said was that Rasmus was in charge of the outfield defense this year, in terms of positioning and stuff.

[G-Snarls]

No, it also is for those of us who like to try to figure out payroll flexibility and off-season targets as well.

 

Well OK, but really that's just us guessing what ownership is thinking

[Dr Negative]

Is Wilner the round table?

[GNick]

From earlier today. Over 40 minutes long.

 

I'm 15 minutes in and it's a good discussion. So far I also agree with pretty much everything they've said.

 

http://pmd.fan590.com/podcasts/jeff_blair/jb_20130930_105739--The-Jeff-Blair-Show---September-30---10am.mp3

Good discussion....lot of stuff there I didn't know. Turf gets faster with age, Gibbons country club atmosphere for veterans.

 

They also talk about pairing Lind up with RH bat who can play corner outfield...what about Sierra?

[Boxcar]

"We all know Alex is a guy who likes to walk the line between being a numbers guy and an old-school guy"

 

- Jeff Blair

 

2-8 are numbers

[Olerud363]

"We all know Alex is a guy who likes to walk the line between being a numbers guy and an old-school guy"

 

- Jeff Blair

 

What the hell does this even mean??

 

There is no arguing with the numbers. None at all. Mike Trout is good, Arencibia is bad. Blah, blah, blah.

 

There is no walking the line here. The numbers work. The numbers are good. On base percentage is good, runs are good, advanced stats work pretty well.

 

Simple stats work good too if you know how to use them

 

Mike Trout is good - his on base percentage is good, his defense is good, his baserunning is good.

Arencibia is bad - his on base percentage is bad, his defense is bad too they say.

 

There is no walking the line here. Numbers are good. So is there any point of having scouts??

 

YES. Ofcourse. The Scouts job is mainly to predict who will have good numbers in the future.

 

And here lies the problem. If the scouts and the GM don't understand the numbers... then even if they predict perfectly who will have good numbers they will still be f***ed because what they think are good numbers really aren't.

 

Scout - My prediction for Mr. X. (Catcher) is that he will hit ..266 .344 .380 with 9 homers, 63 runs, 61 rbi and my prediction for J.P. Arencibia is .231 .277 .438 with 25 homers 52 runs and 76 rbis.

Alex - Sweet diggity... 76 rbis for JP?? So we should go with JP next year? Assuming your predictions are true?

Scout - I am a super scout, they will be true.

 

So here in this simple example Mr. X. will "produce" 115 runs (rbi+runs-homers) and Arencibia will produce 103 runs using this formula, and the scout is truly a superscout. The greatest of all time because he predicts exactly what numbers these guys will have. But AA and the scouts think Arencibia's prediction is better.

 

So even with this hypothetical superscout we would still be screwed because AA and the scouts don't know what numbers are good, so who cares if they can predict how players will do.

 

Anyway it's all so much nonsense. There is no "walking the line" there is no old school or new school. We have a system of measurement and numerics that started thousands of years ago and from that specific tools have been developed to analyze niches like finite element modelling and baseball.

 

If the fat greek needs to walk the line here, then he needs to quit right now, and go back and rewrite the history books from the day his fat greek ancestors invented numbers and say "f*** you my forefathers, I am a greek, and I don't believe in your numbers, I believe in handshakes, and haircuts, and suits and Paul Beeston".

 

I can't emphasize this enough. There is no arguing with the numbers. There is still room for scouts, their job is to predict who will have good numbers in the future... but if one doesn't even know what "good numbers" are?? Then we are all f***ed.

[eastcoastjaysfan]

What the hell does this even mean??

 

There is no arguing with the numbers. None at all. Mike Trout is good, Arencibia is bad. Blah, blah, blah.

 

There is no walking the line here. The numbers work. The numbers are good. On base percentage is good, runs are good, advanced stats work pretty well.

 

Simple stats work good too if you know how to use them

 

Mike Trout is good - his on base percentage is good, his defense is good, his baserunning is good.

Arencibia is bad - his on base percentage is bad, his defense is bad too they say.

 

There is no walking the line here. Numbers are good. So is there any point of having scouts??

 

YES. Ofcourse. The Scouts job is mainly to predict who will have good numbers in the future.

 

And here lies the problem. If the scouts and the GM don't understand the numbers... then even if they predict perfectly who will have good numbers they will still be f***ed because what they think are good numbers really aren't.

 

Scout - My prediction for Mr. X. (Catcher) is that he will hit ..266 .344 .380 with 9 homers, 63 runs, 61 rbi and my prediction for J.P. Arencibia is .231 .277 .438 with 25 homers 52 runs and 76 rbis.

Alex - Sweet diggity... 76 rbis for JP?? So we should go with JP next year? Assuming your predictions are true?

Scout - I am a super scout, they will be true.

 

So here in this simple example Mr. X. will "produce" 115 runs (rbi+runs-homers) and Arencibia will produce 103 runs using this formula, and the scout is truly a superscout. The greatest of all time because he predicts exactly what numbers these guys will have. But AA and the scouts think Arencibia's prediction is better.

 

So even with this hypothetical superscout we would still be screwed because AA and the scouts don't know what numbers are good, so who cares if they can predict how players will do.

 

Anyway it's all so much nonsense. There is no "walking the line" there is no old school or new school. We have a system of measurement and numerics that started thousands of years ago and from that specific tools have been developed to analyze niches like finite element modelling and baseball.

 

If the fat greek needs to walk the line here, then he needs to quit right now, and go back and rewrite the history books from the day his fat greek ancestors invented numbers and say "f*** you my forefathers, I am a greek, and I don't believe in your numbers, I believe in handshakes, and haircuts, and suits and Paul Beeston".

 

I can't emphasize this enough. There is no arguing with the numbers. There is still room for scouts, their job is to predict who will have good numbers in the future... but if one doesn't even know what "good numbers" are?? Then we are all f***ed.

 

You probably could've gotten your point across with like 6 fewer paragraphs.

[CHRIS]

"We all know Alex is a guy who likes to walk the line between being a numbers guy and an old-school guy"

 

- Jeff Blair

 

I wonder which numbers he looks at? Being a "numbers" guy is all well and good if they're useful numbers. RBIs + Twitter followers + GA ("Grit" Analysis) is not helpful.

[Olerud363]

You probably could've gotten your point across with like 6 fewer paragraphs.

 

It's a message board. People come here to rant about s***. Everyone has a different style. Some have several thousand short posts, I have only 500, but some are longer.

 

At this point most of us have come to think AA is a bad GM. It is an open question as to why...

 

Is he stupid?? Is he weak and easily influenced by other people who are stupid? Does he have any real power?

 

That's an important question. A lot of that crap I write is contemplating that question in the larger context of how empty suits ruin good companies.. see RIM. It becomes important to understand the dynamics at work. If AA is stupid he needs to just disapear.

 

If AA is just weak, can't stand up to Beeston... then maybe things will be better when he's president.

[Olerud363]

I wonder which numbers he looks at? Being a "numbers" guy is all well and good if they're useful numbers. RBIs + Twitter followers + GA ("Grit" Analysis) is not helpful.

 

Apparently he's started looking at the OPS, in the in-game interview Sunday he claimed several times that JP is a .700 OPS guy and that's where he needs to be.

 

Wonder if he realizes a .220 .270 .430 with bad defense and baserunning is a lot different then .250 .330 .370 with good D??

[GD]

Olerud should change his username to TL;DR

[G-Snarls]

There's also a world of difference between "could be a .700 OPS guy" and "is a .700 OPS guy, with potential for more."

 

Players who you hope for a .700 OPS on don't belong on a Major League team, unless they're a defensive wizard at shortstop (Simmons, Iglesias, etc.)

 

100% right

[G-Snarls]

Olerud should change his username to TL;DR

 

I know

 

Sometimes he has a good point

 

Sometimes I sort of want to read it just for the entertainment value

 

But every post is so long I just usually don't read any of it

[Olerud363]

There's also a world of difference between "could be a .700 OPS guy" and "is a .700 OPS guy, with potential for more."

 

Players who you hope for a .700 OPS on don't belong on a Major League team, unless they're a defensive wizard at shortstop (Simmons, Iglesias, etc.)

 

Good point. Part of the puzzle is to get a bunch of guys together at their peaks. Guys like Bautista are still usefull off-peak... But not JP.

 

The problem with JP is if he's not at his best he is a disaster.

 

If he's at his best he's sort of passable if everyone else has a good year and you can hit him 9th, and he has like the 8th most plate appearances on the team.

[Olerud363]

I know

 

Sometimes he has a good point

 

Sometimes I sort of want to read it just for the entertainment value

 

But every post is so long I just usually don't read any of it

 

Understandable. Like JP Arencibia I am what I am. If you've read 5 of my posts you have the entire story. On base percentage, cronyism. Beeston sucks.

[G-Snarls]

Understandable. Like JP Arencibia I am what I am. If you've read 5 of my posts you have the entire story. On base percentage, cronyism. Beeston sucks.

 

No prob

 

Everyone has their own style

 

More people will read your posts if you tighten them up though. Just sayin'.

[G-Snarls]

Understandable. Like JP Arencibia I am what I am.

 

More like Brett "I'll do whut I want actually" Lawrie. LOL

 

I wish that Tweet of his hadn't been deleted.