Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jimmer

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,027

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by jimmer

  1. jimmer
    I don't agree, but let's say you're right. It's too much and I would like to think Ryan wouldn't even consider it.
  2. jimmer
    and that would be way, way, way too much to give up for 2 years of Strasburg. I wouldn't trade 6-7 years of Buxton alone for two years of Strasburg, let alone add Dozier's years of control and Berrios' years of control. Need to look at value for value.
  3. jimmer
    Again, though. It could very well end up blowing up in the Nats face, but I think with the spread out payments, his health history, and the money being tossed around now AND in the future, this contract might not turn our that bad.
  4. jimmer
    That would be a horrible trade. It'd give us one year of Zimmerman, who would move from the NL to the AL, and then he'd almost assuredly be gone. We want to give up not only 6-7 years of Sano (which would be way too much) but also 6-7 years of Berrios too? I also doubt it makes us a WC contender and I certainly wouldn't want to give up all that talent to MAYBE play in a one game playoff.
  5. jimmer
    Well, the first part you quoted wasn't my logic, it was written by a SABR guy with an economics degree (Dave Cameron) which is why I had the quotes. Additionally, it only discussed what the contract value (210M) would actually be worth if it was for 7 years. Nothing at all to do with whether he'd be worth it or not, just putting the 210M) into context. Overall, though, I'm not sure how my logic is faulty just because you disagree with it, and I believe it's reasonable to figure how a player has done more recently (over the last three years) is far more indicative of what the player is now as opposed to how he did from 4 years ago out to 7 years ago, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion. I accounted for age dropoff when I said AVERAGES 4 WAR over the course of 7 years. You figure if he's playing in the high 5.0 War for the next couple years then starts dropping, it could very well still AVERAGE 4.0 WAR (not be 4 WAR six years from now, never said that). It's about the overall value. They will UNDERPAY some years and OVERPAY others. Just the way it is. So, again, I doubt it's faulty logic. Whether or not you agree with it, obviously you don't, but I doubt it's faulty. I'd recommend the following two articles: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/max-scherzer-and-when-210-million-isnt-210-million/ http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/nationals-build-potential-super-team-add-max-scherzer/
  6. jimmer
    I was just joking around with my comment. I'm glad you're optimistic about the current MLB talent on this team. I wish I could join you in that optimism. We still had a lot of quality MLBers going into 2008 even after losing Santana and Hunter. Talent that had a good amount of MLB experience and had done well. In regards to Arcia, Meyer, May. Even if the talent is there, talent that could turn them into quality MLBers (something we don't know yet), they are still very inexperienced/or not at all experienced at the MLB level. BTW, I think what we saw from Plouffe last year is likely his ceiling. He had a very good year and I can't see him ever having a season that will be much better than that.
  7. jimmer
    If you figure one WAR is worth 7M right now on the FA market (and that will go up) and he AVERAGES 4.0 WAR over the next 7 years (taking into account normal incremental dropoff) you're looking at a value at 196M in PRESENT worth. He's averaged a hair over 5 WAR the last 3 seasons. BTW, Star and Zimm have both averaged around 4
  8. jimmer
    The way this contract is structured works pretty well for the Nats as well. 15M a year as opposed to 30M a year. Gives them more financial flexibility, they can avoid the luxury tax issue, and 15M is worth more now than it will in future years, etc. 'If Scherzer had signed for 7/$170 with an equal payout in each season that he actually played for the Nationals, that contract would be roughly equivalent in value to the $210 million deferred compensation contract he actually signed.' It's going to be interesting.
  9. jimmer
    Nats have Zimmerman and Fisher for only one more year and Stras for only two more years. Their window is definitely now.
  10. jimmer
    Yes, if you like to judge by ERA, looking at ERA+ (or even better ERA-) is better. How has Max's ERA+ (or -) looked the last three seasons compared to the other two? What about FIP and IP and other peripherals compared to the other two? In fairness, I'm not a huge Scherzer fan. I've never really been one and he may very well age poorly, but I don't see it happening really soon. You mention how badly Boras contracts end up, but also suggest they sign Strasburg instead and he is a Boras client and one with a nagging history issue too.
  11. jimmer
    I think he did that because his arm was below average and not overly accurate, or do I remember wrong?
  12. jimmer
    SO THOSE were the two moves that made us go from worse to first. I've always had a hard time pinning it down :-)
  13. jimmer
    Strasburg and Zimmerman have both exclusively pitched in the NL. Scherzer has spent the last 5 in the AL. Comparing their career ERAs (and just that sta) seems odd to do. Strasburg also has injury issues and I doubt, due to all the hype that's always been around him, that he is going to extend and/or give any kind of discount.
  14. jimmer
    My favorite Jacque Jones moments is when he'd lose the ball in the Metrodome roof and just put his arms out looking around wildly, then it'd bounce like 20 feet away. I know that sounds means, but I don't mean it that way. It was just so comical.
  15. jimmer
    I'm glad to see that even though Gardy is gone, it's not necessarily the end of infielders or catchers playing outfield :-)
  16. jimmer
    I mention 200 IP and 450 PAs because Hughes and Escobar get the benefit of the doubt from so many that their improvements are real and/or sustainable while Plouffe gets nothing but doubt from most on his improved defense. Is it because we have witnessed first hand his poor years and we put more value on those while the other two we've really only had when they were good so we put more value in that? If that's why, is it really fair or accurate? All are short sample sizes. In reality, what those three did last year (and we can add Suzuki in there) are all examples of short sample sizes that can only tell us how those players performed last year. :-)
  17. jimmer
    Indeed. How he did in 226 chances can't give us an accurate description of the kind of defensive player he is overall, just like 55 IP for relievers can't, nor 200 IP, nor 500 PAs. All are short sample sizes. Those can only tell us how that player performed that year. :-)
  18. jimmer
    No, this isn't suggesting that at all.
  19. jimmer
    Here is a good article that evaluates how last years projections turned out. It's a good read, but long. If you skip to the end it says, 'Given all of the above we can decisively say that in 2014 ZiPS did the best job. It performed the best overall and in most of our subsets while never stumbling into the bottom half. You can’t go wrong with any of these systems, but as we look ahead to 2015, I’ll be using ZiPS.' http://www.hardballtimes.com/evaluating-the-2014-projection-systems/
  20. jimmer
    That should read, 'most of the time a team wins and losses 58 games (and last year the lowest win total was 64), that would normally only leave 46 games to play with. I'm sure most understood what I meant and it doesn't really change the point of that overall post.
  21. jimmer
    yeah, I think he cut and pasted parts of that disclaimer :-) If you read his stuff, that disclaimer shows up a lot. I know I've read the last part of it multiple times. It stands out because it cracks me up. It is: 'Finally, Szymborski will advise anyone against — and might karate chop anyone guilty of — merely adding up WAR totals on depth chart to produce projected team WAR.'
  22. jimmer
    Fangraphs had his DRS at 10th, so fairly close there. Still, DRS is a cumulative stat and is driven by opportunities. Opportunities helped by not only the player's ability (range) but by the pitching staff giving up batted balls in their direction.. As far as the Fan Scouting, previous performance almost assuredly let their opinion of his fielding in previous years cloud their thinking in regards to performance this year..
  23. jimmer
    I agree he likely isn't. It's normal practice for people who have a good understanding of stats not to base a player's actual abilities off one year's worth of anything especially if he has a decent amount of history. That goes for offense, defense and pitching. I made it clear I wonder if he can maintain that level of defense. Yearly stats only says what a player did that year, does not mean he is always going to be that player. We also need to remember UZR is a comparative stat and that talent at positions fluctuate. Some may think he's just an okay defensive 3B but maybe last year was a down year for defense at 3B so his ranking is artificially higher. But in regards to how he was last year, Fangraphs says he was top 4 defensively for qualifying 3Bs. I don't think any of us using the eye test watch anywhere near enough of other teams games to really say where he ranks against others. And we definitely don't do it with the sole purpose of evaluating a player's defense at a certain position in order to make a comparison to the other 29 players at the same position.
  24. jimmer
    I said 4th based on Plouffe's Fangraphs UZR and DEF rankings last year. not sure he can maintain that, but that's what I used.
  25. jimmer
    Guessing the win total within 10 wins is a 20 win spread (10 too many, 10 too few). That's huge! So yeah anyone who guessed between 60 and 80 wins last year would have met the criteria but that's hardly an accomplishment. I wouldn't say someone who guessed 60 or someone who guessed 80 came close to being right, nor could we say their analysis of the team was roughly the same just because they were both within 10 games. A 12 win spread is also huge. (which is what guessing within 6 wins is). So I guess we just disagree on the degree of accuracy that meets the standard you are setting. I doubt it takes hardly any baseball knowledge at all to do that, when you consider most of the time every team wins a minimum of 58 games (and last year the lowest was 64), that would normally only leave 46 games to play with. IMO, a plus-minus 3 games is a much better indicator and I doubt we could get anywhere close to a consensus that would end up within plus-minus 3 games.
×
×
  • Create New...