Has there been a single game this year... (Jose Reyes thread)

[o2cui2i]

Not sure what's funny. His contract is bad, but the overall package is an above-average player. He's a very good offensive shortstop, and very good baserunner.

 

I think one thing that pisses people off is that only Navarro is lazier than Reyes, but Reyes is getting "all star" money. what would his numbers be if he mentally showed up for games?

[o2cui2i]

We will do our due diligence on establishing whether we pick up our options on posters for next season. No rock will go un-turned in searching for replacement posters, whether through trade, free agency or internal replacements. Lastly we can guarantee you that ownership is committed in doing whatever it takes to make this board a contender.

 

Sincerely,

 

Your Mods.

 

but we don't do deals that are more than three years and we are always looking for weak late innings posters.

[Vincent]

From time to time. It doesn't matter though. The numbers are a lot more informative then what you perceive watching the games. No matter how much you want to pretend that he's not an above-average player, you're wrong. Objectively wrong.

 

Admittedly I may be somewhat bias from watching him make mistakes nearly every game (how can you not be??). He still has one of the worst $ per WAR contracts in baseball over the last 2 seasons and that will only get worse next year as his salary increases and he gets older. I also argue that as good of an all-encompassing stat as WAR is, nobody would say it's perfect, and in Reyes' case I would argue that it favors him.

[Abomination]

No rock will go un-turned in searching for replacement posters, whether through trade, free agency or internal replacements.

 

Posters emerging from under rocks is part of the problem...

[Abomination]

He still has one of the worst $ per WAR contracts in baseball over the last 2 seasons and that will only get worse next year as his salary increases and he gets older.

 

Not even close. In fact, on average he's probably pretty close to break even for free agent aged players over the last 2 years.

[RealAccountant]

I dont get WAR

 

when Reyes threw that game away, why didn't his WAR get reduced by 1.

[jays4life19]

I dont get WAR

 

when Reyes threw that game away, why didn't his WAR get reduced by 1.

 

lol

[Vincent]

Not even close. In fact, on average he's probably pretty close to break even for free agent aged players over the last 2 years.

 

Jose Reyes has the second worst $ per WAR contract over the last 2 seasons.

 

I guess sometimes what you think and what's true is just plain wrong.

 

http://www.bluejaysmessageboard.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=848&d=1411099147

[BTS]

It's funny because $5.5 M per WAR is actually very good value.

[Vincent]

It's funny because $5.5 M per WAR is actually very good value.

 

So by that logic Trout earning around $110 M the last 2 seasons would be a good deal?

 

It's also funny if your GM goes out and gets the most over-valued SS on the market.

[Orgfiller]

So by that logic Trout earning around $110 M the last 2 seasons would be a good deal?

 

Pretty much.

[Orgfiller]

Isn't a WAR worth roughly 7 million, I'm surprised he has that much value, I thought we were near even or losing value. Whoops! LOL

 

Derek Jeter is an egregious omission for that list.

[jays4life19]

Derek Jeter is an egregious omission for that list.

 

I think he was looking at over a 2 year span...thus the omission.

[Vincent]

Derek Jeter is an egregious omission for that list.

 

He played 17 games last year, therefore did not qualify...

[Vincent]

Isn't a WAR worth roughly 7 million, I'm surprised he has that much value, I thought we were near even or losing value. Whoops! LOL

 

Maybe, maybe not. In any case our GM has gone out and got arguably the most over-valued SS on the market... JOB WELL DONE

[BTS]

So by that logic Trout earning around $110 M the last 2 seasons would be a good deal?

 

It's also funny if your GM goes out and gets the most over-valued SS on the market.

 

Yes. 10-win seasons are pretty valuable.

 

You're right to be unhappy about the Reyes acquisition. He's almost certainly not going to provide value over the life of the contract. Things are going to go bad. It just hasn't happened yet. He's been worth the money so far.

[Abomination]

Jose Reyes has the second worst $ per WAR contract over the last 2 seasons.

 

I guess sometimes what you think and what's true is just plain wrong.

 

http://www.bluejaysmessageboard.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=848&d=1411099147

 

You should have specified $/WAR of just shortstops in your original post if that's what you were looking at (you didn't). Also, you are only considering guys who met the minimum number of games. For a list like that to have any basis, you either have to consider all shortstops regardless of games played, or you'd have to do something like scale all shortstops to the same number of at-bats.

[bill]

Has there been a single game this year in which Jose Reyes did not do at least one of the following:

 

- Make a poor throw to first

- Bobble a ball and allow a hit

- Botch a grounder

- Not hustle to first on a play that would have been a single

- Get picked-off first

- Get thrown out trying to stretch a single into a double

- Let a routine grounder 3-feet away away get by

 

He's being paid to do that little dance after home runs not to produce on the field

[Vincent]

You should have specified $/WAR of just shortstops in your original post if that's what you were looking at (you didn't). Also, you are only considering guys who met the minimum number of games. For a list like that to have any basis, you either have to consider all shortstops regardless of games played, or you'd have to do something like scale all shortstops to the same number of at-bats.

 

I will give you some credit, you/I did not mention SS specifically but that's what I was referring to.

 

But I'm going to go with the qualifiers only... WAR is not scaled "per X games" therefore doing this analysis on players who did not play enough games wouldn't make any sense.

[Vincent]

Yes. 10-win seasons are pretty valuable.

 

You're right to be unhappy about the Reyes acquisition. He's almost certainly not going to provide value over the life of the contract. Things are going to go bad. It just hasn't happened yet. He's been worth the money so far.

 

I'm very unhappy. Mostly just unhappy watching him f***-up in every single game (or so it seems).

[Abomination]

But I'm going to go with the qualifiers only... WAR is not scaled "per X games" therefore doing this analysis on players who did not play enough games wouldn't make any sense.

 

That's exactly why you have to either include basically all SS (or at least all that played most of their games at SS), or scale the results. You are presenting data that in effect has arbitrary inclusion AND that doesn't put all players on an even playing field. You can't really do both and still get meaningful results.

 

Jeter is the most obvious example of why this is, but let's take a fictional example. You need roughly 1000 PA to qualify for a full 2 year period. If you have ten people with 975 and another with 1025, you don't want to exclude the ten that just barely miss the cutoff, and only present the results of the one that just barely makes it. It doesn't tell the story of what the data is saying, and those extra 50 PA aren't going to significantly change the results.

 

As another example, Reyes just barely makes the cutoff himself. If he had missed about 10 more games this year, he probably wouldn't qualify right now. That doesn't mean that his $/WAR among shortstops isn't a valid exploration.

[Vincent]

That's exactly why you have to either include basically all SS (or at least all that played most of their games at SS), or scale the results. You are presenting data that in effect has arbitrary inclusion AND that doesn't put all players on an even playing field. You can't really do both and still get meaningful results.

 

Jeter is the most obvious example of why this is, but let's take a fictional example. You need roughly 1000 PA to qualify for a full 2 year period. If you have ten people with 975 and another with 1025, you don't want to exclude the ten that just barely miss the cutoff, and only present the results of the one that just barely makes it. It doesn't tell the story of what the data is saying, and those extra 50 PA aren't going to significantly change the results.

 

As another example, Reyes just barely makes the cutoff himself. If he had missed about 10 more games this year, he probably wouldn't qualify right now. That doesn't mean that his $/WAR among shortstops isn't a valid exploration.

 

There's a reason baseball has a minimum qualification to begin with. Sure I could reduce the qualification from 1000 PA to 900 PA, but where do you draw the line? Should I just make it 200 PA minimum? Then I'm evaluating players who have barely played at all. So player X has 200 PA in 2 years and is getting paid $10 M obviously his $ per WAR is going to be completely off the mark. The data just becomes useless at this point. Sorry dude, yes it's arbitrary, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

[Abomination]

There's a reason baseball has a minimum qualification to begin with. Sure I could reduce the qualification from 1000 PA to 900 PA, but where do you draw the line? Should I just make it 200 PA minimum? Then I'm evaluating players who have barely played at all. So player X has 200 PA in 2 years and is getting paid $10 M obviously his $ per WAR is going to be completely off the mark. The data just becomes useless at this point. Sorry dude, yes it's arbitrary, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

 

A large part of minimum qualification is because of things like the batting title, but batting average itself has no bearing on the number of games you play. It's a simple average. WAR behaves (more) like a counting stat in that regard, so it does. That's also why (to my knowledge) the 3.1 PA / team game does NOT apply to things like home runs, RBI, or stolen bases. They are counting stats, not rate stats.

 

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you can't make an encompassing statement that compares players with a stat who's value is somewhat directly affected by the number of games played, then arbitrarily cut off the number of games - at least not at levels that eliminate players of interest in the study. Obviously no one is going to care about a bench player that gets 300 at-bats for example (unless they were expected to be a regular), but people are going to care about guys who are fairly regular players who simply missed time due to injury (which is largely not a reliably predictable occurrence, at least not major injuries). Jeter, Tulo, Hanley, Drew, Everth, etc would all be players that could be expected to be included.

 

I suppose in the end, this is more picky than a critical issue anyhow, at least in this case. It is important however when making an observation backed by stats, to do so in a manner that gives an objective (and complete) picture. Subjective opinions can filter it after that, and if all of the data is presented, those opinions can then be properly debated.

 

BTW, your list seems to be missing Hech as well

 

God, I suddenly feel like Moogy. I had better have a shower and go to bed lol.

[glory]

Reyes getting over 600 plate appearances this season is an accomplishment in itself.

[Deadpool]

We will do our due diligence on establishing whether we pick up our options on posters for next season. No rock will go un-turned in searching for replacement posters, whether through trade, free agency or internal replacements. Lastly we can guarantee you that ownership is committed in doing whatever it takes to make this board a contender.

 

Sincerely,

 

Your Mods.

 

I really wanna make an "internal replacement" joke here, but it's way too early and I've been at work for a half hour already... Just pretend I was as hilarious as usual...

[Deadpool]

900 pa's to 200 is redonkulous, he's asking 50 PA by the way, meat, hardly arbitrary, anyhow you were wrong from the get go, Reyes is producing value, you shot yourself in the foot. Also, 7 million, is a guesstimation, IIRC, Nox/JFaS and other MLB insiders say it could be up to near 9 million per WAR, soooo..........

 

Really, the thought process here is "contract value", right? so the threshold should be a minimum of 0 games played. A guy who has a $100M contract and hasn't played in the past 2 years is certainly a poorer value than Reyes. Jeter missing most of the last year doesn't make his contract better at all (well, arguably it does, since he's a negative WAR player now...)

[GD]

Also, a massive consideration being missed here is that the Jays are way higher on the $/WAR scale than most teams because they're basically the Phillies before they crashed.

[shortstop]

GD, this team/mgmt. structure does remind me of the Phillies of this year/past few years...perpetual mediocrity though they believe they can put it together every year...politically it seems, Amaro/ownership can't blow it up yet...though at least they had some winning years before it all...

[Nox]

Playing time qualifiers do not make sense for a list like that.

 

Player health is both a skill and something that you pay for. Throwing limited playing time players out only makes sense if you're looking at a player's "skill when healthy" in isolation. That's not what you pay for with a contract and that's not what should be listed here.

[KingKat]

Really, the thought process here is "contract value", right? so the threshold should be a minimum of 0 games played. A guy who has a $100M contract and hasn't played in the past 2 years is certainly a poorer value than Reyes. Jeter missing most of the last year doesn't make his contract better at all (well, arguably it does, since he's a negative WAR player now...)

 

Is a SS who played 0 games even a shortstop? If you're filtering by position, you need some kind of threshold for a player to even qualify as a SS. Otherwise, you're going to clutter your list with guys who maybe played there for an inning but wouldn't be anyone's idea of a SS. I'd like to see the threshold a little lower to allow for someone like Jeter but I don't think there's anything wrong per say with the way the data was presented.