Otani posted, will be in MLB in 2018

[brett05]

? Who said it did. The general assumption on war is 25 replacement level players would be 40-45 wins.


This is also wrong. A replacement level player is 0 war. It's literally in the title(wins above replacment). An average every day MLB players is 2 WAR. In other words, if you have 8 starters who are at 2 WAR and 5 pitchers that's 26 WAR or 71 wins. Bench players rarely accrue enough playing time to even approach 2 wins. But for the sake of argument if you say the remaining 5 hitters are worth 1 win a piece and the remaining 7 relievers are worth around half a win each(relievers make far for less "value") you're right around 81 wins for an "average" MLB team.

https://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/

 

[CSF77]

I’m trying to figure how a Win above replacement is now at 2 now. Isn’t the term mean that replacement is 0. A 2 means 2 above replacement not replacement are now 2 wins above themselves.

WAR should just be a projection guideline. The games are still won on the field. But you have to have talent and WAR is the best guideline right now to build a team for the next year.

 

[beckdawg]

https://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/

Why are you pointing me toward this? You're clearly the one who doesn't understand it because everything you've said about it is just categorically wrong.

League-average WAR rates vary. An average full-time position player is worth about 2 WAR, while average bench players contribute much less (typically between 0 and 1 WAR). Average starting pitchers also are worth around 2 WAR, while relief pitchers are considered superb if they crack +1 WAR.

That is literally from the link you just shared.

 

[beckdawg]

I’m trying to figure how a Win above replacement is now at 2 now. Isn’t the term mean that replacement is 0. A 2 means 2 above replacement not replacement are now 2 wins above themselves.

WAR should just be a projection guideline. The games are still won on the field. But you have to have talent and WAR is the best guideline right now to build a team for the next year.

It isn't. 0 wins is replacement level. It always has been that way. 2 wins above average is an average regular player be that a starting pitcher or a starting positional player. Bench players as mentioned are worth far less as are relievers.

WAR isn't meant to be a forecast of what a team will win really. The fact of the matter is the margin of error in forecasting baseball is pretty large. In any given season an "average" MLB team that should win 81 games can only win 70 games or they could win 90 if things go right/wrong. Like the people who don't understand WAR often get pissy when a team under/over performs a number. But often times it's something as simple as a star player getting hurt and not producing his expected WAR. And that doesn't get factored in. Also, you will often have teams play far better than normal in 1 run games that causes them to be above their projection.

Simply put, I wouldn't use WAR for projecting wins at all. When I talk about it i generally try to convey the idea of talent level. For example, when I was talking about the teams above I mentioned the comparison between the M's/TEX/LAA and the talent level of the cubs. those teams need 3-4 all-star level players(4 wins) to be where the cubs were last year as a team that underperformed their WAR projections. In other words, the cubs have far more talent of their roster. Obviously as the cubs proved last year, you can underperform your talent but generally if you're at that level you're still going to be a very good team.

 

[brett05]

Why are you pointing me toward this? You're clearly the one who doesn't understand it because everything you've said about it is just categorically wrong.



That is literally from the link you just shared.

A role player is worth 2 war. A team of 25 role players do not win 95 games. Better for you?

 

[CSF77]

A role player is worth 2 war. A team of 25 role players do not win 95 games. Better for you?

No stars or scrubs. In theory it means 95 wins but that means most of the SP are 2/3 starters. All arms in the pen are around Anderson/Minor quality. Bench is all Happ/Baez talent.

If you have a deep farm then in theory this would be feesible. Basically be Oak and sell when their WAR gets closer to 3 to reload more 2 WAR prospects.

Basically a high floor built team. Almora quality prospects

 

[beckdawg]

A role player is worth 2 war. A team of 25 role players do not win 95 games. Better for you?

No a starter is worth 2 wins on average. A role player is worth between 0-1. I literally cited the fangraphs page for you. Hell I'll even do the math for you.

Starting base of 45

8 position players = 16 wins(8 x 2 a pop)
5 starting pitchers = 10 wins(5 x 2 a pop)
5 bench players = ~5 wins(5 x 1 a pop)
7 relievers = ~3.5 wins(7 x 0.5 a pop)

That totals up to 34.5 wins above replacement. 45 + 34.5 = 79.5 wins.

To get to your magical 95 wins you need to be 50 wins above replacement. The literal best bullpen in baseball in terms of fWAR was the yankees at 9.2(median was KC at 3.9). The best group of starters was Cleveland at 23.1(median was the blue jays at 10.7). Separating starting position players and bench players out is a bit more difficult since fangraphs doesn't distinguish between the two like relievers and starters. But in terms of bats on teams the best was Houston at 33.0(median was the red sox at 17.8). You'll note that in my example above of an average team you would have roughly 21 wins from batters on an average team(actual median last year was 17.8), 10 wins from starters(actual median was 10.7), and 3.5 wins from relievers(actual was 3.9). The max if you had the best from each group last year was 65 wins above replacement which would put a team on pace for roughly 110 wins which just so happens to be really close to the number the M's set the record on.

Just as an example here if I take the #5 team in each of those 3 categories it would be the cubs at 26.7 for hitting, the dodgers at 16.7 for starters and the angels at 6.6 for relievers. That's exactly 50 WAR. In other words a 95 win team would literally be top 5 in all 3 categories.

 

[beckdawg]

Also just so we're clear here, if you think 2 fWAR is a "role player" you again have 0 clue what you're talking about. Last season there were 93 hitters in all of baseball who had 2 or more fWAR. There were 44 starters with 2 wins and 12 relievers. That's 149 players out of the 750 players on active rosters(not to mention guys who shuffle back and forth between AAA/MLB) or roughly 20% of players are worth 2 wins.

Edit: Minor correction here. I didn't realize i had the qualified pa's filter on. There's 135 hitters who had 2 wins or more, 69 starters, and still 12 relievers. So that would be 216 out of 750 or 29% but I think the point still stands.

 

[brett05]

No a starter is worth 2 wins on average. A role player is worth between 0-1. I literally cited the fangraphs page for you. Hell I'll even do the math for you.

You are being rude and clearly did not read my link. After this post I am done talking about this subject with you

From the link I provided:

League-average WAR rates vary. An average full-time position player is worth about 2 WAR, while average bench players contribute much less (typically between 0 and 1 WAR). Average starting pitchers also are worth around 2 WAR, while relief pitchers are considered superb if they crack +1 WAR
For position players and starting pitchers, here is a good rule-of-thumb chart:
Scrub 0-1 WAR
Role Player 1-2 WAR
Solid Starter 2-3 WAR
Good Player 3-4 WAR
All-Star 4-5 WAR
Superstar 5-6 WAR
MVP 6+ WAR
https://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/
1-2 WAR is a ROLE PLAYER

 

[beckdawg]

You are being rude and clearly did not read my link. After this post I am done talking about this subject with you

From the link I provided:

League-average WAR rates vary. An average full-time position player is worth about 2 WAR, while average bench players contribute much less (typically between 0 and 1 WAR). Average starting pitchers also are worth around 2 WAR, while relief pitchers are considered superb if they crack +1 WAR
For position players and starting pitchers, here is a good rule-of-thumb chart:
Scrub 0-1 WAR
Role Player 1-2 WAR
Solid Starter 2-3 WAR
Good Player 3-4 WAR
All-Star 4-5 WAR
Superstar 5-6 WAR
MVP 6+ WAR
https://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/
1-2 WAR is a ROLE PLAYER

And you're entirely ignoring the context in which that is referencing. If i'm being rude then whatever but it's incredibly frustrating because you are either being ignorant of that fact or purposefully oblivious to build a straw man argument. This is literally in what you just quoted. An average FULL TIME position player is 2 WAR. You're saying that every single player on a team is a full time player by arguing that any team can have 25 2 win players. That's just not how it works and you should at least understand that before trying to suggest you know what you're dealing with.

If a full time player puts up between 1-1.9 WAR he shouldn't be a full time player and on a good team he'd be a bench player. That's why they list 1-2 WAR as a role player because role players should be on the bench and that's why anyone from 0-1 WAR is listed as a scrub because they shouldn't even be in the majors as they are essentially replacement level or marginally better.

Like I said if I'm being a dick I'm sorry but you're acting like you understand WAR when you're consistently using wrong information. Ask yourself this, why would fangraphs who are a group of people dedicated to stats do something as stupid as saying what you're alleging is the way you use WAR? They know better than anyone that you can't have 25 2 win players to get to 50 wins while being in your words a bunch of role players. It would be a nonsensical argument for anyone to make.

I'll give this one more try. The reason your expectations aren't working with the way WAR is designed is because you're assuming bench players and relievers often get to 2 wins. They flat out don't. The cubs were a 92 win team and arguably have the talent of a 95 or 100 win team. If we assume their "starting line up" was bryant, rizzo, contreras, Baez, Russell, Jay, Heyward, and Schwarber last season, their bench consisted of Zobrist(0.3 fWAR), Almora(1.2), La Stella(0.8), Happ(1.8), and Avilla/Montero(0.8 combined). Now Happ was a bit of a special case obviously because he was essentially a starter upon being called up. But regardless here, the point is that not one of the guys was at 2 wins and the cubs were arguably the deepest team in baseball.

If we go to relievers, the cubs bullpen was average-ish ranked 14th. Davis was worth 1.1 wins, Strop was worth 1, Edwards was worth 0.9. Duensing was worth 0.7. Uehara was worth 0.6. Rondon was worth 0.3. Wilson was worth 0.2. Monty was worth 0.2. Zastryzny was worth -0.1. Pena was worth -0.2. and Grimm was worth -0.4. No one else threw more than 10 innings. None of those relievers are even approaching 1.5 wins let alone 2. The yankees who had the best bullpen in baseball had exactly 2 relievers(chapman 1.6 and chad green 2.3) over 1.5 wins and only another 3 above 1(Betances 1.2, Warren 1.2, and Robertson 1.1).

So simply put that's 13 guys on a team that are never going to be close to 2 wins. That's why your argument of 25 2-win players falls apart. You're not even going to realistically have 8 position players at 2+ wins. Houston was the best team in baseball in terms of batters and they had 6(Altuve, Correra, Springer, Gonzalez, Bregman and Reddick). Their next 2 players were Gurriel at 1.8 and McCann at 1.6.

 

[chibears55]

Been thinking about this today woth Cubs being the oddball team still on Ohtani list..

With Ohtani being just 23 and new to the states and obviously pro ball here..
And with Maddon madness

What if the pitch to Ohtani is to basically have him be an OFer/ reliever / 6th starter

Think about it...

He can start in OF most games , be used later in relief in some games, and then go back to OF after his inning or two

Or

Come in in relief, then go play OF afterwards

And

In dog days, maddon can use him as a 6th starter to give guys an extra day off or start DHers

I think that would be a great way to break him in slowly as a SP for at least the first year..


Off Topic...

I still think 99% chance Schwarber getting traded this off season...

If they dont get Ohtani and or fall short of signing a TOR FA, theyll have to turn to trading someone like Schwarber in a package to get that type of starter..

Or

If they do get Ohtani

Then theyll have to make an opening in OF and Schwarber could be the expendable one who also might bring them in solid bullpen help, like maybe a Betances type from yankees ..

We'll see...
Things will get intetesting next week



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

Been thinking about this today woth Cubs being the oddball team still on Ohtani list..

With Ohtani being just 23 and new to the states and obviously pro ball here..
And with Maddon madness

What if the pitch to Ohtani is to basically have him be an OFer/ reliever / 6th starter

Think about it...

He can start in OF most games , be used later in relief in some games, and then go back to OF after his inning or two

Or

Come in in relief, then go play OF afterwards

And

In dog days, maddon can use him as a 6th starter to give guys an extra day off or start DHers

I think that would be a great way to break him in slowly as a SP for at least the first year..


Off Topic...

I still think 99% chance Schwarber getting traded this off season...

If they dont get Ohtani and or fall short of signing a TOR FA, theyll have to turn to trading someone like Schwarber in a package to get that type of starter..

Or

If they do get Ohtani

Then theyll have to make an opening in OF and Schwarber could be the expendable one who also might bring them in solid bullpen help, like maybe a Betances type from yankees ..

We'll see...
Things will get intetesting next week



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Think the idea of going with a 6 man rotation is fairly plausible given the cubs largely were doing something similar already. I'm not sure it would be an exact 6 starter type situation because it would leave you in a bit of a bind bullpen wise occasionally. But if he only had to make say 20-25 starters rather than 32 that a typical five man rotation does that would help.

As for trading Schwarber I don't really buy it and here's why. First I've previously outlined how this front office believes in Schwarber and how important they view character and leaderships skills which are two things Theo has singled Schwarber out for. But from a more practical stand point you're contending Ohtani needs the room to play. That I disagree with because I don't think you're thinking about how the roster will be constructed. Right now you have Heyward as a lock in RF for a lot of games, Almora in CF, and Schwarber in LF with Happ as your only other OFer. That's 4 guys. Ohtani would make 5 which is interesting because him playing once or twice a week effectively makes him a 5th outfielder in terms of playing time. People for quite a while have been so concerned about how you get him PAs in the NL but I've repeatedly said it's not a big deal. Almora barely played in the first half and still managed 323 PAs last year. And he wasn't batting as the pitcher every 5th or 6th day. If in essence you're replacing Jay with Almora(Jay had 433 PAs to Almora's 323) and you're replacing Almora with Ohtani as a 5th OF there's still plenty of ABs

Now on a prototypical team that might seem sketchy going with a pitcher and 4 OFs. The issue there typically is covering all 3 spots because most teams don't have much in the way of guys for CF. But the cubs do. Almora is perfectly fine there defensively. Heyward probably isn't his ideal position but he's good enough to play in case of injury. Happ is probably average to below average but good enough to play there. Hell even Bryant has played there. Baez was toyed with there. RF is even more covered. You have Bryant who could easily play behind Heyward by shifting Baez to 3B and Zobrist/Happ to 2B. Zobrist has played there though that's not ideal. And Ohtani would likely play there when he does play unless they shift him to LF instead. LF is nuts in terms of guys you can play there. There's the obvious candidates but don't forget Contreras.

The reason I bring up Contreras in LF is I think the plan if the cubs get Ohtani will be to go with 4 OFs(Happ, Schwarber, Almora, Heyward), 6 IF(Zobrist, Russell, Baez, Rizzo, Bryant and La Stella) and 3 Catchers(Contreras and 2 other guys). Maddon likes to do that anyways and having Ohtani as a 5th OF just gives him extra incentive because you have the extra roster slot. And the thing is that the 10 day DL has made injuries far less of a factor. Even if one of the CF guys goes down, you have Hannemann in AAA. Presumably one of the 3 catchers may be Caratini. You could easily send him down for a week or two and bring hannemann up if someone has a short term injury.

So given that I really don't think they trade anyone if they land Ohtani. Like why would you? The two areas of weakness would be your 5th starter and the bullpen. But the cubs won what 103 games with Jason Hammel as their #5 starter. You don't need to have a top 15 pitcher or whatever as your #5 starter especially after you have already landed Ohtani. You would have 4 really good starters for the post season. You just need a guy that's average or a little better than that. I mean you could go out and sign Jaime Garcia for like $20-30 mil over 2 years. Likewise, you could just go out and re-sign Davis and likely any other set up guy for him that you want because by hitting the Ohtani lottery you've gained a quality starter for super cheap. So you have the money to spend. Why deal away players when you can spend money?

Even if they don't land Ohtani, I'm not convinced they will break up their core of guys. The problem is there's not really many names out there worth actively paying top dollar for. There is little info on Archer actually being available. All the talk actually coming out of Tampa is they'd rather move Colome/Odorizzi. Are the pirates really going to trade Cole in division? I highly doubt it. Julio Teheran looks like a #3 or #4 starter based on his recent results. Ditto for Kevin Gausman and Dylan Bundy. They apparently tried to trade for Michael Fulmer but detroit wasn't interested. Marcus Stroman has decent numbers but I think he's already at his peak and I'm not sure they would even entertain Schwarber for him. And in terms of relievers, there's a lot of interesting guys on the market. Someone is likely to be a value.

 

[beckdawg]

http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/...he-alarms-because-the-cubs-meeting-was-today/

 

[CSF77]

Been thinking about this today woth Cubs being the oddball team still on Ohtani list..

With Ohtani being just 23 and new to the states and obviously pro ball here..
And with Maddon madness

What if the pitch to Ohtani is to basically have him be an OFer/ reliever / 6th starter

Think about it...

He can start in OF most games , be used later in relief in some games, and then go back to OF after his inning or two

Or

Come in in relief, then go play OF afterwards

And

In dog days, maddon can use him as a 6th starter to give guys an extra day off or start DHers

I think that would be a great way to break him in slowly as a SP for at least the first year..


Off Topic...

I still think 99% chance Schwarber getting traded this off season...

If they dont get Ohtani and or fall short of signing a TOR FA, theyll have to turn to trading someone like Schwarber in a package to get that type of starter..

Or

If they do get Ohtani

Then theyll have to make an opening in OF and Schwarber could be the expendable one who also might bring them in solid bullpen help, like maybe a Betances type from yankees ..

We'll see...
Things will get intetesting next week



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

It could have been he just likes to see a good show.

But seriously that is a part of it. Also he rehabbed at the Cubs complex last February so he knows that the facility is state of the art.

He prefers a West Coast team due to proximity to Japan but made a exception for the Cubs because they are first class. And honestly he may wanted to see the show they put on and included them.

 

[TL1961]

Yes a team of replacement level players is actually 57 wins.

I am actually working on a statistic called WAM, wins above the mean, that will start off with "mean" players and a team of 81 wins.

Mean players?

Lackey?

 

[brett05]

Think the idea of going with a 6 man rotation is fairly plausible given the cubs largely were doing something similar already.

No they were not.

Lester, Jake, and Lackey all started 30+ games last year. Kyle 24 (thanks to injury).

 

[CSF77]

Fangraphs’ Travis Sawchik, meanwhile, notes that the Cubs can offer a unique benefit that no other suitor can: (relatively) limited travel time. While all Major League players spend an obscene amount of time flying from destination to destination, the Cubs’ setting in the Midwest means they travel as many as 10,000 miles less per season than the Rangers and upwards of 23,000 fewer miles than the Angels and Mariners in a given season (based on Chris Ford’s mileage estimates for the 2017 campaign). It may be a minor benefit, but as Sawchik notes, for a player whose recovery time will be monitored closely than just about any in baseball as he attempts the rigors of two-way play (at least to some extent), there’s some degree of appeal.

 

[chibears55]

Both Mariners and Angels made deals tonight to add 1 million dollars in International Slot Money....

I still think there was a big reason why Ohtani met with the cubs despite them being the odd team of the 7 in it..
Something with them has his interest


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

Both Mariners and Angels made deals tonight to add 1 million dollars in International Slot Money....

I still think there was a big reason why Ohtani met with the cubs despite them being the odd team of the 7 in it..
Something with them has his interest


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

My take on it is they don't think they have the edge and are going to throw money at the situation. If you thought you were good why make the deal for more money?

 

[chibears55]

My take on it is they don't think they have the edge and are going to throw money at the situation. If you thought you were good why make the deal for more money?

Twins made out pretty good here..

They recieved 2 prospects for those deals that were picked in top 5 rounds last year

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk