Is the actual rotation the worst in the last 10 Y?

[a700hitter]

I know that he is not a lawyer. But all of us have a little bit of "lawyer" in us. Bell is one of the most logical and common sense posters on this board, and he has the ability, better than most, to convince me of an opposing argument.

 

Lawyer training is obvious to other lawyers. The rest of you are amateurs.

[a700hitter]

No, it's not. And you have no idea whether the market would bear the price for Porcello.

 

If there are no other number two or three pitchers msing north of $20/tear that is the best indication of fair market value -- comparable sales.

[a700hitter]

You can continue to call the data invalid, faulty, not a "study" etc. because it doesn't support your opinion, but that doesn't make it any less valid. It's funny how you were ready to accept the data on Billy Hamilton, because it supported your opinion, even though that was based on 49 PAs.

 

I didn't show you data from one article, but from 3 different "studies". The guys that do this research do this for a living. They know what they're doing. They acknowledge that the research isn't perfect, but that doesn't mean that their results are incorrect.

 

I can be convinced by evidence also. I've been wrong before, so I wouldn't be surprised to be proven wrong on this. Show me some evidence, otherwise all you have is an unsupported opinion. Saying that you've watched baseball for 50 years is not evidence.

 

I was neither looking for the article to support or counter my opinion. It isn't a big issue for me. It is just an opinion that I have. It isn't a belief. I didnt reject the study because it didn't support my opinion. I rejected it, because it lacked statiscal integrity. I wasn't willing to accept the data on Hamilton as proof. I thought it was a better indicator of his particular effect and I suggested that the sample size would become more reliable as it gets larger over the next few years. I also think that the data size for Ells must be fairly substantial. It really isn't that important for my opinion to be declared " right". But for you victory is apparently a must.

[SoxnCycles]

You can continue to call the data invalid, faulty, not a "study" etc. because it doesn't support your opinion, but that doesn't make it any less valid. It's funny how you were ready to accept the data on Billy Hamilton, because it supported your opinion, even though that was based on 49 PAs.

 

I didn't show you data from one article, but from 3 different "studies". The guys that do this research do this for a living. They know what they're doing. They acknowledge that the research isn't perfect, but that doesn't mean that their results are incorrect.

 

I can be convinced by evidence also. I've been wrong before, so I wouldn't be surprised to be proven wrong on this. Show me some evidence, otherwise all you have is an unsupported opinion. Saying that you've watched baseball for 50 years is not evidence.

 

He's one of those "all opinions are valid, even if they're based on nothing but thin air" folks.

 

He knows you're right Kimmi.

He just can't bring himself to say it.

Dude's got issues.

[cp176]

As an aside from the Porcello controversy here, Masterson did hit 90mph once last night. Who were those guys he was pitching to anyway? Without actually seeing him pitch, it is hard for me to judge his performance. On the computer, it looked pretty good. It did look as though he left a few pitches up which could cost him greatly when he faces a team that can hit. hope he gets stronger as we go along.

 

 

Regardless of what the game stats said from Buccholtz's last spring training start, I still saw it as an improvement for him over his previous ones. I saw the game. He made a couple of mistakes that cost him. On opening day, he built on that start. I was impressed without his ability to maintain his fastball velocity throughout the course of the game. Those extra mph's make his change up a deadly pitch. Hope he stays healthy.

[Dojji]

With Masterson, I'm a lot more worried about his movement than his velocity. When he's got that sinker dancing right it doesn't matter if it comes in at 85 or 95, though of course as the season warms up I do expect the velocity to improve.

[User Name]

Question back at you: what do you think will be the market value in annual salary next year, 2016, for a pitcher of Porcello's age who is projected to put up a 2.7 WAR for the next 4 years? Put your numbers out there and we can really get somewhere on this.

 

He has no numbers. All he can do is make s*** up because he doesn't "like" a player.

 

By the way, good work on your arguments Bellhorn.

 

The way the market is exploding, you can be more than certain that Porcello was going to be close to the AAV he got from the Red Sox with more years attached to the contract unless he suffered a catastrophic injury and/or completely imploded during his platform season. iortiz is arguing because he doesn't know better, and a700 is arguing for the sake of arguing. Par for the course.

[User Name]

With Masterson, I'm a lot more worried about his movement than his velocity. When he's got that sinker dancing right it doesn't matter if it comes in at 85 or 95, though of course as the season warms up I do expect the velocity to improve.

 

That's not how it works. At all. He needs both movement and velocity to be succesful, specially against lefties. You can't get by on sinker movement alone. The difference in speeds between his heater and his offspeed/breaking stuff is vital, specially against lefties.

[User Name]

He's one of those "all opinions are valid, even if they're based on nothing but thin air" folks.

 

He knows you're right Kimmi.

He just can't bring himself to say it.

Dude's got issues.

 

I like you. Please post more.

[a700hitter]

Masterson definitely hung a few sliders in the middle of the plate that the batters did not capitalize on. He did hit 90 a few time, but I remember that he used to throw substantially harder.

[sk7326]

With Masterson, I'm a lot more worried about his movement than his velocity. When he's got that sinker dancing right it doesn't matter if it comes in at 85 or 95, though of course as the season warms up I do expect the velocity to improve.

 

The problem with Masterson has always been the same. His 3/4 arm slot means he offers lefties no deception. And since he does not have a credible changeup, he has nothing to keep lefties off of him. His stuff needs to be good and he needs to be precise against lefties. One of the hypotheses I think the Red Sox made was that with half of his starts in front of a cavernous RF and in front of a plus defense (especially on the right side of the infield) that his lefty issues can be mitigated or hidden. I am not sure if it was on purpose, but Sox were smart to put Masterson in at #3 and avoid subjecting him to Yankee Stadium.

[a700hitter]

With Masterson, I'm a lot more worried about his movement than his velocity. When he's got that sinker dancing right it doesn't matter if it comes in at 85 or 95, though of course as the season warms up I do expect the velocity to improve.

 

What were his physical issues last season that caused the loss of velocity?

[iortiz]

Your point can be summarized in two words: Porcello sucks.

 

To me, yup, he is a another pitcher del montón.

[iortiz]

Question back at you: what do you think will be the market value in annual salary next year, 2016, for a pitcher of Porcello's age who is projected to put up a 2.7 WAR for the next 4 years? Put your numbers out there and we can really get somewhere on this.

 

It's kind of my question, Would you offer that contract if he posts his 2013 numbers again this year?.

[iortiz]

I am a must read.

 

That's right my friend. BTW I just arrived to NY. It's rainy and cold to me considering that in Mexico City has been 25 C these days. Ready for tomo's game.

[a700hitter]

Question back at you: what do you think will be the market value in annual salary next year, 2016, for a pitcher of Porcello's age who is projected to put up a 2.7 WAR for the next 4 years? Put your numbers out there and we can really get somewhere on this.

And if the market gets to Porello level for mid-level or second tier starters, it will have been the Red Sox that helped establish that market. I think this discussion has established something quite clearly. Signing Porcello was not a value proposition of the sort that GMs like to crow about. At $20 million, he is not an undervalued asset. We have been debating for more than argue a day, and it is a tough arguement that he is worth $20 million. Nevermind that he is a bargain. I just thought that it was RedSox FO philosophy to seek out undervalued assets. I don't think Porcello fits that category. That being said, I do think he will be a solid pitcher this year, but he is not a financial bargain.

[iortiz]

And if the market gets to Porello level for mid-level or second tier starters, it will have been the Red Sox that helped establish that market. I think this discussion has established something quite clearly. Signing Porcello was not a value proposition of the sort that GMs like to crow about. At $20 million, he is not an undervalued asset. We have been debating for more than argue a day, and it is a tough arguement that he is worth $20 million. Nevermind that he is a bargain. I just thought that it was RedSox FO philosophy to seek out undervalued assets. I don't think Porcello fits that category. That being said, I do think he will be a solid pitcher this year, but he is not a financial bargain.

 

The funny thing is that most of the board agree in saying that he was overpaid. On the other hand some are saying that he worth 20 M the last couple of years and likely will worth this contract for the next four Y... So if he worth 20 M the last couple of years and will likely worth this contract for the next four, why people still saying that he was overpaid? haha

[cp176]

The funny thing is that most of the board agree in saying that he was overpaid. On the other hand some are saying that he worth 20 M the last couple of years and likely will worth this contract for the next four Y... So if he worth 20 M the last couple of years and will likely worth this contract for the next four, why people still saying that he was overpaid? haha

 

You know what iortiz, I think that every one of them is overpaid. They just won't listen to me though. Most of us are just trying to get along. Maybe even try to understand the importance of the use of metrics when it comes to the game. Once again - this is just my opinion - I bet a large number of the players who play the game do not care about such things and would not understand the data if given to them. It's a stupid financial world we live in and the Red Sox are just as stupid as everybody else. They are intelligent enough to know what they were getting for their investment. The amount of money is no big deal to them.

[sk7326]

It's kind of my question, Would you offer that contract if he posts his 2013 numbers again this year?.

 

But that's why GM's get the big bucks. Porcello has done what he has done entering his Age 26 season. If you think he's going to put up his 2013 for the next 4 years, then $20M a year is going to be high. If you think his 2014 is the baseline, then $20M a year is going to be high-ish but reasonable. But if you project improvement - the sort of thing you expect from 26 year olds? (Remember Jason Varitek entered the majors as a 25 year old) Then $20M a year is absolutely his going rate and maybe even cheap. The Sox are projecting growth - and projecting growth from a 26 year old who is already a mid-rotation level starter, can lead to a good place.

[User Name]

But that's why GM's get the big bucks. Porcello has done what he has done entering his Age 26 season. If you think he's going to put up his 2013 for the next 4 years, then $20M a year is going to be high. If you think his 2014 is the baseline, then $20M a year is going to be high-ish but reasonable. But if you project improvement - the sort of thing you expect from 26 year olds? (Remember Jason Varitek entered the majors as a 25 year old) Then $20M a year is absolutely his going rate and maybe even cheap. The Sox are projecting growth - and projecting growth from a 26 year old who is already a mid-rotation level starter, can lead to a good place.

 

Logic, thy name is SK7326.

[Bellhorn04]

And if the market gets to Porello level for mid-level or second tier starters, it will have been the Red Sox that helped establish that market. I think this discussion has established something quite clearly. Signing Porcello was not a value proposition of the sort that GMs like to crow about. At $20 million, he is not an undervalued asset. We have been debating for more than argue a day, and it is a tough arguement that he is worth $20 million. Nevermind that he is a bargain. I just thought that it was RedSox FO philosophy to seek out undervalued assets.

 

Based on what? Look at the guys the Sox signed before the 2013 season: Napoli, Victorino, Drew, Gomes, Dempster. Were any of those undervalued assets? Look at this year's free agent signings: Sandoval, Hanley, Masterson. Any of those undervalued?

[Spudboy]

What a bore.

[Bellhorn04]

It's kind of my question, Would you offer that contract if he posts his 2013 numbers again this year?.

 

You're dodging the question. I'm saying yes, 2.7 WAR is worth $20 million a year, like it or not.

 

How much do you say it's worth?

[a700hitter]

Saying that you've watched baseball for 50 years is not evidence.

The funny thing is that I am certain that over 50 years, I have witnessed more elite base stealing threats on first base than is covered under that statiscal "study" that is based on data from 2003-2005. Easily 10 fold more. Is it evidence what I saw? Of course it is. Is it conclusive evidence? Of course not, and neither are these so-called studies. The effect a baserunner has on a pitcher a batter differ enormously depending on the individuals. Many batters are completely oblivious to the runners on base. Others seem to be engaged with and part of the baserunning strategy. Other batters, it bothers. I don't think a runner on first base bothered Yaz, because he often spoke about making a living using the hole in that situation. I do know that he hated players dancing on second base. He would tell them to stand still and he would drive them in. I suspect that these stories annoy you because you think I am presenting them as some sort of anectodal evidence. I am not. These stories are part of the beauty and fabric of the game to me, and this is a forum where I can tell them.

 

As far as this issue of proving statistically whether a speedy runner on first base has a positive or negative impact on a batter's performance, the real answer is sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. It depends on the individual's involved. The data has no predictive value at all. It would be like using a study that that says 60 percent of people prefer chocolate ice cream to conclude that chocolate ice cream is superior. I realize that this is a bad analaogy, because chocolate ice cream is superior. LOL! Anyway, Kimmi, we can both agree that these surveys are not perfect, and some are less perfect than others. I like the statiscal aspect of the game, and I don't discount it at all. I am not the traditionalist that you think I am. My father taught me about the statiscal folly of the bunt and the insufficiency of relying on batting average befoe Bill James hit puberty. I also have realized that some times those assumptions and statistics get thrown out the window. If you have a guy who can get 20-30 bunt base hits in a season and his success rate is very high, it is a weapon. For most players, bunting is just to be used as an element of surprise and it is otherwise a wasted AB. I like to look at statistical studies, but I also recognize shoddy work for what it is.

[User Name]

Based on what? Look at the guys the Sox signed before the 2013 season: Napoli, Victorino, Drew, Gomes, Dempster. Were any of those undervalued assets? Look at this year's free agent signings: Sandoval, Hanley, Masterson. Any of those undervalued?

 

They still do that, mind you. They just do it through a different method. Baseball economy is exploding and the SABR movement has taken the baseball world by the balls. It's not so easy finding "undervalued assets" when everyone's looking for them. a700 is just using his typical faulty logic to justify an unjustifiable opinion.

 

The Red Sox current MO is not rocket science: Draft the best available talent, exploit the international market by any means necessary, and avoid stupid long-term contracts even if it means overpaying in the short term. Point/set/match.

 

The hilarious thing is that the two people whining the most about the Porcello contract are the same two people who would whine the most if Porcello had a good platform year and they let him walk because he got too expensive.

 

Just insufferable.

[a700hitter]

Based on what? Look at the guys the Sox signed before the 2013 season: Napoli, Victorino, Drew, Gomes, Dempster. Were any of those undervalued assets? Look at this year's free agent signings: Sandoval, Hanley, Masterson. Any of those undervalued?

I never made the assertion that the Red Sox philosophy was to seek out undervalued assets. I am noting it because others have made that assertion to place a feather in the cap of the FO. And yes, those people asserted that the 2013 acquisitions were exacty those types of acquisitions.

[a700hitter]

What a bore.

^Oh and you are Mr. Excitement?

[Kimmi]

I was neither looking for the article to support or counter my opinion. It isn't a big issue for me. It is just an opinion that I have. It isn't a belief. I didnt reject the study because it didn't support my opinion. I rejected it, because it lacked statiscal integrity. I wasn't willing to accept the data on Hamilton as proof. I thought it was a better indicator of his particular effect and I suggested that the sample size would become more reliable as it gets larger over the next few years. I also think that the data size for Ells must be fairly substantial. It really isn't that important for my opinion to be declared " right". But for you victory is apparently a must.

 

 

I'm not trying to "win" anything. The reason why I come to these forums is to debate these very topics. It's something that I enjoy doing. Yes, I feel strongly about my opinions because, unlike you, I do like to do my homework. When I make a claim, especially one that goes against the grain, you can be sure that I've researched the topic and can back up what I say. If someone posts a false claim as fact, I'm going to call them on it. As a lawyer, you should certainly be able to understand that.

[Kimmi]

He's one of those "all opinions are valid, even if they're based on nothing but thin air" folks.

 

He knows you're right Kimmi.

He just can't bring himself to say it.

Dude's got issues.

 

 

Thank you for your vote of confidence.

 

You know me well enough to know that I don't post things on a whim. Well, at least not usually. LOL

[Kimmi]

But that's why GM's get the big bucks. Porcello has done what he has done entering his Age 26 season. If you think he's going to put up his 2013 for the next 4 years, then $20M a year is going to be high. If you think his 2014 is the baseline, then $20M a year is going to be high-ish but reasonable. But if you project improvement - the sort of thing you expect from 26 year olds? (Remember Jason Varitek entered the majors as a 25 year old) Then $20M a year is absolutely his going rate and maybe even cheap. The Sox are projecting growth - and projecting growth from a 26 year old who is already a mid-rotation level starter, can lead to a good place.

 

 

Thank goodness for posters like you.