Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Marlins Hope To Trade Stanton, Gordon, Prado


Mark68

Recommended Posts

Stanton would still be a fantastic add, but I'd be just as happy throwing a handful of prospects at Miami and getting one of Yelich or Stanton back, and taking the contracts of Gordon and Prado as well. Maybe even Ziegler or Tazawa. A lot less long term salary commitments, still saves Miami a ton of money, still addresses a lot of our needs. If Stanton is going to cost huge money and huge prospects, we may as well spread around the return so there is less risk of the one bad blow sinking the whole deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/20/2017 at 10:03 AM, Warfarin said:

All great points.  For the right player, I am not averse to pursuing a large deal.

With Stanton though, we already have two significant right handed power hitters in our lineup (Trout, Upton).  If we really wanted to commit ourselves to a long-term deal, we might as well wait until next offseason and go all-in with Harper, who would fit between Trout and Upton perfectly in the lineup.

I wouldn’t do it for all the reasons I already stated about long-term contracts, but if I were to pick one player who I would opt for, it’d be Harper over Stanton because I feel he is a better fit given the current team we have.

Harper is going to be far more expensive than Stanton.  Stanton is reasonably priced for his performance and the market.  Harper is going to go for 40 million and a record breaking deal (until Trout breaks it with his next contract).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/20/2017 at 10:26 AM, eaterfan said:

I hate looking at baseball this way. Everywhere that the team isn't #1 in baseball can be upgraded. This is a list of the most easily upgradeable positions for the Angels. It's easier to go from -1.0 WAR to +1.00 WAR generally, but it's not like you improve the team any more doing that than from going from 4 WAR to 6 WAR.

too much emphasis on WAR.  You do know 4 WAR to 6 WAR doesn't really mean you get two more wins don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Harper is going to be far more expensive than Stanton.  Stanton is reasonably priced for his performance and the market.  Harper is going to go for 40 million and a record breaking deal (until Trout breaks it with his next contract).

I think if Harper gets $40 million a year it will be closer to an 8 year contract.  I actually think he will get something along the lines of 10 years $350 million.  I am not sure we are really going to see us get past the $40 million annual salary except possibly for Trout, and to me that is a big maybe.  Just my thoughts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

It means statistical analysis says your team is now more likely to win more games.  So I'm not sure what your point is.

The guys says there is no difference in -1 and 1 War compared to  2 and 4 war.  I buy the stat in comparing players.   I don't buy the fact it improves your win.  First of all statistics are based on past work and not future.  Second if I am not mistaken war figures are compared to position played.  I don't believe simply b6 adding our congregated War of our team will predict our wins  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, stormngt said:

The guys says there is no difference in -1 and 1 War compared to  2 and 4 war.  I buy the stat in comparing players.   I don't buy the fact it improves your win.  First of all statistics are based on past work and not future.  Second if I am not mistaken war figures are compared to position played.  I don't believe simply b6 adding our congregated War of our team will predict our wins  

Is there anyone anywhere adding up WAR to predict actual future wins?

Still not sure what point you are trying to make.  Roughly speaking if you replace a -1 WAR with a 1 WAR, you probably have about the same impact on wins and losses as you would if you replaced a 2 WAR with a 4.

It's kind of the point of WAR to be able to make that kind of observation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Is there anyone anywhere adding up WAR to predict actual future wins?

Still not sure what point you are trying to make.  Roughly speaking if you replace a -1 WAR with a 1 WAR, you probably have about the same impact on wins and losses as you would if you replaced a 2 WAR with a 4.

It's kind of the point of WAR to be able to make that kind of observation.

 

It sure sounded like it

 

"-1 to 1 War is equivalent  to 4War to 6 War"

If you don't understand what I am saying your not 0aying attention to the quote I was responding to".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, stormngt said:

It sure sounded like it

 

"-1 to 1 War is equivalent  to 4War to 6 War"

If you don't understand what I am saying your not 0aying attention to the quote I was responding to".

Do you know what WAR is? WAR is basically comparing the production of an individual player (removing as much context as possible) on offense, defense, and pitching. And it does correlate to wins. If you add up the individual player WAR on a team it will correlate pretty well with its win total. But you have to keep in mind the baseline isn't 0. A team with all replacement level players would win between 50-60 games. That's the baseline.

Beyond that, it does factor out positional differences. And if you were to move a player their defensive WAR wouldn't shift that much except for players on the extreme at either end of the spectrum. Example, an average CF moving to LF loses opportunities to record outs and create WAR compared to when he was in center, but will make more plays than the average left fielder.

But as to your next point, WAR isn't predictive - that's true. It's a counting stat. It's effected by playing time and the defensive metrics use one year samples. That's not great for predicting the future. This is especially true for corner outfielders who might not get many Fielding chances. That being said, I was just speaking hypothetically. I'm not saying Stanton or Harper are a 6 WAR player every year. I was just saying that the difference in games a team wins with a 6 WAR player and a 4 WAR player is the same as between a -1 WAR player and a 1 WAR player.

But if you are going to argue that WAR isn't predictive then don't use it to argue that a -1 WAR player can be improved by a 1 WAR player. Either WAR is a useful tool for predictions or it isn't.

And finally, because roster spots are limited, as are lineup spots, higher WAR players are even more valuable. A 10 WAR Trout is worth far more than 10 1 WAR players. Guys at the far end of the bell curve are rare. We're lucky to have one (or two if Simmons plays like last year). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eaterfan said:

Do you know what WAR is? WAR is basically comparing the production of an individual player (removing as much context as possible) on offense, defense, and pitching. And it does correlate to wins. If you add up the individual player WAR on a team it will correlate pretty well with its win total. But you have to keep in mind the baseline isn't 0. A team with all replacement level players would win between 50-60 games. That's the baseline.

Beyond that, it does factor out positional differences. And if you were to move a player their defensive WAR wouldn't shift that much except for players on the extreme at either end of the spectrum. Example, an average CF moving to LF loses opportunities to record outs and create WAR compared to when he was in center, but will make more plays than the average left fielder.

But as to your next point, WAR isn't predictive - that's true. It's a counting stat. It's effected by playing time and the defensive metrics use one year samples. That's not great for predicting the future. This is especially true for corner outfielders who might not get many Fielding chances. That being said, I was just speaking hypothetically. I'm not saying Stanton or Harper are a 6 WAR player every year. I was just saying that the difference in games a team wins with a 6 WAR player and a 4 WAR player is the same as between a -1 WAR player and a 1 WAR player.

But if you are going to argue that WAR isn't predictive then don't use it to argue that a -1 WAR player can be improved by a 1 WAR player. Either WAR is a useful tool for predictions or it isn't.

And finally, because roster spots are limited, as are lineup spots, higher WAR players are even more valuable. A 10 WAR Trout is worth far more than 10 1 WAR players. Guys at the far end of the bell curve are rare. We're lucky to have one (or two if Simmons plays like last year). 

Agree with this comparative..."

And finally, because roster spots are limited, as are lineup spots, higher WAR players are even more valuable. A 10 WAR Trout is worth far more than 10 1 WAR players. Guys at the far end of the bell curve are rare. We're lucky to have one (or two if Simmons plays like last year). "

Th

That was the point I was trying to make
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...