2016 Red Sox Hot Stove Discussion Thread

[mvp 78]

Jimmies are rustled. Sand is in various undergarments.

 

Must be an offseason thread!!!

[a700hitter]

And the acid freak chimes in...

[iortiz]

2011 was a collapse. 2010 was one of the more proud seasons unless you are unreasonable - another season where injuries decimated them and they still managed 89 wins and the last two weeks of the season with something to play for. "Injuries are part of the game" is a cute idea except that in 2012 all of their good players were hurt for long stretches - no team can recover from that. You are veering awfully close to the "29 teams have had disgraceful seasons" each year mentality, which makes it hard for sports to do much of anything other than disappoint.

For every failure, there will be always an explanation/justificatio/reason known as excuse. I say, Let Cherington and his crew take their bad luck and enigmas somewhere else.

[dupree]

It's pretty obvious Ben will be back for 2016. The big question now is what happens with the manager position.

Fire Farrell

 

Sign Chuck Norris as manager we win 162 out of 162 games. The other team is too scared to win.

[mvp 78]

And the acid freak chimes in...

 

Sad trombone noises

[Kimmi]

I am not defending iortiz. He can state his own case. I am making my own comment about U.N.

 

Then, that's all I'm doing too, except I was making my own comment about literal versus figurative statements.

[iortiz]

In other order of ideas, here's an interesting article about WAR.

 

The fight over WAR obscures the fact that MLB has moved on

 

Yesterday, there was a giant dustup when Buster Olney tweeted that Josh Donaldson was an MVP candidate (YES!) because of his RBI total (NO!). The response was pretty deafening, as defenders of advanced statistics came out of the woodwork to try to hold Buster accountable. He subsequently defended himself, saying that he is not always for hard-core wonks, and that a substantial portion of his audience has a much more casual interest in the game, and especially in statistics.

 

Well, that made a lot of other people mad, because...well, I'll let our friend Jesse Spector, of The Sporting News, explain in his own words:

 

"Holding out against advanced statistics at this point is indefensible.... It is the job of the media, though, to inform the audience, not to oversimplify because of a perception that people will not understand."

 

Now, as a fellow traveler through sabermetric circles, I sympathize with Jesse, and with everyone else out there who wants some of our leading experts to speak, write, and tweet more intelligently about the game we all love. It's frustrating to think that people might be wrong on the Internet, and that someone with a huge following is encouraging that wrongness.

 

The trouble is that we, too, are wrong.

 

That rolling laughter you heard in the late afternoon was not the Internet responding to my funny Twitter jokes at the expense of the participants in this debate. Rather it came from the front offices around the Major Leagues, as executives at 30 different front offices took a moment from their otherwise busy schedules to laugh at the plebes fighting over a small patch of dirt that they had long ago forsaken.

 

Because, reader, trust me when I say that no Major League teams are using WAR to make their decisions. They have, in the overwhelming majority of cases, moved past it. They each have their own databases and data collection systems. They have their own formulas and approximations of value. And those systems and formulas and approximations are undoubtedly more advanced than anything WAR can provide using publicly available data. If you were running a MLB club, you would have so much more information at your disposal than anything we can glean from WAR.

 

Wins Above Replacement is a tool. Sure, it's a more precise tool than RBI, but a tool nonetheless. While it's one of the better ones we have available to us, it is in no way the be-all end-all of any argument about value or team building. It's a fun starting point for an argument, but it's just an approximation. There are also at least three different calculations of the metric, and those calculations often as misused as runs batted in themselves. Indeed, WAR does not have a monopoly on the truth even with itself, as evidenced by the fact that bWAR, fWAR, and WARP can't resolve their differences. It has barely any greater claim to some kind of capital-T truth than RBI do. And, in that regard, screaming at every reporter that they have to use WAR or WAA (wins above average) or WPA (wins probability added) or wRC+ (weighted runs created, adjusted) is not just counterproductive, but silly. It suggests a level of certainty in the metric(s) that no one should have. Ultimately, I want to believe that most of us understand this.

 

And pretending we have the objectively right answer is the same as demanding everyone think about baseball the way that we do. And that's not fair. WAR is not the Pope, and visiting dignitaries should not have to kiss its ring to talk about the game. It's not our place to look down on people who want to talk about RBI any more than it is the place of Jeff Lunhow to look down on people who are using WAR to talk about his Astros while he uses the pre-cog computers from The Minority Report to plot out Houston's continued rise to dominance over the American League. And it's not fair to demand that Buster Olney and his colleagues constantly "educate" the masses when we don't even know what the right lesson plan is.

[iortiz]

Pretty much what Jd was saying, and he is correct.

[iortiz]

Here's the link "Teams aren't using WAR, so why are we demanding Buster Olney talk about it?"

 

http://www.mlbdailydish.com/2015/8/14/9153493/mlb-buster-olney-war-rbi

[Bellhorn04]

John Farrell has lymphoma and is leaving the team.

[Northern Star]

John Farrell has lymphoma and is leaving the team.

 

Not the way I'd want him to stop managing the team, obviously.

[Bellhorn04]

Not the way I'd want him to stop managing the team, obviously.

 

Ditto.

[Northern Star]

Would you trade Xander for Matt Harvey? (Saw this suggested on a blog).

[Kimmi]

Cherington said that defense would be the top priority this offseason. It looks like JBJ, Betts, and Castillo will get a long look in the outfield.

[Kimmi]

Good to see that Pablo has taken the criticism of his weight gain to heart:

 

Sandoval appears to be making an effort. On the team’s recently completed three-city trip, Sandoval regularly spent time working out with his own personal trainer at the team’s hotel, in addition to the lifting he did at the ballpark.

[jd98]

Your take on WAR is uninformed and silly. I will bet money you don't actually understand why its measurement varies between websites. You can't call it terrible if you don't really understand it. Not that it doesn't have its flaws mind you.

When and how do I collect my money?

 

Pretty much what Jd was saying, and he is correct.

 

Yep, that's what I was getting at. I was exaggerating when I said WAR is terrible. I don't hate it so much for what it is, I hate the way it is far too often being used. I've probably seen thousands of articles or posts where somebody is comparing players for the purpose of determining who is better, and then using WAR as the determining factor. That's its purpose IN THEORY ONLY. If you want to know whether Trout or Harper is having a better season, you can't look at 1 stat and determine for certain (assuming players are reasonably similar level). Such a stat does not exist for practical purposes. WAR is that stat in theory and conjecture. Did Ty Cobb have a better career than Roger Clemens? There are tons of people who would vehemently say yes because his WAR is 10.8 (or 15.6) higher. That is what's terrible. The correct answer is there is no correct answer.

 

I didn't even get into the different site/different WAR thing, or other flaws, or what it is good for (it's not completely worthless, I hinted at it above). I'll save that for another day and another thread.

[Kimmi]

Yep, that's what I was getting at. I was exaggerating when I said WAR is terrible. I don't hate it so much for what it is, I hate the way it is far too often being used. I've probably seen thousands of articles or posts where somebody is comparing players for the purpose of determining who is better, and then using WAR as the determining factor. That's its purpose IN THEORY ONLY. If you want to know whether Trout or Harper is having a better season, you can't look at 1 stat and determine for certain (assuming players are reasonably similar level). Such a stat does not exist for practical purposes. WAR is that stat in theory and conjecture. Did Ty Cobb have a better career than Roger Clemens? There are tons of people who would vehemently say yes because his WAR is 10.8 (or 15.6) higher. That is what's terrible. The correct answer is there is no correct answer.

 

I didn't even get into the different site/different WAR thing, or other flaws, or what it is good for (it's not completely worthless, I hinted at it above). I'll save that for another day and another thread.

 

As has been stated many times, WAR, like every other stat has its flaws, and no assessment should ever be made based on one stat alone. If you want the best assessment of a player, or the best comparison of two players, you look at as much information as you can.

 

That said, IF you were limited to using one stat only, WAR would be the best stat to use. It is the most comprehensive and it does give a very good idea of what a player's value to the the team was.

[reYoukilis]

I think you have to look at who's getting the talent before we blame Farrell. Get rid of Lester and Lackey, don't replace, dont keep bullpen strong an bring aboard wild swingers with little defense. What was he supposed to do with this bunch?

[User Name]

When and how do I collect my money?

 

 

 

Yep, that's what I was getting at. I was exaggerating when I said WAR is terrible. I don't hate it so much for what it is, I hate the way it is far too often being used. I've probably seen thousands of articles or posts where somebody is comparing players for the purpose of determining who is better, and then using WAR as the determining factor. That's its purpose IN THEORY ONLY. If you want to know whether Trout or Harper is having a better season, you can't look at 1 stat and determine for certain (assuming players are reasonably similar level). Such a stat does not exist for practical purposes. WAR is that stat in theory and conjecture. Did Ty Cobb have a better career than Roger Clemens? There are tons of people who would vehemently say yes because his WAR is 10.8 (or 15.6) higher. That is what's terrible. The correct answer is there is no correct answer.

 

I didn't even get into the different site/different WAR thing, or other flaws, or what it is good for (it's not completely worthless, I hinted at it above). I'll save that for another day and another thread.

 

If iortiz says you're correct, you need to reevaluate your opinion.

[Northern Star]

If iortiz says you're correct, you need to reevaluate your opinion.

 

The next time you're going to do anything or say anything or buy anything, think it over very carefully. When you're sure you're right, forget the whole thing.

 

...

[User Name]

He'll bet money on something that can't be established with certainty so he can claim victory regardless of the outcome and not pay. Betting money on what someone thinks ... ? Does Vegas have any betting lines on things like that? LOL!!

 

You and the other idiot can't stop reading my posts. I'm must read material. LOL!

 

Also, I'll say what I want, cocksmokers.

[User Name]

This clown is a mass of contradictions.

 

He refused to bet regarding Porcello, apparently because he hates me haha although he was pretty sure that he was going to be a 3.5 ERA pitcher or something, in what planet?

 

He made a storm of s*** regarding bets, remember? (still do not know why) and now, somehow he is willing to bet just because he "thinks" (pretty sure, actually) that jd does not understand WAR. As always no one can think different, otherwise he uses his typical obtuse cliches "do not make sense" "bitching/whine" "reading comp" "you do not understand" etc, while starting s*** up.

 

Quoting Hornsby "That's just the way it is"

 

How are you this stupid?

 

Don't answer that, it's a rhetorical question.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Sometimes I want to grab popcorn, sometimes I want to hit you guys in the head.

[jd98]

As has been stated many times, WAR, like every other stat has its flaws, and no assessment should ever be made based on one stat alone. If you want the best assessment of a player, or the best comparison of two players, you look at as much information as you can.

 

That said, IF you were limited to using one stat only, WAR would be the best stat to use. It is the most comprehensive and it does give a very good idea of what a player's value to the the team was.

I agree with everything you just said, however...

If you were limited to using only 1 stat, what other choice would you have besides WAR. Pitchers and hitters don't share any other stats (maybe some obscure WAR-like stat?). If you are only comparing hitters to hitters and pitchers to pitchers, I doubt WAR is best for pitchers.

But like you said, it's a bad idea to do that anyway and you need to look at all information available to make the best assessment. WAR becomes useless at that point. You'll be getting the same knowledge you need from all the other stats broken down in a more informative way.

[sk7326]

Would you trade Xander for Matt Harvey? (Saw this suggested on a blog).

 

Interesting question - now young premium every day player at premium position vs potential ace ... let's put it this way, that is a fair question. I probably wouldn't, but I would not argue with anybody who says "yes"

[mvp 78]

Sometimes I want to grab popcorn, sometimes I want to hit you guys in the head.

 

And sometimes both!

 

*tries linking video of Mankind hitting the Rock over the head with a bag of popcorn. Phone crashes*

 

f***...

[sk7326]

Here's the link "Teams aren't using WAR, so why are we demanding Buster Olney talk about it?"

 

http://www.mlbdailydish.com/2015/8/14/9153493/mlb-buster-olney-war-rbi

 

That is a piece that sounds smarter than it is. Of course teams don't use WAR - not because it's bad, but because competitive intelligence has moved to different, trade secret sort of things. WAR (or WARs components more accurately) was a place to start. The question is for fans among publicly available resources. WAR is miles better as an item to cite than OPS, which itself was better than RBIs. It's just evolution in this field.

 

The point about multiple ways to calculate WAR is a strength of the current state than a weakness. Instead of arbitrarily resolving questions about the nature of baseball, this provides a range of outcomes based on that assumption ... which is more accurate anyway.

[Kimmi]

I agree with everything you just said, however...

If you were limited to using only 1 stat, what other choice would you have besides WAR. Pitchers and hitters don't share any other stats (maybe some obscure WAR-like stat?). If you are only comparing hitters to hitters and pitchers to pitchers, I doubt WAR is best for pitchers.

But like you said, it's a bad idea to do that anyway and you need to look at all information available to make the best assessment. WAR becomes useless at that point. You'll be getting the same knowledge you need from all the other stats broken down in a more informative way.

 

One of the beauties of WAR is that it allows you to compare pitchers to hitters, first basemen to center fielders, and a current player to a player from the 1970s. Again, it's not perfect, but it does a pretty good comprehensive job. Also, even with looking at all the other stats, WAR gives a nice summary of a player's overall value.

[Kimmi]

That is a piece that sounds smarter than it is. Of course teams don't use WAR - not because it's bad, but because competitive intelligence has moved to different, trade secret sort of things. WAR (or WARs components more accurately) was a place to start. The question is for fans among publicly available resources. WAR is miles better as an item to cite than OPS, which itself was better than RBIs. It's just evolution in this field.

 

The point about multiple ways to calculate WAR is a strength of the current state than a weakness. Instead of arbitrarily resolving questions about the nature of baseball, this provides a range of outcomes based on that assumption ... which is more accurate anyway.

 

Thank you.

[Elktonnick]

Has anyone noticed how well Castillo has been playing of late. Looks like he has adjusted to life in the major leagues and has shaken off the cobwebs of his extended absence from competitive baseball. Travis Shaw may yet get us to forget Mike Napoli and Bradley may have finally figured it out. I find these very encouraging signs, now if only they can find some pitching.