Jump to content

Gallardo - Roch: deal is DONE (signed)


weams

Recommended Posts

One thing I don't understand in the midst of all of this, is the impact of Gallardo on a potential deal with Fowler. Why would not signing Gallardo make them change their mind about Fowler?

Do the O's feel that Gallardo was worth losing #14 over, but Fowler isn't? My thinking is quite the opposite. If you're willing to give up the pick for Gallardo, how are you then NOT willing to give up the same exact pick for Fowler?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 873
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Sort of reminds me of the Markakis scenario, ie. having one offer, evaluating the neck situation and going back to a lesser term (years). If this thing took this long to settle for Gallardo, I wonder if a restructure attempt works more in the O's favor (getting it done here as Spring Training has arrived) or does it tick off Gallardo enough to say, "enough, I'm exploring other options."

How do you pay him and give up the pick if the arm looks hurt though? You can't go shorter on the deal, and how much less onthe money will he take? Three years at 12 million? If he has a serious arm concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I don't understand in the midst of all of this, is the impact of Gallardo on a potential deal with Fowler. Why would not signing Gallardo make them change their mind about Fowler?

Do the O's feel that Gallardo was worth losing #14 over, but Fowler isn't? My thinking is quite the opposite. If you're willing to give up the pick for Gallardo, how are you then NOT willing to give up the same exact pick for Fowler?

Roch had said previously that they would give it up for Fowler even without Gallardo. Time will tell, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

You have no idea what his MRI looks like and the warning signs it may display. When Balfour failed the O's physical, he wasn't coming off of any recent injuries either.

It would not be surprising at all to think that Gallardo's arm may be deteriorating. This is a guy who has seen his velocity on a STEADY decline over the past several seasons and he's not even 30 yet.

If you look at Balfour's splits in 2013 he had a poor second half that some folks saw as a potential red flag. Just like Gallardo.

Might even have been some of the same people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I don't understand in the midst of all of this, is the impact of Gallardo on a potential deal with Fowler. Why would not signing Gallardo make them change their mind about Fowler?

Do the O's feel that Gallardo was worth losing #14 over, but Fowler isn't? My thinking is quite the opposite. If you're willing to give up the pick for Gallardo, how are you then NOT willing to give up the same exact pick for Fowler?

Which is better keep both picks sign Alvarez and play Trumbo in RF or lose the #14 pick and sign Fowler?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you pay him and give up the pick if the arm looks hurt though? You can't go shorter on the deal, and how much less onthe money will he take? Three years at 12 million? If he has a serious arm concern.

I wonder if it's coming down to the arm shows the same wear as they've seen in other medicals (Roch or someone mentioned how they knew his medical history going in), but there's a higher res imaging on the way that will see with more clarity if the wear they were aware of is deeper, any inflamation, etc. I'm probably stating the obvious as I'm prone to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to know what our team is going to look like. It's almost March.

And I feel as though the main job of beat writers is to keep the fans informed and aware of what's going on concerning the team, and I don't think ours are doing a good job right now. They nonchalantly dropped this on is and then went straight to how Jeff Beliveau is doing. No offense meant to him, but I feel like this is a bigger story.

Maybe there is no news right now, but I'm going to bet that a decision is made at some point today. I find it hard to believe that there isn't, unless they are restructuring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is better keep both picks sign Alvarez and play Trumbo in RF or lose the #14 pick and sign Fowler?

Personally, I'd choose option #1 (Sign Alvarez)... but I think both are defensible. Love the idea of Fowler at the top of our lineup and think his D would translate well to a corner spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I don't understand in the midst of all of this, is the impact of Gallardo on a potential deal with Fowler. Why would not signing Gallardo make them change their mind about Fowler?

Do the O's feel that Gallardo was worth losing #14 over, but Fowler isn't? My thinking is quite the opposite. If you're willing to give up the pick for Gallardo, how are you then NOT willing to give up the same exact pick for Fowler?

I doubt it has much to do with the pick, as the difference between 14 and 28 is negligible. It's likely Fowler's price tag and term that makes them ultimately pass. Hopefully they could still get something done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




  • Posts

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...