Around Baseball 2014

[jaysfan2014]

Adam Jones is ticked off at the O's letting Cruz and Markakis go:

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/adam-jones-not-too-happy-about-nick-markakis-leaving-orioles-001320253.html

 

And the O's promised to boost payroll.. Peter Angelos is being cheap again. O's fans are ticked.. while the Jays and Red Sox (and likely the Yankees) are making upgrades, the O's haven't done a thing! They're looking at a huge drop in the standings next year if they don't get help in the OF and starting rotation.

[LongTimeReader]

Adam Jones is ticked off at the O's letting Cruz and Markakis go:

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/adam-jones-not-too-happy-about-nick-markakis-leaving-orioles-001320253.html

 

And the O's promised to boost payroll.. Peter Angelos is being cheap again. O's fans are ticked.. while the Jays and Red Sox (and likely the Yankees) are making upgrades, the O's haven't done a thing! They're looking at a huge drop in the standings next year if they don't get help in the OF and starting rotation.

 

Can't see the O's competing again unless they make some SIGNIFICANT moves.

[L54]

Can't see the O's competing again unless they make some SIGNIFICANT moves.

 

Ya we've been saying this for a long time though. Add in a healthy Weiters and Machado, who are much more valuable than Cruz/Markakis.

[Chappy]

Can't see the O's competing again unless they make some SIGNIFICANT moves.

 

I can.

[burlingtonbandit]

So uhh... it turns out that Jonah Keri is actually way dumber than I thought he was.

 

He just released the first part for his trade value rankings for this year:

 

http://grantland.com/features/2014-mlb-trade-value-rankings-part-1/

 

After a brief glance, they think Hamels has more trade value than Edwin and Jose, Machado, Beltre, Russell, and a host of others (and yes they claim to take contracts into account).

 

They didn't even have Bautista ranked in the top 50 last year.

 

Really bad job by a site that I very much expect better from.

 

It could be trade value around the league and not value for what you are getting for your money. Cole Hamels is thought of as an "ace" so he probably fetches a bigger return. That said, you would think Bautista and Edwin would be higher because of the "star" value and since RH power is so scarce.

 

Edit: After reading the part 2, I agree that this is just a bad list. Anthony Rizzo at 7 was just weird.

[Westfan]

A,s top ten prospects from Baseball America. Barrett 2nd, Graveman 6th, Nolin 7th. Wow A,s system was bad.

[Frag]

What's a good site that contains total team salaries since 1980? The best I could find goes back to 1988.

 

As for age effects, I adjusted for that and did find changes to the rankings (I also changed the adjustments for marginalization of wins). Top 5 in terms of team performance under certain GMs since 1980:

 

1. John Schuerholz(115.0 dWAR)

2. Pat Gillick (91.2)

3. Billy Beane (61.9)

4. Frank Cashen (58.6)

5. Brian Cashman (53.2)

 

It's harder to tease out how much of an influence GMs on either very rich or very poor teams have on win% differential than on teams in the middle.

 

Bottom 5:

 

1. Bill Bavasi (-47.7 dWAR)

2. Chuck LaMar (-44.4)

3. Andy MacPhail (-37.6)

4. Allan Baird (-37.4)

5. Woody Woodward (-37.2)

 

The salary information can really help me look into its actual effect of salary differential (relative to league changes, of course) to change in win%.

[fatcowxlive]

So, I've been analyzing team performance between successive seasons (eg. dWin% = Win% of season 2 - Win% of season 1) and been checking on how much of an impact general managers have on this. When doing a linear regression analysis between win% of the 2nd season and win% of the first season, the effect was, of course, significant (p<0.05). However, after accounting for GM of the team, while still significant, the predictive value of the model actually improved. So, I thought that maybe I should check the WAR differential (dWAR; yes, just as creative as dCorsi) between seasons among each of the GMs since 1980 and add up the results to see how GMs have done. I adjusted for marginalization of win%, since it's harder to improve from 85 wins to 90 wins than it is to improve from 75 wins to 80 wins.

 

Here are the top 10 GMs since 1980 according to this measure:

 

1. John Schuerholz*(111.3 total dWAR)

2. Brian Cashman (89.3 dWAR)

3. Pat Gillick (83.9 dWAR)

4. Theo Epstein (51.7 dWAR)

5. Billy Beane (49.4 dWAR)

6. Frank Cashen (42.2 dWAR)

7. Walt Jocketty (41.5 dWAR)

8. Dan Duquette (40.4 dWAR)

9. Ned Colletti (38.2 dWAR) (Yeah, this surprised me, too)

10. Bill Stoneman (36.2 dWAR)

 

Plus:

 

18. Andrew Friedman (18.0 dWAR)

 

Worst 10:

 

1. Chuck LaMar (-39.5 dWAR)

2. Andy MacPhail (-39.0 dWAR)

3. Cam Bonifay (-38.6 dWAR)

4. Woody Woodward (-37.8 dWAR)

5. Bill Bavasi (-37.7 dWAR)

6. Harding Peterson (-32.5 dWAR) (Doesn't include his early years, so it may not be representative of his full career)

7. Joseph Klein (-32.2 dWAR)

8. Allan Baird (-31.4 dWAR)

9. Syd Thrift (-31.0 dWAR)

10. Randy Smith (-30.6 dWAR)

 

Just because I felt like adding them:

 

11. Mark Shapiro (-30.3 dWAR)

12. Jim Bowden (-26.5 dWAR)

 

Main caveats with this analysis:

 

1) Doesn't account for ownership/salary, which can influence a GM's decision (Hi Florida/Miami Marlins!).

2) Doesn't account for draft picks made by GMs. This can, especially, influence the dWAR of GMs with shorter than average career lengths.

3) Survivorship bias weeds out the bad GMs, which can cause issues with studies like this one.

 

I'm hoping to work on this some more, since I find it pretty interesting.

 

Frag is the GOAT

[TwistedLogic]

And this is why I hate Torii Hunter and got nauseous at the rumors that the Jays were interested in him.

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/11976931/torii-hunter-berates-reporter-news-conference-minnesota-twins-return?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

Like who gives a f*** if the guy asked you a hard question, you literally just signed with the team, it's your first appearance wearing their uniform, be a professional and answer the question, or respectfully decline.

 

No, gotta call the guy a prick on national TV four times. Dumbass.

[GreekFatAss]

A,s top ten prospects from Baseball America. Barrett 2nd, Graveman 6th, Nolin 7th. Wow A,s system was bad.

 

Its funny how Jays prospects always jump the highest on the prospect charts after they get moved to another market.

[TwistedLogic]

First appearance wearing their uniform?

 

Yeah pretty lame though.

 

Since the recent signing, you know what I mean... he hasn't been a Twin for 6 years.

 

It's his first day "on the job" and he's already publicly shamed a guy that's responsible for covering him in the media throughout his time there. Just dumb, unprofessional composure.

[jays_fever]

Well seriously some of these reporters deserve to be called out. Why are you asking him about his views that have nothing to do with baseball. Was the reporter honestly going to do a story about Hunter's views on same sex marriage?

[TRM]

Well seriously some of these reporters deserve to be called out. Why are you asking him about his views that have nothing to do with baseball. Was the reporter honestly going to do a story about Hunter's views on same sex marriage?

 

He was baiting him for a quote, and he did it four times, after Hunter made it clear he didn't want to answer it. Should Hunter have phrased his response better? Of course. But it was trash journalism.

[HERPDERP]

He was baiting him for a quote, and he did it four times, after Hunter made it clear he didn't want to answer it. Should Hunter have phrased his response better? Of course. But it was trash journalism.

 

I agree, I don't understand how people here are bitching at Hunter. Could he have answered it better? For sure, but when you have someone bait you like that you'll be pissed off.

 

The question was unrelated to baseball and asked during the worst time.

[TwistedLogic]

Well seriously some of these reporters deserve to be called out. Why are you asking him about his views that have nothing to do with baseball. Was the reporter honestly going to do a story about Hunter's views on same sex marriage?

 

Everybody knows that reporters are *******s, but they shouldn't be called out in that setting and in the manner that it was done. If he had left it where he originally left it, that would have been more than adequate of a response, telling him that it had nothing to do with baseball and they can talk to him about this stuff after he's retired. Dwelling on it in his head and then lashing out and saying "prick" four times in the middle of a press conference is completely unwarranted and doesn't constitute "calling someone out". It makes you look like an uneducated and unprofessional tard.

 

Secondly, it was Hunter's prerogative for originally mentioning his homophobic views in the media in the first place. How do you expect to not be grilled for that? If he didn't want to be questioned for it, he should have been smart enough to know not to spew that garbage in an open forum in the first place. Of course, that thought probably never crossed his mind, because he's a moron that clearly doesn't think before he talks.

Edited December 4, 2014 by TwistedLogic

[TRM]

Everybody knows that reporters are *******s, but they don't "deserve to be called out" by the player, in that setting, in the manner that he did it. If he had left it where he originally left it, that would have been more than adequate of a response, telling him that it had nothing to do with baseball and they can talk to him about this stuff after he's retired. Dwelling on it in his head and then lashing out and saying "prick" four times in the middle of a press conference is completely unwarranted and doesn't constitute "calling someone out".

 

Secondly, it was Hunter's prerogative for originally mentioning his homophobic views in the media in the first place. If he didn't want to be questioned for it, he should have been smart enough to know not to spew that garbage in an open forum in the first place. Of course, that thought probably never crossed his mind, because he's a moron that clearly doesn't think before he talks.

 

I agree with this. Hunter is a s***** person, and is an idiot for opening this can of worms in the first place.

 

Still, bad journalism is bad journalism.

[jays_fever]

He was baiting him for a quote, and he did it four times, after Hunter made it clear he didn't want to answer it. Should Hunter have phrased his response better? Of course. But it was trash journalism.

 

Well for the record I thought Hunter was a piece of s*** before this even happened, but baseball players are paid professional athletes. A "difficult" question may be something with regards to a personal rift involving a teammate or coach. I'm not sure why athletes are expected to always take the higher road when they are provoked

[TRM]

Well for the record I thought Hunter was a piece of s*** before this even happened, but baseball players are paid professional athletes. A "difficult" question may be something with regards to a personal rift involving a teammate or coach. I'm not sure why athletes are expected to always take the higher road when they are provoked

 

I think we're basically on the same page here.

[jays_fever]

Everybody knows that reporters are *******s, but they called out in that setting and in the manner that it was done. If he had left it where he originally left it, that would have been more than adequate of a response, telling him that it had nothing to do with baseball and they can talk to him about this stuff after he's retired. Dwelling on it in his head and then lashing out and saying "prick" four times in the middle of a press conference is completely unwarranted and doesn't constitute "calling someone out". It makes you look like an uneducated and unprofessional tard.

 

Secondly, it was Hunter's prerogative for originally mentioning his homophobic views in the media in the first place. How do you expect to not be grilled for that? If he didn't want to be questioned for it, he should have been smart enough to know not to spew that garbage in an open forum in the first place. Of course, that thought probably never crossed his mind, because he's a moron that clearly doesn't think before he talks.

 

I completely agree with your views on Hunter, but I really dont think anyone should be running to defend the reporter. It's one thing to ask a hard pressing question, it's another to just keep poking at something that's unwarranted.

[Angrioter]

MLB

Chase Headley reportedly has a 4-year, $65 million offer from an unspecified team

[TwistedLogic]

I agree with this. Hunter is a s***** person, and is an idiot for opening this can of worms in the first place.

 

Still, bad journalism is bad journalism.

 

Like I said, I agree. Reporters are *******s. Still, it's their job and it's a dog-eat-dog industry, so when you have an opportunity to get a controversial bite like this, and the guy on the receiving end is a dumbass bigot that isn't in much need of remorse, I can see why they keep prodding him about it, and will probably continue to do so, especially after this spectacle.

 

Well for the record I thought Hunter was a piece of s*** before this even happened, but baseball players are paid professional athletes. A "difficult" question may be something with regards to a personal rift involving a teammate or coach. I'm not sure why athletes are expected to always take the higher road when they are provoked

 

No, this is a one-sided way of thinking. If the media can talk to Martin about his Canadian heritage, or Dickey about his trek to climb a random mountain, or about his history with being sexually abused, or they can ask Rasmus about how much he hates LaRussa, or just last night, ask Saunder's to talk about his uncomfortable situation with Jack Z, they can ask a question like this. None of these guys lashed out and said this has nothing to do with baseball, whether they were easy or tough questions. Saunders immediately responded saying that he wasn't going to go into it, but he still gave them somewhat of an answer. You said it yourself, they're paid professional athletes.

 

I completely agree with your views on Hunter, but I really dont think anyone should be running to defend the reporter. It's one thing to ask a hard pressing question, it's another to just keep poking at something that's unwarranted.

 

If you look back at the interview, when Hunter said that it had nothing to do with baseball and they could ask him about it when he's retired, it was done. The guy didn't prod him anymore. It was a train-of-thought type thing where Hunter randomly felt he later had to add "Mike is a prick though". Im not defending the reporter, I don't care about the reporter. Im only talking on the principle of Hunter acting like an assclown on national TV, regardless of the reason or provocation. When he has the views he has, he should know that he'll never be the "victim" in these situations because he brought it upon himself.

[z3r0s]

Only the Yankees would be that dumb.

 

he's been pretty damn good over the past several years, projected for 4WAR next year. Not that dumb unless his injuries continue.

[TwistedLogic]

Only the Yankees would be that dumb.

 

I can see the Yankees being behind that offer, but 4/65 will probably end up being a complete steal on Headley.

[Laika]

I don't understand the disconnect on Headley's value. The guy is a stud. Has averaged 4.4 WAR over the past five seasons. Elite defender, pretty good hitter.

 

What's hard to understand? Most people still see baseball through batting average, home runs, and RBI. Headley generates most of his value through defense and plate discipline (+ decent power and hit).

 

Same reasons that Melky is so overrated - .300 hitter!

[HERPDERP]

Well wasn't the issue with Headley was injuries? You're assuming he's going to be playing healthy over those 4 years.

[HERPDERP]

BREAKING NEWS

 

BRAVES SIGN BRAUN

 

http://i.imgur.com/hClgvZD.jpg

[baubau]

I think people had pegged Headley to continue his 7+ WAR season, just injuries and lack of sexy numbers like BA have put him at a negative on a lot of people's mind. 4 / 65M isn't bad for Headley. Would only suck should he get injured but you can say that about anyone in Baseball.

[Laika]

I think people had pegged Headley to continue his 7+ WAR season, just injuries and lack of sexy numbers like BA have put him at a negative on a lot of people's mind. 4 / 65M isn't bad for Headley. Would only suck should he get injured but you can say that about anyone in Baseball.

 

4/65 for Headley is f***ing robbery compared to the 4 year deals given to Cruz and Markakis.

 

Easily twice the player, not much more money.

 

In a rational market, contracts for Sandoval and Headley are only a stones throw apart.

[KingKat]

I'd rather have Headley at 4-70, and keep Lawrie + the specs,, then Donaldson.

 

A bird in the hand is worth more than two in the bush.

[TwistedLogic]

Well wasn't the issue with Headley was injuries? You're assuming he's going to be playing healthy over those 4 years.

 

Bautista has a similar contract right now to what Headley apparently has on the table. Despite some serious injury troubles, Bautista's contract has long been considered one of the best in the game.

 

The value he'll provide on that contract will far outweigh some injury concerns.