The Bullpen Has Blown 7 Games for Trachsel

[DrungoHazewood]

You could make that argument but you'd be very, very wrong. With or without Padilla the Rangers are 60-72; hell, without him they're probably worse as hard as that is to believe. They stink this year because Millwood has been terrible, because McCarthy's been hurt a lot and stunk when he did pitch, because Robinon Tejada has stunk since April, because Mike Young has had a subpar season, because Blalock's been hurt, because Kinsler hasn't developed quite as they hope, and, imo, the biggest reason, because they went into the season with a 39 yo Kenny Lofton as their best outfielder. It had nothing to do with Padilla's struggles. He could be on pace for 200 inn and a 3.50 era and they'd still be right where they are. You do realize that Traschel would be FAR and AWAY the best starter in their rotation this year? FAR and AWAY.

So, sure, we could not exercise Traschel's option and save a few million. Big F'In deal. We still aren't going to sign A-Rod or Hunter or Jones (Not that you would advocate that anyway) and we run the risk of JJ Johnson throwing 150 innings next year at a 6.5 era.

You're actually making the argument that giving 18 starts and $10M to a pitcher with a 6.24 ERA isn't hurting the Texas Rangers?

[Flosman]

I'll take a supposedly risky $350k placeholder over a Payton or his ilk all day long. If Payton fails... well, we've seen what happens. He just keeps getting plugged into the lineup all year and he'll probably get 300 PAs next year, and no matter what we're out $10M.

If you instead went with Jon Knott, and he fails you release him or send him to the minors and plug in Jason Dubois. If Dubois fails you dump him and plug in Tike Redman. If Tike Redman fails... you get the point. You've saved $millions that can be spent elsewhere, and you've gotten the same performance in the field.

I agree with your theory, too bad the O's don't. The O's would be a much better team without guys like Payton, Mora, Gobbons type guys committed to multiyear deals. Save the money and sign difference makers. If you are going to settle for a hopefully league average guy make it a one year deal. It is what I would do.

[Fan4Life]

I thought it was very unlikely he'd pitch as well as he has.

Which should make you somewhat less than pretty darn certain he'll callapse next year.

[Fan4Life]

I agree with your theory, too bad the O's don't. The O's would be a much better team without guys like Payton, Mora, Gobbons type guys committed to multiyear deals. Save the money and sign difference makers. If you are going to settle for a hopefully league average guy make it a one year deal. It is what I would do.

What difference makers have we passed on that were worth the money they eventually got? Not since Delgado and Vlad(assuming there was a number he would come for)has there been a signing we passed on that I felt was a mistake. Can you think of any, with regard to being difference makers?

[tim27]

You're actually making the argument that giving 18 starts and $10M to a pitcher with a 6.24 ERA isn't hurting the Texas Rangers?

No, I'm making the argument that giving 18 starts to a 10mil pitcher with a 6.24 era is one of the "Major" reasons the Rangers are terrible. With or without Padilla they suck.

[tim27]

I thought it was very unlikely he'd pitch as well as he has.

Are you more certain that he'll stink in 08 as opposed to 07?

[DrungoHazewood]

What difference makers have we passed on that were worth the money they eventually got? Not since Delgado and Vlad(assuming there was a number he would come for)has there been a signing we passed on that I felt was a mistake. Can you think of any, with regard to being difference makers?

If you don't want to spend the savings on free agents, pour it all into scouting and development. I'd rather do that than sign most free agents. In any case, there are always better uses of money than $10M for random 30-something players who might be average if they overachieve.

[Since'54]

I realize that you don't like uncertainty, but it's a very real and important part of life, including baseball. Sadly, the most useful perspective does not reduce to a simple soundbite, because it it multi-dimensional. It is not reducible to one bullet point, there are several:

• Stats are a valuable tool. It would be dumb to not consider what they suggest.
• Previous performance is the best predictor of future performance, but it is nonetheless an unreliable predictor.
• For a given individual, the previous performance of that individual is a better indicator than normative data for a group, but even that is still an unreliable predictor (i.e., low r-value)
• The sensible thing to do is to consider multiple factors, including past performance and detailed observations of current performance by knowledgeable observers/evaluators.

Applying the proper weight to the various factors is something that is still more art than science, and is likely to continue that way for the foreseeable future. The error that is routinely made around here is to pretend otherwise.

One of the best and funniest parts of Moneyball is the description of pre-draft meetings Billy Beane was having with his scouts. Beane wanted to draft a catcher who had good stats but his "knowledgeable observers/evaluators" couldn't get past the fact that the prospect had a big rear end and didn't look like a ballplayer. Hence Beane's remark, "We're not selling blue jeans here".

To me the stats, imperfect predictors that they are, are going to be better to go on than observations from baseball lifers. Too many built-in prejudices

and long-held opinions that, when analyzed, are pretty much baseless.

[DrungoHazewood]

Are you more certain that he'll stink in 08 as opposed to 07?

Yes. As I've said before, pitchers sometimes have a decent season with awful periperials. They almost never repeat it. That goes double for 37-year-olds.

[DrungoHazewood]

No, I'm making the argument that giving 18 starts to a 10mil pitcher with a 6.24 era is one of the "Major" reasons the Rangers are terrible. With or without Padilla they suck.

And they would suck slightly less if they'd made a better use of the resources used to sign Padilla.

[tim27]

I'll take a supposedly risky $350k placeholder over a Payton or his ilk all day long. If Payton fails... well, we've seen what happens. He just keeps getting plugged into the lineup all year and he'll probably get 300 PAs next year, and no matter what we're out $10M.

If you instead went with Jon Knott, and he fails you release him or send him to the minors and plug in Jason Dubois. If Dubois fails you dump him and plug in Tike Redman. If Tike Redman fails... you get the point. You've saved $millions that can be spent elsewhere, and you've gotten the same performance in the field.

This is the fallacy of your argument and I'll try to make you see it one time. With Payton we know what we're going to get, granted it costs more money than it's worth. So we bring up Knott and he sucks over a month. Then they'll be some knucklehead saying, "Well, you only gave him a 100 abs how do you know he really sucks?" Ditto for Dubois and Redman. You'll save some $ undoubtedly- not that it's getting spent anywhere else mind you- but you'll most likely get an inferior performance and you still won't know what you've got, short of a breakout by a career minor leaguer.

[tim27]

And they would suck slightly less if they'd made a better use of the resources used to sign Padilla.

Yeah, they could have signed Trascel for half that.

[Sports Guy]

Is it smart to bank 4.75 million dollars that a player will literally be one of the only players in ML history to do something?

[Sports Guy]

This is the fallacy of your argument and I'll try to make you see it one time. With Payton we know what we're going to get, granted it costs more money than it's worth. So we bring up Knott and he sucks over a month. Then they'll be some knucklehead saying, "Well, you only gave him a 100 abs how do you know he really sucks?" Ditto for Dubois and Redman. You'll save some $ undoubtedly- not that it's getting spent anywhere else mind you- but you'll most likely get an inferior performance and you still won't know what you've got, short of a breakout by a career minor leaguer.

Yea, a bad player.

[tim27]

Yes. As I've said before, pitchers sometimes have a decent season with awful periperials. They almost never repeat it. That goes double for 37-year-olds.

It's pretty bold to sit here and harp on Traschel for a year with the certainty that he'll suck, be proven wrong, and then say, "Wait till next year because he'll definitely suck then." Like I said, keep predicting his downfall and it'll eventually come but you and all your periperials aren't telling anybody something they don't know already.