Orioles trade Cashner to Red Sox

[Legend_Of_Joey]

51 minutes ago, jsbearr said:

He looks more like a 1/10 w/option or a 2/18 player.  A weak pitching team may be desperate enough to offer that.

So he will be back with the Orioles? Got it.

[jsbearr]

6 minutes ago, Legend_Of_Joey said:

So he will be back with the Orioles? Got it.

Orioles won't spend for that.

[FanSince88]

I would have waited this out until the end of July or maybe even end of August.  Never know who might get hurt between now and then.  The guys we got are hardly "can't miss" and hard to believe we wanted them so bad that we couldn't risk losing them to another team or whatever.  The biggest thing that bugs me is Cashner made it very clear he didn't want to be traded and we did anyway for next to nothing in return.  That's not a great look, and future free agents could use that against us.  

However, this is hardly a major blunder by Elias, in my opinion.  It was a no-brainer to try to move a rental like Cashner, and if this is the best he thinks he could get, so be it.  Not a great fan of the return, but castigating Elias for this trade is not going to be my hill to die on.

[SteveA]

3 minutes ago, FanSince88 said:

I would have waited this out until the end of July or maybe even end of August.  Never know who might get hurt between now and then.  The guys we got are hardly "can't miss" and hard to believe we wanted them so bad that we couldn't risk losing them to another team or whatever.  The biggest thing that bugs me is Cashner made it very clear he didn't want to be traded and we did anyway for next to nothing in return.  That's not a great look, and future free agents could use that against us.  

However, this is hardly a major blunder by Elias, in my opinion.  It was a no-brainer to try to move a rental like Cashner, and if this is the best he thinks he could get, so be it.  Not a great fan of the return, but castigating Elias for this trade is not going to be my hill to die on.

New rule this year:  no waiver trades in August.   July 31 4:00 pm EDT is a hard trade deadline.

[FanSince88]

Just now, SteveA said:

New rule this year:  no waiver trades in August.   July 31 4:00 pm EDT is a hard trade deadline.

Oh, I didn't know that, thanks for the correction.  Then this move from Elias make a lot more sense.  Still would have waited a couple weeks to see who gets hurt, but that's a bit of a nitpick I suppose.  

[jerios55]

14 hours ago, FanSince88 said:

Oh, I didn't know that, thanks for the correction.  Then this move from Elias make a lot more sense.  Still would have waited a couple weeks to see who gets hurt, but that's a bit of a nitpick I suppose.  

Cashner could have been the one to get hurt or simple throw a bad game.  Means hit a fairly hot swinging Rays team.  Means recent stat line for Cashner wouldn't have helped things.  Although no one will ever know that now.

I don't disagree with your idea, but if the return in Elias eye was acceptable, then waiting doesn't always matter.  If the team put out feelers in the offseason and again now, they probably have a good idea of the number of suitors.  We don't so I'm not gonna worry about a few starts.

 

[atomic]

21 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Do you even know what FIP is?  If it's meaningless why or how does it predict future ERA more accurately than actual ERA?

Well you just said ERA is meaningless.  So what difference does it make if FIP predicts future ERA?  

[jsbearr]

14 minutes ago, atomic said:

Well you just said ERA is meaningless.  So what difference does it make if FIP predicts future ERA?  

None of it is meaningless.

A quick run down.

ERA expresses that a pitcher is responsible for all runs except those caused in relationship to errors.

FIP expresses that a pitcher is responsible for Ks, BBs, and batted balls that go over the fence. It tries to isolate the pitcher from good or bad fielding which could make him look better or worse than he actually is.

xFIP takes FIP, but suggests there is randomness to home runs and instead assigns league average values for that by considering the pitcher's fly ball rate.

SIERA says that relationships between strikeouts and balls to runs are not linear. It uses more complicated math to develop that association.  It also treats batted balls as far more complicated with a focus on ground balls.

DRA thinks all of that is nice, but that run attribution is very complex. It uses mixed modeling to determine that. It breaks down pitcher performance pitch by pitch. It looks at the field, the weather, the specific batter, the catcher, the umpire. It puts these all together and develops a larger picture.

In general, all of the metrics will lead you to a similar place unless over a career a pitch pitches in front of an incredible defense (see: Jim Palmer) or if they reside in an extreme offensive environment.

If I remember correctly, ERA takes about 100 IP to have a decent sample. FIP  is also around 100.  xFIP is around 80. SIERA is around 60. DRA is around 30. You have to basically quadruple those samples if you want something fairly definitive, but those marks give you a reasonable idea who the pitcher is.

The key thing to remember is that ERA gives way too much credit to the pitcher for batted balls. FIP gives way too much credit to the defense for batted balls. xFIP does a shade better. SIERA tries to parse out major drivers of pitching performance. DRA tries to solve the whole thing.

 

[NCRaven]

12 minutes ago, jsbearr said:

In general, all of the metrics will lead you to a similar place unless over a career a pitch pitches in front of an incredible defense (see: Jim Palmer) or if they reside in an extreme offensive environment.

So, Jim Palmer wasn't all that good?  Is this Jake Arrieta?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, NCRaven said:

So, Jim Palmer wasn't all that good?  Is this Jake Arrieta?

Was it ever determined that it was Arrieta that made that comment?

[NCRaven]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Was it ever determined that it was Arrieta that made that comment?

My assumption but readily admit it could have been one of the other young (at that time) pitchers.  Just seemed very much like a Jake thing to say.

[jsbearr]

1 minute ago, NCRaven said:

So, Jim Palmer wasn't all that good?  Is this Jake Arrieta?

Jim Palmer was very good and looked great because of a superior defense and some help from Memorial Stadium.  In other words, he is a HOF pitcher who looked like a very special HoF pitcher.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

My assumption but readily admit it could have been one of the other young (at that time) pitchers.  Just seemed very much like a Jake thing to say.

For some reason I always pinned that one on Matusz.  Certainly could have been Jake.

[NCRaven]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

For some reason I always pinned that one on Matusz.  Certainly could have been Jake.

They're certainly the two most likely.  Doesn't sound like Tillman or Bergesen.

[jsbearr]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

For some reason I always pinned that one on Matusz.  Certainly could have been Jake.

It could have been anyone. Palmer's criticisms in the past have been seen within the organization as being not constructive and inflammatory.  Maybe this is inaccurate, but it has been expressed to me that in the rare instances that he does talk to a pitcher that his advice is never something that can actually be applied.  That it is stuck in what worked in a previous era.  So, all that happens is that it is unhelpful and encourages fans to make bad situations worse.