Fuentes to Angels - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Fuentes to Angels

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby AquaMan2342 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:42 pm

Big Pimpin wrote:
AquaMan2342 wrote:I forgot to mention that I was making fun of BP and his over-analysis of Dunn's inability to play defense. My fault. ;-D


If by over-analyze you mean used numbers that you don't understand to prove a point you don't agree with, then fair enough. I really do find it fascinating how so many are willing to totally overlook an incredibly important aspect of the game. I was there once too, but I have seen the light! :-B


So you are saying you'd rather have 100 games of Bradley and 62 out of random fan out of section 10 than Adam Dunn? Again...not to mention that there's no way an AL team would ever sign Dunn and not play him at DH the majority of the time. LAA had a poor team OBP last year, and signing a perennial .400+ guy like Dunn significantly helps one of their biggest weaknesses. Taking Dunn at face value, I still see him as a better signing than Bradley/section 10 and that's without the factors of health and consistency.

Anyways, I still think it's funny that you click some buttons, read some articles and charts, act like nobody else is capable of comprehending what they are saying, make the claims that you do and then criticize other people for not agreeing with you. My question to you is whether or not you can prove how tangible UZR, UZR/150 and these other defensive metrics really are. You are naive at best to think that I, or anybody else who doesn't agree with you, completely neglects the value of defense when looking at a certain player. I am indeed guilty of probably not taking into account enough, but if anything you seem to be (at least that's how it comes off) of doing the exact opposite and overestimating it.
AquaMan2342
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 7852
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Searchin for my mainline....I couldn't hit it sideways

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby kab21 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:54 pm

Yoda wrote:
kab21 wrote:
I said that the closer is overrated, but the bullpen as a whole is extremely important. And just because they have internally produced a great bullpen in the past doesn't mean that they have another guy that will go Arredondo, KRod or Shields on them.


Or Percival.

Hmmm come to think of it, Halos always produced a dominant closer. Yeah, I don't like the signing.


I guess I wouldn't necessarily consider the Angels current bullpen that deep before adding Fuentes. They had two arms that were very good in Arredondo and Shields. And a bunch of question marks after that in Oliver, Speier and the rest. The bullpen could have been in alot of trouble if Shields or Arredondo had gotten injured next year. But I guess they could have just hoped that someone went Percival or KRod on them if that happened. Fuentes was signed for reasonable years at a reasonable amount and is a pretty decent RP.

Now it wasn't their most pressing need but I have not heard that this signing means that they can't sign a power hitter.
kab21
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe Ranker
Posts: 5340
(Past Year: 166)
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby Neato Torpedo » Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:47 pm

AquaMan2342 wrote:So you are saying you'd rather have 100 games of Bradley and 62 out of random fan out of section 10 than Adam Dunn?

More accurately, 62 games of GMJ and/or Juan Rivera.
Image

Rocinante2: you know
Rocinante2: its easy to dismiss the orioles as a bad team
ofanrex: go on
Rocinante2: i'm done
Rocinante2: lmao

Play Brushback Baseball! (we need more people)
Neato Torpedo
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerWeb Supporter
Posts: 8618
Joined: 4 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: we don't burn gasoline, we burn our dreams

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby Yoda » Thu Jan 01, 2009 5:10 pm

kab21 wrote:
Yoda wrote:
kab21 wrote:
I said that the closer is overrated, but the bullpen as a whole is extremely important. And just because they have internally produced a great bullpen in the past doesn't mean that they have another guy that will go Arredondo, KRod or Shields on them.


Or Percival.

Hmmm come to think of it, Halos always produced a dominant closer. Yeah, I don't like the signing.


I guess I wouldn't necessarily consider the Angels current bullpen that deep before adding Fuentes. They had two arms that were very good in Arredondo and Shields. And a bunch of question marks after that in Oliver, Speier and the rest. The bullpen could have been in alot of trouble if Shields or Arredondo had gotten injured next year. But I guess they could have just hoped that someone went Percival or KRod on them if that happened. Fuentes was signed for reasonable years at a reasonable amount and is a pretty decent RP.

Now it wasn't their most pressing need but I have not heard that this signing means that they can't sign a power hitter.


I don't think it was a bad move. Just an overkill and I don't like it. Plenty of no name guys step up and Halos are one of the better teams in terms developing pitchers.
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin
Yoda
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 21344
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 15th green...

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby Big Pimpin » Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:06 pm

AquaMan2342 wrote:So you are saying you'd rather have 100 games of Bradley and 62 out of random fan out of section 10 than Adam Dunn? Again...not to mention that there's no way an AL team would ever sign Dunn and not play him at DH the majority of the time. LAA had a poor team OBP last year, and signing a perennial .400+ guy like Dunn significantly helps one of their biggest weaknesses. Taking Dunn at face value, I still see him as a better signing than Bradley/section 10 and that's without the factors of health and consistency.


Random section 10 fan is not replacement level. Replacement level is freely available talent, think a AAAA guy that can be had by any team at any point. If you don't have one of your own to call up, you can deal a D- prospect for one.

Where do you get the consistency argument from? HRs? Did you realize that Dunn was almost twice as productive (in relation to the average player) offensively in 2007 than he was in 2008? In fact, on a per PA basis, Bradley and Dunn were almost the same player offensively. Then Bradley blew Dunn out of the water in 2008.

AquaMan2342 wrote:Anyways, I still think it's funny that you click some buttons, read some articles and charts, act like nobody else is capable of comprehending what they are saying, make the claims that you do and then criticize other people for not agreeing with you. My question to you is whether or not you can prove how tangible UZR, UZR/150 and these other defensive metrics really are. You are naive at best to think that I, or anybody else who doesn't agree with you, completely neglects the value of defense when looking at a certain player. I am indeed guilty of probably not taking into account enough, but if anything you seem to be (at least that's how it comes off) of doing the exact opposite and overestimating it.


I'm pretty sure that I never once have said that no one else is able of comprehending this stuff, rather they either discount most of it or disregard it altogether. There is no way of "proving" UZR or PMR, it's an impossible task. It's a counter-factual analysis. One side of the equation is always going to be "What would have happened if...?" and you can't prove it. The systems all use batted ball data (position and how well hit the ball is) to determine the expected number of outs that an average player would have made given his distribution of batted balls. Then, his actual number of outs is compared to that number. All that's left is a simple out to run conversion and you are there.

The thing that I don't understand is you make this statement like I think I'm some guru because I've read articles and look at the numbers. That couldn't be further from the truth. It's very similar (in fact, the same!) to how when we try to evaluate a player offensively, we do it based on the numbers. I can say with confidence that you don't prefer Dunn over Bradley because you've watched each of their at bats over the past 5 years, you've looked at some numbers (I'll probably argue the wrong ones) and have come to a conclusion. I have to come to the conclusions that I have because I've done a lot of research on the systems and trust the brightest analytical minds in the business. Certainly there are smart guys in front offices that have great minds, but as far as publicly available analysis this is the best of the best. I'm not making up numbers in my basement while scrolling through play by play readouts.

In any case, there are only two aspects to a position player's value - how many runs he creates and how many runs he prevents. They are equal in value and completely additive. You may say the offensive value is easy to figure, but that's not true at all. OPS may be better than BA, but are all .800 OPS hitters created equally? No. Can a .940 OPS guy be more productive than a .965 OPS guy? Sure! OBP is a touch more valuable in run creation than slugging. Run creation has gotten much more quantifiable with wOBA, because it directly correlates to run scoring. An single is worth A runs, a double B runs, a triple C runs, etc, etc, etc. Only using wOBA and then an idea of what a player does defensively (and a positional adjustment and an adjustment for average vs. replacement but we don't need to get into those) can you get an idea of how many runs a player is worth.

There's no "overestimating" about taking defense into account. A run saved is as valuable as a run scored. (Actually it's a little more valuable [perhaps up to 10%] simply because the differentials are more powerful when the overall runs you're talking about are smaller but we'll leave that part out of it.) You may feel like I'm overestimating the idea of defense simply because I'm one of the few who will actually talk about or quantify it around here, but that doesn't make it any less of a part of what a player gives a team. And I don't think that people are neglecting defense, I know from their very arguments around how guys are good signings or good values that they are.
Big Pimpin
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterMatchup Meltdown ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 13710
(Past Year: 4)
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Building a metric. And being ignorable and stupid.

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby AquaMan2342 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:21 pm

Where do you get the consistency argument from? HRs?


Partially, yes. I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with that either. A lot of it, however, is based on the fact that he's consistently healthy though. You know what you are getting with Dunn. You don't know what you are getting with Bradley. That means something. I could continue and talk about clubhouse presence and what not also (I think Bradley has an unfair reputation, but it's safe to say he's probably not the best teammate)

Did you realize that Dunn was almost twice as productive (in relation to the average player) offensively in 2007 than he was in 2008? In fact, on a per PA basis, Bradley and Dunn were almost the same player offensively. Then Bradley blew Dunn out of the water in 2008.


There's no doubt Dunn's 2007 was great and far better than his 2008. You mention a per PA basis, which is valid, but simply highlights the fact that Bradley can't stay healthy. He played 61 games in 2007. He's only played over 100 games twice in his entire career. This sort of illustrates my last point, but pointing to a "per PA basis" doesn't prove much given Bradley's history.



I'm pretty sure that I never once have said that no one else is able of comprehending this stuff


???

Big Pimpin wrote:If by over-analyze you mean used numbers that you don't understand to prove a point you don't agree with, then fair enough.


I mean, whatever.

There is no way of "proving" UZR or PMR, it's an impossible task. It's a counter-factual analysis. One side of the equation is always going to be "What would have happened if...?" and you can't prove it.


I know this. I realize these stats are helpful, don't get me wrong. I just think they are so intangible that it's hard to really make claims like the Bradley/Dunn one you have made when you use them as the crux of the argument.


The thing that I don't understand is you make this statement like I think I'm some guru because I've read articles and look at the numbers. That couldn't be further from the truth.


When you continue your argument, and tell me I am "probably looking at the wrong numbers", it comes off as real I-am-guru-like. I apologize if that's not your intent.


In any case, there are only two aspects to a position player's value - how many runs he creates and how many runs he prevents. They are equal in value and completely additive.


I completely realize this, and would never argue otherwise. It would be stupid to. I don't think it can be denied that statistical analysis has yielded offensive stats that are far more tangible than the defensive ones. Hopefully this will change in the future. Maybe I am wrong about that though.
AquaMan2342
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 7852
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Searchin for my mainline....I couldn't hit it sideways

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby Big Pimpin » Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:19 pm

AquaMan2342 wrote:
I'm pretty sure that I never once have said that no one else is able of comprehending this stuff


???

Big Pimpin wrote:If by over-analyze you mean used numbers that you don't understand to prove a point you don't agree with, then fair enough.


I mean, whatever.


Heh, I apologize. That was more of a snarky response to a snarky comment than something I truly believe. Sorry. :-b

I know this. I realize these stats are helpful, don't get me wrong. I just think they are so intangible that it's hard to really make claims like the Bradley/Dunn one you have made when you use them as the crux of the argument.


That's fine, but so are OBP and OPS and everything else. None of it truly tells how much better one player is than another.

When you continue your argument, and tell me I am "probably looking at the wrong numbers", it comes off as real I-am-guru-like. I apologize if that's not your intent.


True, and again I apologize. I'm kind of jaded because I don't think I've come across another post mentioning wOBA, which might be the only real stat that quantifies the difference between players. And I'm used to hearing ERA and WHIP and such to explain how good a pitcher is. :-* :*)

Anyway, it's all good. :-)
Big Pimpin
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterMatchup Meltdown ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 13710
(Past Year: 4)
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Building a metric. And being ignorable and stupid.

Re: Fuentes to Angels

Postby AquaMan2342 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:22 pm

No problem man. Debate is healthy for the mind. (Tips hat). B-)
AquaMan2342
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 7852
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Searchin for my mainline....I couldn't hit it sideways

Previous

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: neuronss and 9 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact