Trade Central Station

[Stotle]

This is the only the case if you look solely at ERA(which was still a #3 type pitcher anyway)...If you look at every other "real" stat and predictive stats, you are wrong.

And his K rate is right around league average...If you can have a league average K rate and put that with a BB rate below 2, you can win games.

He's around the plate too much with average stuff, and it will eventually catch up with him. The only reason he is in the ML is because his walk rate is so low, which prevents the hits from doing to much damage when they occur.

Even with his incredible walk rate (and it is incredible, I agree) his WHIP was still almost 1.3. That's a lot of base hits, and it's not a #3.

[Sports Guy]

He's around the plate too much with average stuff, and it will eventually catch up with him. The only reason he is in the ML is because his walk rate is so low, which prevents the hits from doing to much damage when they occur.

Even with his incredible walk rate (and it is incredible, I agree) his WHIP was still almost 1.3. That's a lot of base hits, and it's not a #3.

Again, his K rate is still around league average...He throws a ton of first pitch strikes...Gets as many swinging strikes as Guthrie does.

His strike % is very high.

His stuff isn't great but he knows how to pitch and he is still young, so he can still learn things, perhaps a new pitch, etc....

His FIP suggests he is a sub 4 ERA pitcher.

The only stat that remotely suggests a potential long term issue with him is his HR rate...His BABIP and LOB% were unlucky this past season.

Everything says he should be fine long term.

[Stotle]

Again, his K rate is still around league average...He throws a ton of first pitch strikes...Gets as many swinging strikes as Guthrie does.

His strike % is very high.

His stuff isn't great but he knows how to pitch and he is still young, so he can still learn things, perhaps a new pitch, etc....

His FIP suggests he is a sub 4 ERA pitcher.

The only stat that remotely suggests a potential long term issue with him is his HR rate...His BABIP and LOB% were unlucky this past season.

Everything says he should be fine long term.

I'm happy to agree to disagree. I promise 1) not to say I told you so, and 2) to admit I was wrong if/when you tell me you told me so.

But I'm not wrong....

[Sports Guy]

I'm happy to agree to disagree. I promise 1) not to say I told you so, and 2) to admit I was wrong if/when you tell me you told me so.

But I'm not wrong....

You aren't wrong about his stuff.

You are wrong about everything else though.

Gotta put the radar gun down for a second and look at results.

[Stotle]

You aren't wrong about his stuff.

You are wrong about everything else though.

Gotta put the radar gun down for a second and look at results.

Oh scouts don't need a gun for Sonnanstine. They just look at it and say "The [explitive] is slow!" :eektf:

[emmett16]

Scott/Reimold/Hernandez for Hermida/Olsen

[allstar1579]

You aren't wrong about his stuff.

You are wrong about everything else though.

Gotta put the radar gun down for a second and look at results.

His results were great playing on that team, but does that automatically translate to good results on our team and in our ballpark?

I mean, stats are great to tell you how good of a year someone had in hindsight, but they are far from a guarantee of future performance, especially in such a small sample size.

Wouldn't it be more prudent to shoot for someone with an unspectacular but steady track record than to give up talent for someone that may still project to be a long reliever?

[Sports Guy]

His results were great playing on that team, but does that automatically translate to good results on our team and in our ballpark?

I mean, stats are great to tell you how good of a year someone had in hindsight, but they are far from a guarantee of future performance, especially in such a small sample size.

Wouldn't it be more prudent to shoot for someone with an unspectacular but steady track record than to give up talent for someone that may still project to be a long reliever?

Nothing about his numbers suggest long reliever.

[allstar1579]

Just what I was saying, his numbers are just that, statistics he amassed in a previous situation with a different team. What is saying that he won't get shelled next year and then you'd be looking at him as a long guy instead of a SP.

We might need to see another season or two out of him before I am ready to anoint him a solid starter in the ML.

[JTrea81]

Here's one:

Markakis and Roberts for Heyward, Schafer, Hanson, Lillibridge and Johnson

[Sports Guy]

Just what I was saying, his numbers are just that, statistics he amassed in a previous situation with a different team. What is saying that he won't get shelled next year and then you'd be looking at him as a long guy instead of a SP.

We might need to see another season or two out of him before I am ready to anoint him a solid starter in the ML.

You can say this about anyone.

[allstar1579]

You can say this about anyone.

Yes you can, but I am a firm believer in statistics do not tell the whole story, and you can't use them at all until you have a long enough period with consistency.

The way I look at it, without tearing the team we are trying to build down, we have a couple trade chips: Sherrill, Scott, Hernandez (expendable) Roberts (need to be replaced), and if we go trading 2 of the 4 with the most value in one deal, and the best we get back is AS, we are in trouble.

We should stay the course, take a crack or two at a FA that could help in 2010 and beyond, and develop the wave of talent we have coming up.

[Pruke]

Here's one:

Markakis and Roberts for Heyward, Schafer, Hanson, Lillibridge and Johnson

That's a set you back 4-5 years move.

[JTrea81]

That's a set you back 4-5 years move.

If we don't get Tex or Burnett or extend Roberts, it's a move we should be looking to make...

[Ruzious]

Just what I was saying, his numbers are just that, statistics he amassed in a previous situation with a different team. What is saying that he won't get shelled next year and then you'd be looking at him as a long guy instead of a SP.

We might need to see another season or two out of him before I am ready to anoint him a solid starter in the ML.

So, you're of the belief in buying high, because if you wait for him to have a couple more years like last season, his cost goes up. Meanwhile, he projects to most people to be exactly what you said before that you'd prefer - to be a steady but unspectacular starter. This is a guy who seems to be able to pitch a lot of decent innings for you - in the Garland mode, imo. And he'll be getting paid at about 1/20th or so of what Garland's going to make.