Jays acquire Corey Dickerson and Adam Cimber

[Stangstag]

Gurriel to 3B maybe lol

 

This would solve so many problems honestly

[glory]

Seriously, Joe Panik is gone! This is amazing. I've been waiting for this day since his minor league contract was confirmed before the season. I knew Buntoyo would play him too much and dude was awful as expected. If Atkins wasn't going to fire Charles, then taking his vetrins away will at least mitigate some of his stupid lineup decisions.

[InsideThePark]

Great deal. We get a serviceable arm who's a huge upgrade on our current pen trash and good enough to stick around through the rest of his arb years. The money we take on is still quite useful when he gets healthy, we give up nothing in the way of prospect capital since McInvale is nothing, and we get rid of Panik. Win - Win - Win - Win. This trade is a 4 game winning streak.

[Ray]

This could be our pen in a few weeks if no additional injury setbacks occur. It is by no means great, but it at least resembles a major league bullpen.

 

Romano

Merryweather

Borucki

Cimber

Castro

Chatwood

Mayza

Dolis

 

That's a pretty great bullpen tbh.

 

The main issue with guys like Castro, Payamps, and Mayza is that they're pitching in situations where they shouldn't be. You get Borucki, Merryweather, and Dolis pitching in high leverage, and that'll instantly improve their production because you're not forcing high leverage on guys who weren't even in the majors before this year.

 

Starters are going deeper into games now too as opposed to early on in the season. So we likely won't be overusing them too much.

[Sammy225]

Is Cimber likely to move the need much for us..... not a lot but he is better then a lot that we have so it is a step in the right direction. As for Dickerson he could be potentially a nice piece against RHP, platoon him with Gurriel or Grich. Better yet PANIK IS f***ING GONE! Almost feels like the Moneyball scene where Beane traded away Pena so they would stop playing him

[Ehjays]

I looked up the trade on Google and an article came up from a NY paper saying Dickerson was a potential target for Cashman.

 

Here is a bit of the article......

 

Tuesday’s trade is significant for two reasons.

 

One, the Blue Jays are in third place in the American League East, one game ahead of the fourth-place New York Yankees.

 

Two, the Blue Jays prevented the Yankees from adding to a position of need before the July 30 non-waiver trade deadline.

 

It’s no secret Yankees general manager Brian Cashman is shopping for an outfielder with Aaron Hicks sidelined by a wrist surgery. Last week, MLB.com’s Mark Feinsand identified Dickerson as a “low-cost” option for New York.

 

Dickerson is hitting .260 this season in with two home runs and 14 RBI in 62 games. He was an attractive trade target based on two facts. One, he’s shown power in the past, hitting a career-best 27 home runs in 2017. Two, he’s under contract for $9.5 million this season and will be a free agent after the 2021 World Series, making him a cost-effective short-term rental.

 

https://www.nj.com/yankees/2021/06/mlb-rumors-blue-jays-trade-with-marlins-for-yankees-potential-low-cost-outfield-option.html

[43211234]

Just in the past few weeks we've seen:

 

-Joe Panik DHing

-Joe Panik playing 1B

-Joe Panik the only lefty bat available on the bench late in games

 

 

There isn't a roster issue with Dickerson. The roster issue was only having Panik for those spots.

 

Go back to a 4-man bench if need be.

[Laika]

These type of WAR takes are what makes the old-timers cringe. WAR is about assigning a value for future performance predictions rather than assigning a value to what happened. RBIs and a guy hitting .700 with risp are mocked because clutch hitting and opportunity aren’t a controllable situation and it makes sense not to factor these in looking forward but their impact in a past situation is undeniable. Same with situational pitching, especially with RP. A guy with O WAR could’ve actually helped your team more than a guy with 1.5 WAR.

 

The exact opposite of this is true. Not only are you wrong, you are wrong and you have embarrassed yourself.

 

WAR is not predictive. It's about assigning a value to what happened, based on measurements of performance. A player who runs a hot BABIP will also run a hot WAR, that doesn't mean it will be sustainable.

[Angrioter]

Now Espinal is Panik, and Kevin Smith is Espinal

[Slade]

We might not be seeing much more of Rowdy when Dickerson is back which is a good thing.

[connorp]

The exact opposite of this is true. Not only are you wrong, you are wrong and you have embarrassed yourself.

 

WAR is not predictive. It's about assigning a value to what happened, based on measurements of performance. A player who runs a hot BABIP will also run a hot WAR, that doesn't mean it will be sustainable.

 

Hot babip doesn’t necessarily impact games like runs crossing, or not crossing, which I referenced

[TwistedLogic]

I'm so happy.

[TwistedLogic]

This could be our pen in a few weeks if no additional injury setbacks occur. It is by no means great, but it at least resembles a major league bullpen.

 

Romano

Merryweather

Borucki

Cimber

Castro

Chatwood

Mayza

Dolis

 

If those guys are healthy and play to the level they can, that's a borderline elite pen.

[Ryu In My House]

Great move. Get rid of Joe and get another lefty in the batting lineup at some point. Dickerson knows how to work a count and has some sneaky pop. Also who doesn't want a side throwing crafty reliever that's controllable for a few more years?

 

Looks like he is under control until 2025. Major score for Panik.

[connorp]

The exact opposite of this is true. Not only are you wrong, you are wrong and you have embarrassed yourself.

 

WAR is not predictive. It's about assigning a value to what happened, based on measurements of performance. A player who runs a hot BABIP will also run a hot WAR, that doesn't mean it will be sustainable.

 

Riddle me this Batman:

 

One game WC. Player A goes 4-4, scorches the ball all 4 times for 3 doubles and a single. No runs come from those innings.

Player B goes 2-4 with two somewhat excuse me singles but runners were on 2nd and 3rd for his singles and he has 4 RBI.

 

Players B’s team wins 4-2. Is it unfair to say Player B was more valuable in that game, even if saying Player A clearly played better (and had the deservingly better WAR)? It’s really not even that an extreme of an example. That’s the kind of stuff that plays out most games

 

WAR is predictive. Estimates how many runs shouldve been (/can be expected to in future) generated, not how many were

Edited June 29, 2021 by connorp

[Laika]

Riddle me this Batman:

 

One game WC. Player A goes 4-4, scorches the ball all 4 times for 3 doubles and a single. No runs come from those innings.

Player B goes 2-4 with two somewhat excuse me singles but runners were on 2nd and 3rd for his singles and he has 4 RBI.

 

Players B’s team wins 4-2. Is it unfair to say Player B was more valuable in that game, even if saying Player A clearly played better (and had the deservingly better WAR)? It’s really not even that an extreme of an example. That’s the kind of stuff that plays out most games

 

It's not my fault that you don't understand the difference between WAR and WPA. Do your own research, meat.

 

https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/wpa/

 

Now go look at your original post in this thread and think about it some more. What is the point of your post? Go get hired as a GM and bring in a bunch of guys with good WPA or large RBI totals in the past, and see how you do. Hint: the teams that focus on acquiring projected WAR will leave you in the dust. It's perfectly valid and sensible to say that acquiring Dickerson increases their projected future WAR by 1 win and that's a good thing. We can't predict his future WPA or RBI totals so what is the point in thinking about it? He could literally hit five walk off homers and be worth way more than one win in the win column, but that's random.

[connorp]

It's not my fault that you don't understand the difference between WAR and WPA. Do your own research, meat.

 

https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/wpa/

 

Now go look at your original post in this thread and think about it some more. What is the point of your post? Go get hired as a GM and bring in a bunch of guys with good WPA or large RBI totals in the past, and see how you do. Hint: the teams that focus on acquiring projected WAR will leave you in the dust. It's perfectly valid and sensible to say that acquiring Dickerson increases their projected future WAR by 1 win and that's a good thing. We can't predict his future WPA or RBI totals so what is the point in thinking about it? He could literally hit five walk off homers and be worth way more than one win in the win column, but that's random.

 

I don’t debate the wisdom in adding WAR to jockey for playoff position and I wouldn’t claim acquiring “clutch” players is wise. I simply respect the randomness of baseball and rejected the literal thinking of “if we missed the playoffs by 1 game, getting this guy would’ve put us over the top” in hindsight, based on WAR totals

[Bluebombers]

The end of an era,,,,Joe " never show " panik taking his professional services to Miami.

Way to pinch one off Shatkins....

[Krylian]

3 weeks minimum.

 

60 day IL it is then

[Krylian]

Montoyo must be hating this deal

[Laika]

I don’t debate the wisdom in adding WAR to jockey for playoff position and I wouldn’t claim acquiring “clutch” players is wise. I simply respect the randomness of baseball and rejected the literal thinking of “if we missed the playoffs by 1 game, getting this guy would’ve put us over the top” in hindsight, based on WAR totals

 

The rejection of that comes from ignorance though. Or an immature worshipping of randomness.

 

Imagine they did miss the playoffs by one game and they ran Joe Panik out there all year long and he ended up at -0.1 fWAR and -0.2 bWAR. Would you look at that as a missed opportunity, not upgrading on him with say a useful platoon player? Of course you would.

 

Or would you instead say, hey remember that walkoff single Panik got on May 22nd? WAR is wrong and he was worth a win this year, so it was fine to carry him. You can't expect a bench player to be worth two wins. No, of course you wouldn't. That would be retarded.

[L54]

Connor take the L here bud you’re not right

[Benito]

Maybe Montoya will be so upset Atkins traded away Panik, he'll quit in retaliation! One can dream.

[TwistedLogic]

Riddle me this Batman:

 

One game WC. Player A goes 4-4, scorches the ball all 4 times for 3 doubles and a single. No runs come from those innings.

Player B goes 2-4 with two somewhat excuse me singles but runners were on 2nd and 3rd for his singles and he has 4 RBI.

 

Players B’s team wins 4-2. Is it unfair to say Player B was more valuable in that game, even if saying Player A clearly played better (and had the deservingly better WAR)? It’s really not even that an extreme of an example. That’s the kind of stuff that plays out most games

 

WAR is predictive. Estimates how many runs shouldve been (/can be expected to in future) generated, not how many were

 

Player A had no control over the rest of his teammates s***ing the bed. Player A was more valuable and would rightfully gain more WAR from his game than Player B did.

 

The biggest mistake people make in understanding WAR is wondering scenarios exactly like you described, which is comparing Player A's performance with Player B on paper and concluding that Player B was more valuable in the vacuum of that single game.

 

Instead of looking at it like this:

 

"I'd rather Player B going 2-4 with four RBIs than Player A going 4-4 with no RBIs"

 

You should be looking at it like this:

 

"If I could have had Player A instead of Player B in those exact same scenarios, which guy would I rather have on my team?"

 

The answer is wrapped in your own question. With men on 2nd and 3rd, you would much rather have Player A than Player B because Player A's scorching doubles likely have a much higher chance of helping your team than Player B's excuse-me singles if given the exact same game situations.

 

Here's an extreme example to get that same point across:

 

In Game 4 of the 2018 World Series, as part of his World Series MVP campaign, Steve Pearce hit a game-tying solo home run off of Kenley Jansen. In the next inning, he came up with three men on and drove a bases-clearing double to put the Red Sox ahead 8-4. But if you could go back before those two plate appearances and trade Steve Pearce for Mike Trout and have Trout take those at-bats in his place, would you? If you're a sane human being with a functional IQ, the answer to that question is yes, you would. Because regardless of what Pearce did do in that situation, there is a much higher chance of Trout getting a hit there than Pearce.

 

A good talent evaluator in sports is aiming for the highest percentage of success in every situation, devoid of emotional, hard-to-quantify and confirmation bias-driven things like clutch factor.

[AMS528]

So I'm not a fan of Panik at all, but people definitely get too up in arms about a guy like him. He could have played a little less for sure, but lots of teams in baseball have one or two players you could point to who should play less. The Rays have Mike Brosseau who's played even more than Panik. You try to improve that spot, but it's not exactly unique.

 

This is a good upgrade at the margins though.

[Benito]

Brosseau 0.8 war vs Panik -0.3 war. Panik should not be rostered on a contending team, let alone get as much playing time as he has. Brosseau is a good IF bench guy, even with his poor bat this year.

[connorp]

Player A had no control over the rest of his teammates s***ing the bed. Player A was more valuable and would rightfully gain more WAR from his game than Player B did.

 

The biggest mistake people make in understanding WAR is wondering scenarios exactly like you described, which is comparing Player A's performance with Player B on paper and concluding that Player B was more valuable in the vacuum of that single game.

 

Instead of looking at it like this:

 

"I'd rather Player B going 2-4 with four RBIs than Player A going 4-4 with no RBIs"

 

You should be looking at it like this:

 

"If I could have had Player A instead of Player B in those exact same scenarios, which guy would I rather have on my team?"

 

The answer is wrapped in your own question. With men on 2nd and 3rd, you would much rather have Player A than Player B because Player A's scorching doubles likely have a much higher chance of helping your team than Player B's excuse-me singles if given the exact same game situations.

 

Here's an extreme example to get that same point across:

 

In Game 4 of the 2018 World Series, as part of his World Series MVP campaign, Steve Pearce hit a game-tying solo home run off of Kenley Jansen. In the next inning, he came up with three men on and drove a bases-clearing double to put the Red Sox ahead 8-4. But if you could go back before those two plate appearances and trade Steve Pearce for Mike Trout and have Trout take those at-bats in his place, would you? If you're a sane human being with a functional IQ, the answer to that question is yes, you would. Because regardless of what Pearce did do in that situation, there is a much higher chance of Trout getting a hit there than Pearce.

 

A good talent evaluator in sports is aiming for the highest percentage of success in every situation, devoid of emotional, hard-to-quantify and confirmation bias-driven things like clutch factor.

 

Well, assuming Player A and Player B’s game was fair to their skill set, of course for the next game I’d rather have Player A on my team. But in determining the MVP of a game, series, or even a season…do you use the outcome of a game to determine value? It’s an interesting question, don’t think there’s a wrong answer. As of now, traditionalist thought wins out irl

[Dick_Pole]

We can celebrate that one game Panik did something useful without getting into a long discussion about it. Was he absolutely, completely useless? No. Any player with a batting average higher than .000 will eventually do something meaningful. Was it necessary for the Jays to upgrade the position and did they? Yes. A playoff team can't be carrying negative WAR players on a short bench.

[Slade]

So I'm not a fan of Panik at all, but people definitely get too up in arms about a guy like him. He could have played a little less for sure, but lots of teams in baseball have one or two players you could point to who should play less. The Rays have Mike Brosseau who's played even more than Panik. You try to improve that spot, but it's not exactly unique.

 

This is a good upgrade at the margins though.

 

I agree, I didn't loathe Panik but he was playing too much just cause he was a LHH.

[RobinThicc]