TT: Sisco among last cuts, roster takes shape

[BohKnowsBmore]

7 hours ago, jrobb21613 said:

The way rosters are going to be contructed the Tides if in the big leagues would be predicted to win more games than the Orioles . It’s obvious to me we are tanking this season. Our best roster is not heading north.

Important distinction:

even if you think the players at Norfolk are better than those at Baltimore, that doesn’t negate claims that further development at AAA is the best thing for those players and the long-term of the club. 

One of the worst things about 1998 - 2011 was fast-tracking of prospects to the bigs simply because there was nothing better in front of them. 

[jrobb21613]

53 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

Important distinction:

even if you think the players at Norfolk are better than those at Baltimore, that doesn’t negate claims that further development at AAA is the best thing for those players and the long-term of the club. 

One of the worst things about 1998 - 2011 was fast-tracking of prospects to the bigs simply because there was nothing better in front of them. 

Agree!!

[DrungoHazewood]

13 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I have a long history with framing.

I think I was the first person here to post about it, referencing Mike Fast's work.

Later I had serious issues with latter generation quantifiers that I thought were greatly exaggerating the impact.

It is pretty clear it's a thing but I think of it as more of a complementary skill.

Did you see than Fangraphs started including framing in their value calculations?  Ryan Doumit is now listed as 6.2 wins below average on defense in 2008, 5.5 of that in framing.  The spread in per-game results between Doumit and Jose Molina that year, just in framing, is greater than the value difference between 1927 Babe Ruth and 2018 Chris Davis.

My guess is that's not 100% correct.

[interloper]

Cobb to IL. Back on OD in Baltimore.

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

One of the worst things about 1998 - 2011 was fast-tracking of prospects to the bigs simply because there was nothing better in front of them. 

What specific examples are there of prospects who were derailed by being promoted too soon in that era?  I thought the primary issue in the 1998-2011 era (or really the 1981-very recently era) was the lack of quality prospects.  It's hard to ruin a high draft pick by fast-tracking him when he stalls out or gets hurt in A ball.

[bobmc]

Joe Trezza with an update

 

[HarlowFan]

There are actually 6 IF.

[terphoopsfan]

18 minutes ago, bobmc said:

Joe Trezza with an update

 

going to be a longer season than what some anticipated. Find solace in following the MiL this year gentlemen.

[BohKnowsBmore]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What specific examples are there of prospects who were derailed by being promoted too soon in that era?  I thought the primary issue in the 1998-2011 era (or really the 1981-very recently era) was the lack of quality prospects.  It's hard to ruin a high draft pick by fast-tracking him when he stalls out or gets hurt in A ball.

The first one (or ones) that jumps to mind is the much-vaunted "Cavalry." I would have to dig, but I remember an article about what happened with them where there were quite a few quotes about there being no need to "prove it" to make their way to the big club.

Daniel Cabrera was immensely talented w/r/t physical tools, but he only spent ~27 innings above A ball before starting for the big club.  I certainly can't prove that he would have been good, but I don't think there would be many that would argue that competition throughout the org is a positive.

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Did you see than Fangraphs started including framing in their value calculations?  Ryan Doumit is now listed as 6.2 wins below average on defense in 2008, 5.5 of that in framing.  The spread in per-game results between Doumit and Jose Molina that year, just in framing, is greater than the value difference between 1927 Babe Ruth and 2018 Chris Davis.

My guess is that's not 100% correct.

Sounds like there may be some bugs to work out. Besides, how did they have framing data in 2008?

[LookinUp]

26 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Sounds like there may be some bugs to work out. Besides, how did they have framing data in 2008?

The crazy thing to me is that a "stat head" would even put that type of data out there. That's the type of developmental project that should be sanity tested and never see the light of day. 

[DrungoHazewood]

25 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

The first one (or ones) that jumps to mind is the much-vaunted "Cavalry." I would have to dig, but I remember an article about what happened with them where there were quite a few quotes about there being no need to "prove it" to make their way to the big club.

Daniel Cabrera was immensely talented w/r/t physical tools, but he only spent ~27 innings above A ball before starting for the big club.  I certainly can't prove that he would have been good, but I don't think there would be many that would argue that competition throughout the org is a positive.

It's hard to recall all the details from a decade ago, but I think I'd promote pitchers about as fast as I could.  The attrition rate is such that every inning in the minors is an inning they're not being productive in the majors and may never be if they get hurt.

In any case... Jake Arrieta had a 2.59 ERA in Bowie with almost 11 K/9 in 2009, then in 2010 he started the year 6-2, 1.85 in Norfolk before being called up.

Chris Tillman was 11-4, 3.18 in Bowie in 2008, with 154 Ks in 135 innings.  Then in '09 he was 8-6, 2.70 in Norfolk before being called up.  Pre-2009 he was a top-25 prospect in baseball.

Brian Matusz was a polished college pitcher who had 113 innings of a 1.91 with 121 Ks before getting called up.

Brad Bergesen went 16-7, 3.10 in Frederick and Bowie, then just two starts in Norfolk before going 7-5, 3.43 in Baltimore.

Jason Berken only spent 25 innings in AAA in 2009, but he was already 25.  He was always a 2nd lieutenant in the cavalry anyway.

David Hernandez got 61 innings with 83 Ks between Bowie and Norfolk before his callup, after 141 innings and 166 Ks the year before in AA.

Wasn't Cabrera called up after a season in Delmarva for some very specific reason?  I don't remember the details but they were going to lose him for some reason and it was almost like he was a Rule 5 guy.

I guess in hindsight they could have left everyone to dominate the minors longer, but unless you're playing service time games I don't really see the point.  This was the era where they were giving starts to the broken 7.00 ERA version of Rich Hill, and Jeremy Guthrie at 200 innings of a 4.50 or 5.00, and Mark Hendrickson, who was really a loogy but got 11 starts one year.  They could have tanked.  But explicit tanking wasn't as much a thing then.

[DrungoHazewood]

13 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

The crazy thing to me is that a "stat head" would even put that type of data out there. That's the type of developmental project that should be sanity tested and never see the light of day. 

I think they should be prepared to vigorously defend numbers like that if they're going to put them out there.  They're saying that Ryan Doumit, a catcher with an .858 OPS, was just as (in)valuable as Chris Davis was last year.  They now have a six-win delta between their numbers and bb-ref's for Doumit's 2008.  That's an extraordinary claim, and requires extraordinary justification.

[LookinUp]

11 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I think they should be prepared to vigorously defend numbers like that if they're going to put them out there.  They're saying that Ryan Doumit, a catcher with an .858 OPS, was just as (in)valuable as Chris Davis was last year.  They now have a six-win delta between their numbers and bb-ref's for Doumit's 2008.  That's an extraordinary claim, and requires extraordinary justification.

You're right, but they're not even in a position to defend those numbers without evaluating them in-house. If they did, the defense should essentially already be written, and queries like yours should be anticipated.

I suspect the worst case here. The data people essentially had their biases confirmed with a lot of the data. They're assuming it's mostly right, and didn't really feel the need to focus on outliers because they're old inputs. My problem with that is that if you don't fully understand the causes of such weirdly obvious outputs, the you also don't understand the underlying truth behind the run of the mill outputs.

Put another way, I bet they can't really tell the difference between a -.5 pitch framer and a +.5 pitch framer. They just want smart people to take it at face value.

[Can_of_corn]

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Did you see than Fangraphs started including framing in their value calculations?  Ryan Doumit is now listed as 6.2 wins below average on defense in 2008, 5.5 of that in framing.  The spread in per-game results between Doumit and Jose Molina that year, just in framing, is greater than the value difference between 1927 Babe Ruth and 2018 Chris Davis.

My guess is that's not 100% correct.

I saw.  What really caused me to start questioning their numbers was when they had a Rays catcher's framing worth 4 wins in under 120 games.

My thinking is, if framing is that valuable why isn't that value being reflected in the free agent deals?

If every team knows a guys framing is going to win them four extra games over 120 starts someone is going to pay.