11/1 - Can We Move On To The Offseason Yet?
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 1, 2009 5:00 AM EDT
in Daily Links
45 comments
Hopefully everyone set their clocks back and you aren't reading this as a way to pass the time because you woke up too early and can't get back to sleep. But hey, you're reading this, so let's get to the links.
Creating Obscure Red Sox Shirts - Sox Tea Party
I need to look into getting myself a Jed shirt...
Chips Are in Place for Adrian Gonzalez Trade to Red Sox - NESN.com
No new info here - not even a suggested package. Even the worst bloggers come up with a package, as ridiculous as most of them end up being (MDC + Lugo get it done, becuz they can't even ask four that from the Sox!!!).
Runs Created: A First Step - Intro to Sabermetrics 101
Today’s Friday lecture will discuss the first of many steps taken to estimate a number of runs. Bill James’ Runs Created, initially published in an early version of the classic Bill James Historical Abstract (in Dan Fox’s explanation, he has it as the 1979 version), was one of the first run estimation models and is likely the most well known. As a result, it will be the first of a few run estimators that we’ll look into here.
Has A-Rod lost his postseason magic? - Bleacher Report
IT'S NOT MAGIC - it's just random variance in performance output.
After the jump, Forbes needs to retake Statistics, Fire Brand gets another prospect interview, and the Padres are taking our guys.
America's Safest Cities: America's Best Sports Fans - Beyond the Box Score
Even with the ludicrous methodology, it's hilarious how well the two correlate. Oh, and apparently, my area of residence gives the consistency of the Filter's publishing at risk. So, yeah...
Tim Federowicz: Rising up the prospect charts - Fire Brand of the American League
Can't wait until we have Wagner, Expo, and Fed-X (possibly a few more?) ready all at once. Hopefully, we can take our pick and reap the benefits of other teams needing catchers.
Hazen interviews with Padres - Extra Bases
Uh-oh, Hoyer's getting greedy. How does he ever expect to even get on the phone with Theo if he doesn't worship the Sox?!?!
Comments, links, comparing the advantages and consequences of a drawn out season - whatever floats your boat.
0 recs |
45 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Few more links
The 2010 Red Sox ZIPS Projections are in: Always fun to check them.
Decision looms for Casey Kelly: He’s trying to make it sound like a hard decision, but really Casey, is it that hard?
The Padres send out a ticket brochure to former season ticket holders for 2010 — and there isn’t a single photo anywhere in there of Adrian Gonzalez? Hmmm…
"That was a lot of fun… You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don’t want to do is hit a home run. That’s a rally-killer." Jeff Francoeur
by radiohix on Nov 1, 2009 7:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not sure how I'd feel about the brochure as a Padres fan...
I mean, either your team sucks balls at marketing, or you’re about to lose the best player off your team.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 1, 2009 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If I was a Padres fan, the loss of Gonzo would make me less likely to go to games.
However, it would give the team a bright future. Trading him might be the best move for the franchinse right now, unlikely as it may be.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 1, 2009 2:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One more link
The worst top 10 prospect list you could find: Fuentes at 9? Really? and Almanzar at 10 (Have this guy ever heard of Rizzo or Exposito or Lin or…Ok I’ll stop)? Heck, he’s even putting guys from single A before Austin Jackson in the MFY prospects list!
"That was a lot of fun… You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don’t want to do is hit a home run. That’s a rally-killer." Jeff Francoeur
by radiohix on Nov 1, 2009 7:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Bowden and Taz really shouldn't be that high.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 1, 2009 11:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why not?
I don’t think either will be major elague stars, but I think both will be productive major league players. Any major league production from a homegrown player, especially a starting pitcher, is extremely valuable.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 1:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like Bowden being in the top 10 to begin with, especially not in the top 5.
He has a bad delivery and didn’t pitch great this year, with lesser stuff than he should have.
Taz… meh. He’s okay where he is, but he should probably be a little lower.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 1, 2009 8:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tazawa is fine where he is on that list
I think both Bowden and Tazawa would be in any Sox Top 10 list, mostly due to their average profiles and closeness to the majors. I think Tazawa should be a bit higher than Bowden, but not by much. As much of a sucker I am for pure potential, there are instances where it’s okay to grade out someone who isn’t going to be superstar but should have a good chance to be a regular up in the bigs in a Top 10 list. Tazawa is hard to judge based on his short stint in the majors, especially considering that was his first year in the US, and considering what he did in the minors he had a pretty successful first year. He’s not an ace, but if he learns to command his pitches better he could be a decent back-end guy on some teams, and that’s worth something. Bowden is an entirely different story.
DFA Beckett
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 1, 2009 10:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I grade only on potential, so there's where we'd have some issues.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 1, 2009 11:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You shouldn't
The closer a guy gets to the majors the less likely he is to bust in the minors. There are plenty of high potential guys who fizzle out in A or AA.
by Gnick on Nov 2, 2009 11:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup.
Grading only on potential is kinda nutty. You have to look at expected value. A guy with an 80% chance at being a solid starting SS (Jed Lowrie) is better than a guy with a 5% chance at being an All Star (Almanazar).
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 3, 2009 12:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Potential was definitely not the word I was looking for there.
Blame the candy. :) Anyways, I factor in chance to make it, but I don’t immediately give the guy in AAA higher ranking compared to a similar talent in AA or A ball.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 3, 2009 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ohh, I see what you mean. And I agree. Casey Kelly is probably number one on my list right now.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 3, 2009 7:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wierd list.
I can deal with Fuentes at 9, but Almanazar is waaay too high. Sub .600 OPS at Lowell and Greenville this year, but he is still only 18. Soxprospects.com has him at 38, btw.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed....I don't know about Bowden anymore.
What is this going for? Major League possible career? All-Star potential? Etc…?
And I’m sorry. Once Casey Kelly commits to becoming a full time pitcher, he should rank higher than Lars.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Nov 1, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah.
Kelly would be my number one. Lars somewhere around 4 or 5 behind Kelly, Westmoreland and Reddick. I also might put Iglesias in the top 10, but I’m a sucker for the new guys.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Another link:
From Let’s Go Tribe: what its like to root for a small market team in the broken MLB economic system.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 1:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I can understand the obstacles that come with having a small market.
That is an excuse that is used too much in Cleveland because the franchinse fails in other areas. For example, they don’t evaluate and develop talent very well. Earlier this year , I was listenting to the radio, and the show recapped the previous drafts. The Indians had the chance to draft players like Joba, Pedroia, and Ells(I think) but did not. That’s why all the trades occured because they needed to replenish the farm.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 1, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats not why the trades occured.
The Indians could not afford to resign those guys in the free agent market. They do not have the money to compete for top free agents.
In order for a team like the Indians to compete they have to be perfect. They cannot make a mistake with money or they will be screwed. This is what happened to the Indians; they spent money to keep Travis Hafner and now are financially crippled for the next few years. The window of opportunity with these teams is tiny. The Indians had a few years where they competed. Now they have to trade their best players and start again. They will be lucky to compete again in the next 5 years. The Red Sox can afford to make mistakes. The Red Sox can afford to compete every year. Most teams cannot.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
From what I heard, they could have kept one of Lee and V-mart.
Why wouldn’t they pick up the options and try to win next year? They could always trade at the deadline next year. My point is that the farm was bad, so they needed to get as much as possible. There are restrictions because of the market size, but the owner really doesn’t wan to spend anymore, at least not now.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 1, 2009 5:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Indians have one of the best farm systems in baseball. Keith Law ranked them 5th going into this season (ahead of the Sox). This doesn’t even take into account that the economic system in acquiring amateur talent drastically favors the wealthier clubs.
The owner does not want to spend money because he is not making money. You cannot expect these owners to lose money every year. The Indians increased their payroll to make a run the last few years. The run is now over, so now they have to decrease payroll and hope their highly ranked prospects work out. Thats how it works for small rocket teams.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 7:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Law is not the most reliable source.
The Indians did have one of the best systems in which Sizemore, V-mart, and Lee came up in. How many of thier minor leaguers were drafted by the Indians, and not brought in from trades? My point wasn’t really about the trades; it was that the Indians could improve on other things because they have a small market.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 1, 2009 7:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well they spent time in the Indian's system
but it’s worth mentioning that both sizemore and lee were drafted and spent their first couple of years in the minors in the Expos system- then traded by the brilliant Minaya for a year of Bartolo Colon- but in any case, not the Indian’s draft
by wolf9309 on Nov 2, 2009 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously their farm system benefits from trading away stars. You said they did not have a good farm system, which is obviously untrue. But you are right that for a small market team to succeed, they must excel at player development. They must be absolutely perfect with the money they dole out in extensions and to free agents. The Red Sox (and many other teams) do not have to be perfect. We can make mistakes. We won a World Series in 2004 with like 2 guys that we drafted. That would be impossible for most teams in the league. It is an uneven playing field. That much is clear.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 2, 2009 2:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
wasn't always that way
I’m not sure who left, but the Indians used to draft & develop some very good talent, like the guys they’ve traded away the past 2 years. To think that in 2007 they were one win from the World Series. You’re right B&B, the problem is not the MLB economic system. It is about the choices they have made- just like the bad choices the Red Sox used to make before the new ownership group.
"simul justus et peccator"
by cavman on Nov 1, 2009 3:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you guys really think that the economic system in the MLB is fair? Really?
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair
or not, there is only one difference between the way it has always been and now. That is the Yankees. Before 2003 the overall distribution of payrolls was basically always the same in distribution. Now it is still like that with one outlier that exceeds all other payrolls by an enormous amount (this year it was a 39% gap). I don’t know if it is unfair, but it has changed.
by Buzzy on Nov 1, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Yankees have certainly pushed the limits.
After luxury tax payments, they will have spent almost twice what the Sox spent this year. They are operating on a different level than everyone else. I don’t know how, but baseball has to fix this at some point.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 1, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No way should one team be able to sign the top 3 FA in one year.
They had money coming off the books, but that is still ridiculous.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 1, 2009 5:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is an easy fix for this
without a salary cap. Put rules in place only allow a certain number of type-As to be
by Buzzy on Nov 1, 2009 7:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oops
premature post.
If the MLB put rules in place that limited the number of type -A’s that could be signed to something like 3 over 2 years or 3 over 3 years, and only if the team has 1st round picks to give in compensation, then I think this would make things more fair. You would need to be strategic, even if you had big $$. For example, even ignoring the fact that the Jays got screwed in compensation over Burnett, the Yankees would have “maxed out” on the FAs by going for their haul last year and would be out of the Holliday/Bay sweepstakes for this year as the price for their 0.5 billion dollars in FA spending last year.
by Buzzy on Nov 1, 2009 7:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 1, 2009 7:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Business
As much as everyone hates how the Yankees can buy every player and as much as no one will admit it MLB is still a business. And in a business the most successful teams have the money to buy more players, and i still think they should be able to. If teams can make the money while signing all the big players i think its fair, as much as i do hate the Yanks
by cnubsbl16 on Nov 1, 2009 11:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True, in a way.
It would be cool to see every owner forced to budget a uniform amount of money each season, so that only talent and luck would affect the results. Problem is that the owners would go beserk – some would be mad that they’re losing a competitive advantage, while others wouldn’t want to pony up the money.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 1, 2009 11:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the bigger impediment is the players. A salary cap would limit their earnings potential.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 2, 2009 3:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 2, 2009 7:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would love to see that too….but it has been too long and the owners have been doing what they are doing now forever. There would be total outrage if they changed it
by cnubsbl16 on Nov 2, 2009 7:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“Success” in baseball is partially dependent on having money; that is the long and short of it. The Yankees produce more revenue because of their market. Of course their success helps, but in many markets it would not matter if they won the World Series every single year; these markets simply do not have the capacity to produce that much money.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Nov 2, 2009 3:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no
Maybe MLB should go to a revenue sharing type of thing that the NFL does.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 1, 2009 5:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pretty sure they do.
And some of the cheap owners pocket the extra money (Marlins).
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 1, 2009 8:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
this is true
more on that here: http://www.bnet.com/2403-13502_23-210897.html
by wolf9309 on Nov 2, 2009 11:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Then it doesn't SEEM to have much effect.
When I hear about the NFL on TV, I get the feeling that it’s system is the greatest thing ever.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 2, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
MLB's had more parity of late.
Drugs showed that in one of his lecture-comments a few weeks/months ago, IIRC.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 2, 2009 7:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the new ownership of the indians probably changed that.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
by BoldandBrash on Nov 1, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
