The Bullpen Has Blown 7 Games for Trachsel

[tim27]

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?

Smarter than banking 14million on a player in a career free fall.

[Sports Guy]

Smarter than banking 14million on a player in a career free fall.

What the hell does this matter?

You shouldn't really bank on either.

[tim27]

What the hell does this matter?

You shouldn't really bank on either.

You're the one that wants Sexson. Yeah, Payton sucks at 4.5 mil, but he's better than Sexson and he makes three times as much.

[Sports Guy]

You're the one that wants Sexson. Yeah, Payton sucks at 4.5 mil, but he's better than Sexson and he makes three times as much.

You are so clueless it is unreal.

What have i said about a Sexson trade?

That i would want Balentien back with him...Do you understand that that is the key or is that concept above your head?

BTW, in an awful year for Sexson, he has a higher OPS and has shown a lot more power than Payton.

Also, Sexson is a one year gamble to see if he can bounce back....He was solid just last year so it is a gamble that could pay off big time for us and if it fails, then we cut him and have Balentien to fall back on, which is the whole point of trading for Sexson.

[tim27]

You are so clueless it is unreal.

What have i said about a Sexson trade?

That i would want Balentien back with him...Do you understand that that is the key or is that concept above your head?

You also want to give up Millar, a superior player at this point to Sexson, and D-Cab. I understand the concept it's just a terrible idea, that's all.

BTW, in an awful year for Sexson, he has a higher OPS and has shown a lot more power than Payton.

He's a terrible defensive 1st baseman; Payton is a good defensive lf than can run. Give me Payton any day of the week if their salaries are equal.

Also, Sexson is a one year gamble to see if he can bounce back....He was solid just last year so it is a gamble that could pay off big time for us and if it fails, then we cut him and have Balentien to fall back on, which is the whole point of trading for Sexson.

So a one year gamble on Trasch- who's actually performed well this year- is a bad idea, but a one year gamble on Sexson who's getting worse every year and makes three times as much is a good idea?

Makes a lot of sense.

[Old#5fan]

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.

This is a money post! Especially your last bullet and final two sentences. Truer words have never been written here (IMHO)!

[DrungoHazewood]

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.

I really, really, really, really doubt that Knott, Dubois, or even Tike Redman would have been meaningfully worse than Jay Payton's .259/.299/.368 line. No left fielder in the majors is more than a win worse than Jay Payton.

[Sports Guy]

So a one year gamble on Trasch- who's actually performed well this year- is a bad idea, but a one year gamble on Sexson who's getting worse every year and makes three times as much is a good idea?

Makes a lot of sense.

Big difference is and what i would bank on is that Sexson would be coming from a pitchers park to a hitters park and he was still pretty good last year.

Trax, while he was decent with the Mets last year, was coming to the AL, with poor peripherals, a worse team and to a better hitters park.

Plus, offense is down across the league...This has helped Trax and hurt Sexson.

[Old#5fan]

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.

This may be off topic if so I apologize (didn't want to start a thread on this) but do you think Mussina is done? His recent poor outings and his age would seem to indicate so.

[DrungoHazewood]

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.

You're going much further out on a limb predicting that a guy who's clearly walking a tightrope should be around next year, and be paid $5M.

If you roll a pair of dice and hit snakeyes twice in a row, am I being bold by predicting that the third roll isn't going to follow the first two?

[ScottieBaseball]

So what I take from this is stats really just aren't very reliable to predict what will occur in the future as there are just too many variables. I distinctly recall a few years ago on this forum many posters were all hyped up about Kurt Ainsworth because he had a great ERA in pre-season and looked like a future Cy Young. I commented at the time that I thought this guy looked like there was something wrong with him (based on observation) and he was damaged goods when the Orioles got him.

I was pretty much derided for that view because of his great "stats." Well, we all know who turned out to be right on that now don't we? I don't care about being right or wrong, but I do think way too much emphasis is placed on stats which overall are not reliable enough to accurately predict much of anything other than general possibilities. In other words they are a better history of a players performance than a future indicator, hence not very reliable regarding future performance?

Would you agree with my take expressed thusly?

Stats, while flawed, are an EXACT measurement of PAST performance, but also a pretty good indicator of future performance. Yes, there are variables, but the evolution of sabremetrics has done a great deal in accounting for them and factoring them into an equation. To say, "Not very reliable" would be incorrect. Statistics simply need to be taken in context.

Trust me...I'm far from a stathead. I believe that just because you can't put it in a spreadsheet and sort it doesn't mean it's not tangible. A few months ago someone (don't remember who) argued that there's no statistical evidence that protection in the lineup exists. Having caught until I was 16 years old, I beg to differ. There were plenty of times that I asked the umpire for time out, tucked my skull cap and mask under my arm, and walked out to the mound to ask the pitcher, "How do you think we should pitch to this guy?" Followed closely by, "You see who's in the on-deck circle, don't you?" Stats might not support it, but I can assure everyone that protection in the lineup exists.

[tywright]

You are so clueless it is unreal.

What have i said about a Sexson trade?

That i would want Balentien back with him...Do you understand that that is the key or is that concept above your head?

BTW, in an awful year for Sexson, he has a higher OPS and has shown a lot more power than Payton.

Also, Sexson is a one year gamble to see if he can bounce back....He was solid just last year so it is a gamble that could pay off big time for us and if it fails, then we cut him and have Balentien to fall back on, which is the whole point of trading for Sexson.

I can't believe you just called him clueless. Actually it doesn't surprise me

[Frobby]

This may be off topic if so I apologize (didn't want to start a thread on this) but do you think Mussina is done? His recent poor outings and his age would seem to indicate so.

Yeah, could be. I've remained a big Moose fan all these years, but it looks to me like he's toast. But, he's a resourceful and intelligent piece of toast, so maybe he has one more adjustment to make to compensate for his ever-worsening fastball.

[Sports Guy]

I can't believe you just called him clueless. Actually it doesn't surprise me

In this situation, with the way he is implying the whole Sexson thing and what i wanted to accomplish, yes he is clueless.

[Old#5fan]

So a one year gamble on Trasch- who's actually performed well this year- is a bad idea, but a one year gamble on Sexson who's getting worse every year and makes three times as much is a good idea?

Makes a lot of sense.

No, it doesn't. I have never liked Sexon. He has a huge strike zone due to his size and very overated on many message boards. I personally am very glad the Orioles never wasted good money on him.