Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau
by 1Perry » Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:18 pm
by motherscratcher » Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:52 pm
by 1Perry » Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:54 pm
by skatingtripods » Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:58 pm
by bookelly » Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm
by skatingtripods » Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:40 pm
bookelly wrote:I predict we make a serious run on Santana now.
by dazindiansfanuk » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:26 pm
by Dnthateonthepronk » Tue Feb 18, 2014 12:12 am
by Erie Warrior » Tue Feb 18, 2014 5:46 am
skatingtripods wrote:My bigger concern is the 6/100 Homer Bailey's rumored to be getting.
by British_Pharaoh » Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:19 am
by noles1 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 2:50 pm
by skatingtripods » Tue Feb 18, 2014 5:43 pm
by ChoccoIndians » Tue Feb 18, 2014 5:57 pm
by Dnthateonthepronk » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:00 pm
by 1Perry » Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:13 pm
Dnthateonthepronk wrote:Ive now gotten into an arguement in my ESPN Fantasy Dynasty League with some guy who says the Ubaldo deal is a steal and is better than Edwin Jacksons deal
by skatingtripods » Wed Feb 19, 2014 2:41 pm
by 1Perry » Wed Feb 19, 2014 6:53 pm
skatingtripods wrote:6/105 (7/130 w/ option) the official number for Bailey.Let the Masterson farewell tour begin.
by skatingtripods » Wed Feb 19, 2014 7:17 pm
1Perry wrote:skatingtripods wrote:6/105 (7/130 w/ option) the official number for Bailey.Let the Masterson farewell tour begin. I have to admit.....It's things like this that make me enjoy going to minor league games more and more. I understand it's not just about wins but nobody is worth a million plus a win.
by bookelly » Wed Feb 19, 2014 7:21 pm
by 1Perry » Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:38 pm
bookelly wrote:I'm sorry, but Bailey contract is just about the stupidest thing I've ever seen. That's the kind of albatross deal that'll set a franchise back a decade. Dumb move.
by bac5665 » Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:00 pm
skatingtripods wrote:If you break down the Bailey deal by $/WAR, he's probably worth that. He's trending upwards in his prime, but for the old school thinkers out there, they simply see a guy whose career record is essentially .500 and his 4.25 ERA and 4.00 FIP are pretty much league average when you consider the ERA is higher and the FIP is lower. He's also only made two seasons of 30+ MLB starts and he's getting $17.5M per. So, yeah, depending on how you evaluate players and evaluate MLB financials, it can be pretty disenfranchising.
by bookelly » Thu Feb 20, 2014 5:20 am
by skatingtripods » Thu Feb 20, 2014 10:38 am
bac5665 wrote:The fact is that pitching is damn expensive, but it's because it's hard to get. We need to be willing to spend that much on pitchers, at least, or we're only going to compete for 2 or 3 years every decade. Tops.
Scrub 0-1 WARRole Player 1-2 WARSolid Starter 2-3 WARGood Player 3-4 WARAll-Star 4-5 WARSuperstar 5-6 WARMVP 6+ WAR
by Govbarney » Fri Feb 21, 2014 3:44 pm
skatingtripods wrote:I don't think the problem for the Indians is the AAV. I think the problem is the contract length. Six and seven-year contracts for pitchers are serious gambles and the Indians can't afford to be tied to a player for that long at a substantial percentage of their payroll.I won't say that the Indians have mastered the art of cheap wins via the use of platoons, because they've had their share of failures, but you can put together an above-replacement level position player with a platoon at a very good cost. Take the Murphy-Raburn platoon in RF for this season. They'll be paying $8.25M for a player that should be worth close to 3 WAR, if not more. You can't exactly platoon a starting pitcher, so they have to try and find a market inefficiency elsewhere.That's why they're forced into taking gambles on guys like Shaun Marcum and Aaron Harang. That's why they took the gamble that paid off on Scott Kazmir. That's why they never got rid of Ubaldo Jimenez when we all wanted him gone and parts of the front office probably did too. That's why they have to hope for league-average production from guys like Josh Tomlin, Zach McAllister, etc.What a lot of people fail to realize is that #4 and #5 starters all over the league are below league average. Without a true ace, if the Indians can have five starters at league average or better, they can compete. Last season is a prime example. By fWAR: Masterson 3.4, Jimenez 3.2, Kluber 2.6, Kazmir 2.5, McAllister/Salazar/Bauer/Carrasco/Myers 1.9 (subtract Myers's three starts and it's 2.4). Fangraphs: An average full-time position player is worth +2 WAR, while average bench players contribute much less (typically less than +1 WAR). Average starting pitchers also are worth around +2 WAR, while relief pitchers are considered superb if they crack +1 WAR.Code: Select allScrub 0-1 WARRole Player 1-2 WARSolid Starter 2-3 WARGood Player 3-4 WARAll-Star 4-5 WARSuperstar 5-6 WARMVP 6+ WARSo that's what you aim for. A couple starters above 3 fWAR and the rest at or above 2 fWAR. Since Fangraphs's pitching WAR calculations use FIP and B-Ref's don't, my guess is that the Indians use some variation of Fangraphs's formula with their own spin, possibly RA9-WAR or something to that effect.We might as well get used to the Indians trying to do it this way until somebody gets burned with a long-term deal and the market regulates itself, if that even happens. The framework the Indians are trying to construct is to have an above average offense (which they did), an above average bullpen (which they didn't in the first half), and an average or better starting rotation. They'll take their chances with that, getting an edge wherever and whenever possible.
by YahooFanChicago » Sun Apr 13, 2014 7:26 pm
by skatingtripods » Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:34 am
by CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! » Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:13 am
by Adverb Harry » Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:47 am
Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB
Users browsing this forum: ybot and 2 guests