jmomcc

How much could the jays change the park dimensions? i was thinking in the comerica series that it really suited the traits of our team. Maybe similar for coors.

You would think with the chaos around their franchise with the sale, now would be a good time to hire off them?

It would probably be cheaper to get the people who develop the pitching. But yea, all the relievers they sold (i think there were 5?) look good. .

Yea, but that's the same deal. Why are we caring so much about finding ways to get value two years from now when we are good now. If i was projecting right now, i'd say we probably won't be a playoff team next year by projections. Why would you not maximize winning this year?

Its not just the variability. Its the opporunity cost. If we had 100 units of trade capital, we spent like 50 of them on the next 5 years. We don't know if we will be good those years. 1.5 WAR of good reliever is intensely useful when good and not so much when you aren't. We could spend all 100 units this year or mostly this year, and be better this year. We could have three relievers, a starter and a good bat. The whole thing is more sounds smart than actually smart to me. Also, money is cheaper for us. In real terms if a team has half our budget, then we can spend twice as much as them for the same value. Prospects are the same price, which means i'd be more willing to spend money and less willing to spend prospects. That's essentially what the dodgers gm was talking about when trying to get as much business done in the offseason as possible. We seem to be the opposite. We love paying for multiple years of control at the exact most expensive time to do so. The signings we should be making is from twins pitching dev. They obviously know what they are doing.

There is zero evidence that Guerroro has ever tried to do so. He has been essentially the same hitter the entire time (which is excellent). The results mostly depend on luck. Teams have taught hitters to go get the ball more. Its just not something the jays emphasize. If anything we emphasize the other way.

Dominuez has that in him. It tends to come with great stuff. Not sure why he throwing the splitter to a rightie though.

You responded twice to the same comment.

4% vs 7% swinging strike. Just over 80% contact rate vs 90% contact. Roden has more power potential because his max ev is 112mph, well above Kwan. So, if a team can get him lifting the ball more... that seems like a good player. I didn't say he would defend like Kwan. I said he can play above average corner outfield defense. That's it. We'll see. Edit: maybe he just said he liked the fastball not specifically the shape?

Roden looks a bit like a potato. Much safer.

Loperfido has definitely improved his stock. He's also very handsome which helps. My wife immediately clocked him lol.

France coming in represents a bit of an opportunity in triple A. If he sucks and one of our right handed bats in triple A can get white hot over the next month, they might get a shot in september.

What is a slap hitter statistically? I've never really tried to quantify it but he seems above the line to me.

I really think the bat will play with Roden. Like Kwan has run a sub 3% barrell rate in the majors and his bat plays. I just think he will walk and not strike out, and has enough pop to play in a corner. He also is athletic enough to be an above average defender. Over seven years of control, you'll get a smattering of 1.5 -3 WAR seasons. That's valuable to me. i listened to some atkins interviews and he said he loves his fastball shape which is interesting. That makes me like it a bit more. I still philosophically just don't like betting on relievers which this is. There is no fallback from this. The velo ticks back, there is generally no back up like you have with a starter. So, the range of outcomes just includes alot more 'DFAed well before 5 years' than with position players and starters. I also feel like the deadline is the most expensive time to buy relievers. So its specifically the time when you don't want to pay for control. edit: also the opportunity cost. I just heard on the radio that we gave up 4 of the top 11 prospects traded on the day. Could we have got better for this year with those prospects, rather than spending some of that capital over the next 5 years? However, Atkins clearly loves him. He says he's followed him for years. Loves the fastball shape. So, whatever., let's see what happens.

That's so hard to do for extended periods of time. Maybe in september?

He has so much track record, yea.

He had great stuff, lots of control and he cost more than is typical for relievers who don't strike guys out at the deadline. Its not a perfect comparison because he cost less but the arguments sound the same to me. Varland's big saving grace is that he might start. But he also cost a good bit more.

If they were sure fire studs, this would be an insane overpay. Why would you trade surefire studs? I think its just a normal overpay. I don't know if Varland will suddenly turn into a pumpkin but i do know that it is pretty common for relievers to turn into pumpkins and its really hard to tell before hand if they will or not. The range of outcomes is pretty massive. Also, there is absolutely no way he is an elite closer striking out 8.6 per 9. We could tweak him but its always hard to see that happening when the twins are already so good at that. We did this before. We paid a high price for zach pop because he had control. That control was not relevant in the end. Yes, Groshans was a bust, but we could have traded him for something else. Pop also had great stuff. edit: also we could have got more swing and miss this year for a smaller price. I feel like we prioritized control over immediate this year impact. I would much have preferred two nasty rental than one controlled for a long time when who knows with relievers.

Roden isn't a slap hitter. i'm fine with investing in the bullpen, i think they overpaid in this instance because i don't believe 5 years of control is actually relevant for most relievers. Especially ones with half a season of track record. Treating reliever control as the same as starter and position player control is stupid, its a mistake.

That's not quite what i'm saying. I'm saying we paid a lot for control of an asset that is inherently more variable than other types of asset. We overvalue reliever control essentially. Unless someone is absolutely elite. I think what people really disagree with is that roden and rojas are a high price. But they really are two of the better prospects traded today.

You referenced stuff plus before so you know baker has great stuff, but you are pretending to be dumb and judging a reliever by era? And i'm obtuse? Lol

i think roden has at least one 3 WAR season in him but we'll see.

Griffin Jax strikes out 14/9 and is possibly the best reliever in baseball. I would also be willing to pay full price for that. They also paid 2 million for Baker who has fantastic stuff. We paid like what... 7 times that for Varland. The yankees literally today paid almost nothing for bednar. Today.

That's fair but just buy rentals and then spend in free agency. Because there is also no guarantee that Varland with one year of track record is going to be good next year either. Or the year after.

Which of the big pitching org teams routinely trade for relievers with long term control paying full price?