Around Baseball 2015

[HERPDERP]

I wonder if Pedro Alvarez might make sense for us now given his market seems uber weak-sauce. I understand he's been pretty bad the last 2 years, but obviously has the power to break out any given season.

 

I wouldn't have suggested it if it didn't look like he would cost peanuts. Adds a LH bat as well and is a better bat than Smoak

 

Pedro Alvarez's calling card is his offense, which we have no need of and would hurt our team a lot more having him play 1B. He is your typical DH and we don't have room. Besides, he will cost a lot and we already wasted a big chunk of dollars on Smoak.

 

Colabello is superior to both.

[z3r0s]

Pedro Alvarez's calling card is his offense, which we have no need of and would hurt our team a lot more having him play 1B. He is your typical DH and we don't have room. Besides, he will cost a lot and we already wasted a big chunk of dollars on Smoak.

 

Colabello is superior to both.

 

I'm not confident that Cola is superior to either. I also don't think he'll cost much given the contract for CCC and a market that doesn't seem to be developing.

 

I find it strange that anyone would ever say "we don't need more offense".

[Boxcar]

I think the argument would be more about whether Alvarez is an upgrade at all.

[z3r0s]

I think the argument would be more about whether Alvarez is an upgrade at all.

 

I'd say that he isn't obviously an upgrade, but does offer a LH bat, and some real upside (which I'm not sure Smoak or Cola really have). The guy was a 3 win player only a few years ago and would be moving to a much better power hitting park.

[GD]

I think the argument would be more about whether Alvarez is an upgrade at all.

 

z3r0s owns him in Lod

[Laika]

Steamer600

 

Cola - 108 wRC+; 1.1 fWAR

Pedro - 112 wRC+; 1.1 fWAR

Smoak - 96 wRC+; 0.6 fWAR

Pearce - 110 wRC_; 2.0 fWAR

 

Pedro is a career 118 vs. RHP while Smoak is a 101.

Colabello is a 113 vs. RHP but contrary to what Grant thinks, that split has little meaning.

 

Pedro would improve the team's offense vs. RHP but is it worth the drop in defense from Smoak, and is it worth (presumably) the increased payroll? He was projected for I think $8M in arbitration so he'll look to approach that figure.

 

You would lose roster flexibility by replacing a switch hitter with someone who can't hit lefties. You would gain some by adding an emergency 3B, though.

[Boxcar]

z3r0s owns him in Lod

 

Ahh

[Boxcar]

Oh man, I'd love Steve Pearce but not holding my breath.

[Laika]

Oh man, I'd love Steve Pearce but not holding my breath.

 

It seems like the Blue Jays are married to Smoakabello and not really interested in looking for creative upgrades at 1B.

 

The fact that they quickly gave Smoak $3.9M is evidence of this.

 

A shame, really.

[Boxcar]

It seems like the Blue Jays are married to Smoakabello and not really interested in looking for creative upgrades at 1B.

 

The fact that they quickly gave Smoak $3.9M is evidence of this.

 

A shame, really.

 

Fire Shapiro

 

Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, I kinda wonder if Chris Davis is on their radar. Maybe he's badly overestimating his market and ends up with what Cruz got the one year he played for the Orioles...different situation of course but I think it's in the realm of possibility. In that scenario, he's probably looking at racking up counting stats and Toronto would be by far his best option for are bee eyes.

[Laika]

Fire Shapiro

 

+1

 

Bring back the zecutive of the year

 

Less suits, more toots!

[z3r0s]

z3r0s owns him in Lod

 

I fail to see why I would advocate the Jays to pick him up (knowing that has no effect on them actually doing it) because I own him in a fantasy league. I brought him up because he would presumably come cheap (CCC signed for 2.5MM) and has some upside the others don't.

[HERPDERP]

I'm not confident that Cola is superior to either. I also don't think he'll cost much given the contract for CCC and a market that doesn't seem to be developing.

 

I find it strange that anyone would ever say "we don't need more offense".

 

When I say superior I mean the whole package..offense, defense and most importantly to $hapiro, salary. I don't think Colabello is going to make anywhere close to a million and at that price it is a no brainer to s*** on Alvarez. I would've s*** on Smoak too.

[Muck Bartinez]

Fire Shapiro

 

Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, I kinda wonder if Chris Davis is on their radar. Maybe he's badly overestimating his market and ends up with what Cruz got the one year he played for the Orioles...different situation of course but I think it's in the realm of possibility. In that scenario, he's probably looking at racking up counting stats and Toronto would be by far his best option for are bee eyes.

 

That would be a good strategy depending on the cost. I was thinking about this earlier: Could the Jays do to hitters what Oakland/San Diego/etc. does with pitchers? Oakland has a history of having guys with great traditional stats (due partially to things like park factors, etc.) and then dealing them for a profit. A lot of pitchers have signed one-year deals in places like San Diego to rebuild their value because of the pitching environment.

 

The Jays could do this in theory with guys who have good stats (HR, RBI, AVG) that aren't really supported by their BABIP's, HR/FB, etc. Juan Fransisco and Chris Colabello come to mind as guys who performed better than they would have in a context-neutral environment and should probably have been dealt at their peak value. They could also take on guys who are looking to rebuild value in an offensive environment.

 

The problem is they don't really have the roster flexibility as it stands now to take on a 1B/DH/Corner OF type of player unless someone gets dealt, but it does seem like a good way to take advantage of the offensive environment of Toronto.

[Laika]

Fire Shapiro

 

Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, I kinda wonder if Chris Davis is on their radar. Maybe he's badly overestimating his market and ends up with what Cruz got the one year he played for the Orioles...different situation of course but I think it's in the realm of possibility. In that scenario, he's probably looking at racking up counting stats and Toronto would be by far his best option for are bee eyes.

 

I love the idea of adding even more offense to this team. Just keep stacking bats and then sit back and revel in the positive feedback and the ~9 runs for per game.

 

But, won't happen.

[KingKat]

I fail to see why I would advocate the Jays to pick him up (knowing that has no effect on them actually doing it) because I own him in a fantasy league. I brought him up because he would presumably come cheap (CCC signed for 2.5MM) and has some upside the others don't.

 

 

The point is that having him in fantasy may make you view him more positively than you would otherwise.

[z3r0s]

The point is that having him in fantasy may make you view him more positively than you would otherwise.

 

Only if you have very little ability to compartmentalize. I'm not on here saying "OMGZ we gotta sign Pedro right away because he's soooo f***ing awesome!!!"

 

I think I've been pretty clear that it only make sense if he comes for pennies on the dollar, and that even though he isn't a clear upgrade on either Smoak or Cola, it might make sense because the upside is (I think fairly clearly) much higher than either of those two.

 

I think that's a pretty defensible position, and its lazy to just say "Well you just like him because you own him in fantasy, smh"

[Angrioter]

I love the idea of adding even more offense to this team. Just keep stacking bats and then sit back and revel in the positive feedback and the ~9 runs for per game.

 

But, won't happen.

 

Zero sum game. You can improve your team scoring more runs, or allowing less runs.

[KingKat]

 

I think that's a pretty defensible position, and its lazy to just say "Well you just like him because you own him in fantasy, smh"

 

Sure it's lazy but it's also fair. Yes you can compartmentalize but the fact that you even need to compartmentalize means that there is a bias there you may not be properly adjusting for despite your no doubt sincere attempts to do so. You should acknowledge as much rather than try to hand waive it away. I don't see anyone else arguing for Alvarez here. Do you? So maybe put your big pants on and admit that you have a stake in Alvarez that might be causing you to squint a little too hard. SMH.

[Laika]

Zero sum game. You can improve your team scoring more runs, or allowing less runs.

 

Adding to an already good offense has synergistic benefits though

[z3r0s]

Sure it's lazy but it's also fair. Yes you can compartmentalize but the fact that you even need to compartmentalize means that there is a bias there you may not be properly adjusting for despite your no doubt sincere attempts to do so. You should acknowledge as much rather than try to hand waive it away. I don't see anyone else arguing for Alvarez here. Do you? So maybe put your big pants on and admit that you have a stake in Alvarez that might be causing you to squint a little too hard. SMH.

 

Your assertion that I might not be 'properly adjusting' for my bias is a pretty weak-sauce argument. If the original bias is minuscule, than the error in adjustment on that bias would be only a fraction of that already minuscule bias. For the record, I don't find it difficult to separate my real life analysis of the team and players, from my fantasy analysis and moves, so I do assert the original bias is minuscule.

 

As for your next point, no. I will not withdraw my suggestion and invalidate my arguments based purely on the fact that I may have some sort of bias. I'll do what I always do and try to make good points while checking for my own biases.

 

Just because nobody else is arguing for Pedro, is not an argument against him. There are lots of reasons why people may not argue for him, no the least of which is that the suggestion is largely based on a play to try and catch lighting in a bottle than getting a likely upgrade (so a small small upgrade).

[Boxcar]

Your assertion that I might not be 'properly adjusting' for my bias is a pretty weak-sauce argument. If the original bias is minuscule, than the error in adjustment on that bias would be only a fraction of that already minuscule bias. For the record, I don't find it difficult to separate my real life analysis of the team and players, from my fantasy analysis and moves, so I do assert the original bias is minuscule.

 

As for your next point, no. I will not withdraw my suggestion and invalidate my arguments based purely on the fact that I may have some sort of bias. I'll do what I always do and try to make good points while checking for my own biases.

 

Just because nobody else is arguing for Pedro, is not an argument against him. There are lots of reasons why people may not argue for him, no the least of which is that the suggestion is largely based on a play to try and catch lighting in a bottle than getting a likely upgrade (so a small small upgrade).

 

Sounds exactly like what someone with bias would say

[z3r0s]

Sounds exactly like what someone with bias would say

 

sounds like someone who doesn't want to make an argument but wants to get their lazy two-cents in would say.

[KingKat]

Your assertion that I might not be 'properly adjusting' for my bias is a pretty weak-sauce argument.

 

It's neither weak nor an argument. It's just a possibility. One that it would be foolish not to acknowledge.

[z3r0s]

It's neither weak nor an argument. It's just a possibility. One that it would be foolish not to acknowledge.

 

Was the whole next part of that paragraph not my musing on how I considered it and don't feel its affected the points I made re: Alvarez?

[Boxcar]

sounds like someone who doesn't want to make an argument but wants to get their lazy two-cents in would say.

 

It may be lazy, but it's true

[z3r0s]

It may be lazy, but it's true

 

same response from KK and yourself. Admit it's lazy. Assert it's true. How about pointing out where my alleged bias has affected my suggestion that Alvarez could be an upgrade given the right deal.

 

nah, pointing out a potential bias is enough.

[BTS]

lol, what a ridiculous argument

[Boxcar]

same response from KK and yourself. Admit it's lazy. Assert it's true. How about pointing out where my alleged bias has affected my suggestion that Alvarez could be an upgrade given the right deal.

 

nah, pointing out a potential bias is enough.

 

That he's even mentioned at all given our situation is a red flag. I can't really think of any other reason to bring him up.

 

Don't worry, we all have inner biases. I really wanted John Lackey to sign here.

[z3r0s]

lol, what a ridiculous argument

 

one of the sides, or the argument as a whole?