Brian Roberts trade rumors back on!

[Sports Guy]

Yeah I'd agree with that last comment. Just not that sherrill is worth LaPorta straight up.

If we package any two of Sherrill, Roberts, and Cabrera, I can see LaPorta being involved. Gamel is more likely though.

Of course he's not worth LaPorta straight up...But that doesn't mean some trade like that can't/won't happen.

How many trades have been made that you could say, no way a team would do that and then they go ahead and do it?

[PoorMike]

Didn't Melvin shoot down the rumors that they were interested in Roberts??

Yes, basically saying that MIL is scouting us because we play them.

I took KR's report on face value, but that makes more sense then them trading us prospects in order to get in the race.

[nadecir]

Do you really think GMs are going to say, we aren't going to go get Sherrill because he is a flyball pitcher?

Come on...They want saves and a good ERA...They clearly value those things much higher than gb/fb ratio.

Sometimes you don't give GMs enough credit. Most of these guys are pretty smart and look beyond the misleading statistics, especially the counting ones. Analyzing player performance is something these guys do for a living and they almost certainly go beyond saves and ERA.

All are making important decisions involving millions of dollars. A gb/fb ratio doesn't take a doctorate to understand. A lot of teams have research guys that specialize in sabermetrics on their payroll now.

Not to say that GMs don't regularly make bad decisions. But to say that a modern GM doesn't look at gb/fb ratios seems a bit naive to me.

For example, the Brewers' Gm, Doug Melvin, has Dave Lawson on his staff. Lawson is the Brewer's stats guru, and he is a Bill James devotee. He wrote a book in the 90's on sabermetrics called "Essential Baseball 1994: A Revolutionary New Method for Evaluating Major League Teams, Players, and Managers." I think Lawson might just know what a gb/fb ratio is and its importance in evaluating pitchers.

Here is an interview with Lawson from the Brewers:

http://www.brewcrewball.com/story/2006/4/14/1151/39437

[crawdad]

But far from the greatest prospect to ever be traded for a reliever, which LaPorta very possibly might be.

#3 in the org is a very good prospect, but nothing compared to top 10 in all of MLB.

Exactly. He is probably rated about a B- or so . . . LaPorta should be evaluated as an A- right now. There is a huge difference between the two. Inman is arguably a top 100 guy. Most have him slotted to the backend of that. Many think he winds up being a closer.

[Sports Guy]

Sometimes you don't give GMs enough credit. Most of these guys are pretty smart and look beyond the misleading statistics, especially the counting ones. Analyzing player performance is something these guys do for a living and they almost certainly go beyond saves and ERA.

All are making important decisions involving millions of dollars. A gb/fb ratio doesn't take a doctorate to understand. A lot of teams have research guys that specialize in sabermetrics on their payroll now.

Not to say that GMs don't regularly make bad decisions. But to say that a modern GM doesn't look at gb/fb ratios seems a bit naive to me.

For example, the Brewers' Gm, Doug Melvin, has Dave Lawson on his staff. Lawson is the Brewer's stats guru, and he is a Bill James devotee. He wrote a book in the 90's on sabermetrics called "Essential Baseball 1994: A Revolutionary New Method for Evaluating Major League Teams, Players, and Managers." I think Lawson might just know what a gb/fb ratio is and its importance in evaluating pitchers.

Here is an interview with Lawson from the Brewers:

http://www.brewcrewball.com/story/2006/4/14/1151/39437

Oh, they look at it...But no way do most of them value that over saves and ERA.

[Stotle]

Good point...Between overpaying for Gagne in terms of money and the package he gave up for Linebrink, it is pretty obvious Melvin values the back end of the pen very highly.

He gave up the package for Linebrink knowing he would have compensation picks in the draft.

[Mackus]

Sometimes you don't give GMs enough credit. Most of these guys are pretty smart and look beyond the misleading statistics, especially the counting ones. Analyzing player performance is something these guys do for a living and they almost certainly go beyond saves and ERA.

All are making important decisions involving millions of dollars. A gb/fb ratio doesn't take a doctorate to understand. A lot of teams have research guys that specialize in sabermetrics on their payroll now.

Not to say that GMs don't regularly make bad decisions. But to say that a modern GM doesn't look at gb/fb ratios seems a bit naive to me.

For example, the Brewers' Gm, Doug Melvin, has Dave Lawson on his staff. Lawson is the Brewer's stats guru, and he is a Bill James devotee. He wrote a book in the 90's on sabermetrics called "Essential Baseball 1994: A Revolutionary New Method for Evaluating Major League Teams, Players, and Managers." I think Lawson might just know what a gb/fb ratio is and its importance in evaluating pitchers.

Here is an interview with Lawson from the Brewers:

http://www.brewcrewball.com/story/2006/4/14/1151/39437

I agree with this, I think SG is being unfairly critical of GMs are vastly dumbing down their jobs.

While they often times end up making moves that seem poor, my guess is that they definitely know that these moves are risky, for the exact reasons that others criticize them, but feel compelled to do them out of trying to compete or save money or for whatever reason.

If Sherrill is traded to the Brewers, you can bet Melvin will know everything there is to know about him. Even if he gives up a lot to get him, he'll certainly be aware and understanding of his limitations. He absolutely won't only care about his save total and ERA, its ludicrous to suggest that.

[Sports Guy]

Exactly. He is probably rated about a B- or so . . . LaPorta should be evaluated as an A- right now. There is a huge difference between the two. Inman is arguably a top 100 guy. Most have him slotted to the backend of that. Many think he winds up being a closer.

And Linebrink doesn't have the value of Sherrill either and everyone universally said the Brewers paid a lot to get Linebrink.

The point is that you made the point that Melvin isn't one of these GMs that will value these things...it is obvious he does...He has targeted Cordero, Gagne and Linebrink in the last few years...He also paid a lot to Riske and of coruse, gave a good deal to Turnbow after his very good year.

He obviously values a BP very highly and has and will continue to pay a lot to get it right.

[Sports Guy]

He gave up the package for Linebrink knowing he would have compensation picks in the draft.

It still shows how much he values it and that is the entire point.

[nadecir]

Oh, they look at it...But no way do most of them value that over saves and ERA.

That's your opinion, and one that I really disagree with. Why do you think they pay guy's like Lawson if they value a counting stat like saves and a bad stat like ERA when they have ready access to so much better data and analysis? Your thinking is really dated on this subject, and its wrong.

[Sports Guy]

I agree with this, I think SG is being unfairly critical of GMs are vastly dumbing down their jobs.While they often times end up making moves that seem poor, my guess is that they definitely know that these moves are risky, for the exact reasons that others criticize them, but feel compelled to do them out of trying to compete or save money or for whatever reason.

If Sherrill is traded to the Brewers, you can bet Melvin will know everything there is to know about him. Even if he gives up a lot to get him, he'll certainly be aware and understanding of his limitations. He absolutely won't only care about his save total and ERA, its ludicrous to suggest that.

Most GMs do the "dumbing" themselves.

[Mackus]

Oh, they look at it...But no way do most of them value that over saves and ERA.

What does that even mean? Value Gb/FB ratio over Saves and ERA? Thats a meaningless statement.

GMs will have a very good idea of what to expect from somebody. They'll look at current raw production, the major stats like ERA and Saves. They'll also look at the other stuff, the periferal stuff and sabermetric stuff and have a good idea of what to expect. They'll know the risks of taking someone who's raw numbers are better than his predictive stats would think they'd be.

To think that you and I know things and care about smaller stats that GMs don't know about is beyond ridiculous. GMs never ignore things like that. If they trade for a guy who has bad periferals, they are knowingly rolling the dice. Its not a mystery to them when someone with bad periferals all of a suddens starts declining.

[crawdad]

And Linebrink doesn't have the value of Sherrill either and everyone universally said the Brewers paid a lot to get Linebrink.

The point is that you made the point that Melvin isn't one of these GMs that will value these things...it is obvious he does...He has targeted Cordero, Gagne and Linebrink in the last few years...He also paid a lot to Riske and of coruse, gave a good deal to Turnbow after his very good year.

He obviously values a BP very highly and has and will continue to pay a lot to get it right.

You are stripping all of these moves from organizational context. Or, your strategy is just to tire people out.

If you want me to, I can retype everything I have typed in this thread.

[Stotle]

And Linebrink doesn't have the value of Sherrill either and everyone universally said the Brewers paid a lot to get Linebrink.

The point is that you made the point that Melvin isn't one of these GMs that will value these things...it is obvious he does...He has targeted Cordero, Gagne and Linebrink in the last few years...He also paid a lot to Riske and of coruse, gave a good deal to Turnbow after his very good year.

He obviously values a BP very highly and has and will continue to pay a lot to get it right.

Again, he gave up the package for Linebrink with the knowledge that he'd be getting compensation in this year's draft.

[Sports Guy]

That's your opinion, and one that I really disagree with. Why do you think they pay guy's like Lawson if they value a counting stat like saves and a bad stat like ERA when they have ready access to so much better data and analysis? Your thinking is really dated on this subject, and its wrong.

Really? Then perhaps you can tell me why they paid 10 million dollars to Gagne, a pitcher with a lifetime .87 GB/FB ratio(ie he is a FLYBALL pitcher).

Or maybe why they gave a contract to Riske, a guy who has a lifetime .90 gb/fb ratio.

Or maybe you could tell me why they traded for Linebrink, a guy who had a lifetime .89 gb/fb ratio.

If they value it so much, why have they given up so much for flyball relievers?