Right-handed Power Bat

[Babypowder]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I hadn't checked fangraphs recently, rWAR has him at a robust .2.

On the bright side, he's faster than Davis.

Paying market value for 1.5 wins and getting 1.5 wins is already poor business practice in my view. Paying market value for 1.5 wins and getting 0 wins is what I personally would call horrible.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Babypowder said:

Paying market value for 1.5 wins and getting 1.5 wins is already poor business practice in my view. Paying market value for 1.5 wins and getting 0 wins is what I personally would call horrible.

I'm certainly not disagreeing.  I don't get it when folks shrug and think it's fine when the O's get around the free agent value out of free agent contracts.  First off they should strive to do better than that and secondly it often doesn't include the draft pick involved.  If a second round comp pick is worth ~3m what is the pick they gave up to sign Davis or Trumbo worth?

[Babypowder]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I'm certainly not disagreeing.  I don't get it when folks shrug and think it's fine when the O's get around the free agent value out of free agent contracts.  First off they should strive to do better than that and secondly it often doesn't include the draft pick involved.  If a second round comp pick is worth ~3m what is the pick they gave up to sign Davis or Trumbo worth?

Right, I'd also argue that when you get below league average production (<2 wins) there are always players available in that range for far less than market value. The closer you get to replacement level the less sense it makes to pay the standard $ per WAR price. Market value is fine at the top end, much less so on the low end. It's easier to find surplus value at the bottom.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Babypowder said:

Right, I'd also argue that when you get below league average production (<2 wins) there are always players available in that range for far less than market value. The closer you get to replacement level the less sense it makes to pay the standard $ per WAR price. Market value is fine at the top end, much less so on the low end. It's easier to find surplus value at the bottom.

Yes and no.  I think that some value exists if you are a "proven" producer at the 1.5 or so level, compared to a player that swings from (-1)-(2).  And of course we don't see people get market value at the top end (Trout isn't getting 80M a year).

[Frobby]

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I hadn't checked fangraphs recently, rWAR has him at a robust .2.

On the bright side, he's faster than Davis.

I hadn't realized Trumbo was having such a poor June (.656 OPS).     It's interesting that his BA and OBP are virtually identical to last year, but his homers (hence SLG) are down drastically.    I did not expect him to hit 47 homers this year, but I wasn't expecting him to hit 22, either.  Hopefully he finds his HR swing soon.   

[Babypowder]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes and no.  I think that some value exists if you are a "proven" producer at the 1.5 or so level, compared to a player that swings from (-1)-(2).  And of course we don't see people get market value at the top end (Trout isn't getting 80M a year).

Are there even guys who are consistently slightly below average? I would think that talent level would almost guarantee swings between below and slightly above replacement. Mark Trumbo falls closer to the second group you described. Maybe Nick Markakis?

Right, no one gets paid market value at that elite level. I was meaning more in the 4-5 win range. You can be happy paying near market price for that level of production, I would think.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I hadn't realized Trumbo was having such a poor June (.656 OPS).     It's interesting that his BA and OBP are virtually identical to last year, but his homers (hence SLG) are down drastically.    I did not expect him to hit 47 homers this year, but I wasn't expecting him to hit 22, either.  Hopefully he finds his HR swing soon.   

I think his late game heroics blind us a bit to his overall struggles.  On the bright side we all know he is a much stronger player in the second half of the season.

Anyone else think 23 games in the outfield is way too many now that they don't have a designated DH on the team?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Babypowder said:

Are there even guys who are consistently slightly below average? I would think that talent level would almost guarantee swings between below and slightly above replacement. Mark Trumbo falls closer to the second group you described. Maybe Nick Markakis?

Right, no one gets paid market value at that elite level. I was meaning more in the 4-5 win range. You can be happy paying near market price for that level of production, I would think.

Sure, someone like Nick.  The point is there is some value in being able to predict value.

[Babypowder]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure, someone like Nick.  The point is there is some value in being able to predict value.

Absolutely, I understand the point and I agree with what you are saying. I'm just curious now how many actual guys there are that you can do that with. I'll have to look into it, it seems like it would be pretty rare to have a guy who is consistently just sort of bad.