Cubs acquire Kevin Gregg for Jose Ceda

[cubsfan26]

But we also don't know if Ceda will be any good in the future. Much like Cashner and who ever else we could draft in the future. All we know right now is Ceda, can get A and AA hitters out as a reliever in a impressive way. Who knows if his lack of control, and his weight will catch up to him once he gets to the higher levels. Thats why I don't really mind losing Ceda all that much right now. Just because he's one of our best prospects doesn't give him much more value around the league. Alot of teams with better farms can trade guys like Ceda, and have it not affect their farm system much. But the Cubs are in a win now mode, and were looking for a cheap(salary wise)replacment for Wood(reliever who can set-up and has experience closing), so they can have more money improve other parts of the ballclub. If Ceda was a good starting prospect, I would be much more against trading him. Edited November 14, 2008 by cubsfan26

[Mephistopheles]

I love you Tyrant but ERA+ is pretty useless for starters...much less relievers. Edited November 14, 2008 by Mephistopheles

[Guest]

Guys outside 10-15 look OK the year you draft them of course otherwise you wouldn't draft them, duh, its that their attrition rate is much higher (and Cashner at 19 was barely outside the range and we aren't going to get a 1st rounder for Gregg). Thats exactly the point, no one knows if Cashner is going to be as good as Ceda, but we DO know that Ceda will be as good as Ceda.

I definitely understand what you are saying and your point is valid. However, let's also face the fact that AA relievers with a history of weight & control issues also have a pretty high attrition rate.

 

And while your point about the possibility of not getting a first round pick for Gregg even as a type A is also valid, most type A's do net a first rounder because most teams don't sign more than one type A free agent in a given year. Sure, it does happen, but I believe odds are in the Cubs favor instead of against them. Particularly if Gregg closes and becomes a medium-level type A.

[Mephistopheles]

he's not good.

True.

 

He's also not bad.

 

 

Neither was Howry. Besides we could actually use Michael Wuertz and have a Kevin Gregg without trading Jose Ceda who has a chance to be a Carlos Marmol.

 

And we could still not need to replace Wood if that was the idea.

Howry gave up enough home runs + extra base hits in 2008 to qualify as bad. I'd say that in 2006 & 07, Howry was actually good.

 

That said...

 

Howry was bad. The question isn't whether or not they were bad, it's more or less if they will be good or bad. Bob Howrys much more likely to be a quality reliever next year.

 

Kevin Gregg is a pitcher who gives up more flyballs than groundballs who walks a batter every other inning who pitched in a ballpark that is very forgiving to flyball pitchers. Now he doesn't. Bob Howry may give up a few home runs, but at least he won't walk 40 guys as a frickin relief pitcher.

 

Lou Piniella is going to hate this guy so much he's going to be actually wishing Gregg had Wuertz's control.

[Guest]

he's not good.

True.

 

He's also not bad.

 

 

Neither was Howry. Besides we could actually use Michael Wuertz and have a Kevin Gregg without trading Jose Ceda who has a chance to be a Carlos Marmol.

 

And we could still not need to replace Wood if that was the idea.

Howry gave up enough home runs + extra base hits in 2008 to qualify as bad. I'd say that in 2006 & 07, Howry was actually good.

 

That said...

 

Howry was bad. The question isn't whether or not they were bad, it's more or less if they will be good or bad. Bob Howrys much more likely to be a quality reliever next year.

 

Kevin Gregg is a pitcher who gives up more flyballs than groundballs who walks a batter every other inning who pitched in a ballpark that is very forgiving to flyball pitchers. Now he doesn't. Bob Howry may give up a few home runs, but at least he won't walk 40 guys as a frickin relief pitcher.

 

Lou Piniella is going to hate this guy so much he's going to be actually wishing Gregg had Wuertz's control.

No reply to the Ceda part? Disappointing. I thought maybe you'd back up your claim that Ceda has a legitimate chance at Marmol level production.

 

I'm not trilled by Gregg. I think he'll be an adequate 9th inning guy. I'm hoping they'll save Marmol for tough save situations and let Gregg handle the easy ones to keep his value high. I don't expect such intelligence, but I'm hoping for it. If that's how Lou manages the situation, then this could work out swimmingly.

[Mephistopheles]

oh and for you RA kids. Gregg was incredibly lucky last year when he got yanked. He should have had about 3.5 more runs scored than who did. That gives him a legit 4.40 or so RA. To compare: Howry has been WAY under that four of the last five years.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Kevin Gregg is a pitcher who gives up more flyballs than groundballs who walks a batter every other inning who pitched in a ballpark that is very forgiving to flyball pitchers. Now he doesn't. Bob Howry may give up a few home runs, but at least he won't walk 40 guys as a frickin relief pitcher.

 

Lou Piniella is going to hate this guy so much he's going to be actually wishing Gregg had Wuertz's control.

 

The last two years, the difference between Wuertz and Gregg is like 3 walks over 70 IP.

 

And Gregg has no platoon split and doesn't give up HR no matter where he pitches.

[Mephistopheles]

btw - I understand that Ceda has some chance to become a good reliever, but very few relief prospects ever reach the level of Marmol's performance over the past couple years. Ceda's chances of reaching that level aren't substantially better than, say, Ascanio's because the chances of anyone reaching that level are so remote.

 

Alright I probably should not have Marmol's class. You're right, hardly anyone becomes that good...but I meant more or less comparable overall to Marmol in general. Dominant over-powering high strikeout reliever. I meant more or less the stuff, style more so than the actual production Marmol has given the last two years. Let's be honest, even Marmol has very little chance sustaining that run.

 

Anyways my gripes about moving Ceda in this deal aren't so much that I think Ceda's great or anything. I really believe that if you're going to acquire relievers for anything of value, you might as well get a great one. If there ever was a high quality closer prospect, Ceda is one. His upside is very high, and at the very least his stuff alone ought to give him Kevin Gregg upside in the near future. I don't understand why we're trading him for a reliever we can find in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart.

[Mephistopheles]

Kevin Gregg is a pitcher who gives up more flyballs than groundballs who walks a batter every other inning who pitched in a ballpark that is very forgiving to flyball pitchers. Now he doesn't. Bob Howry may give up a few home runs, but at least he won't walk 40 guys as a frickin relief pitcher.

 

Lou Piniella is going to hate this guy so much he's going to be actually wishing Gregg had Wuertz's control.

 

The last two years, the difference between Wuertz and Gregg is like 3 walks over 70 IP.

 

And Gregg has no platoon split and doesn't give up HR no matter where he pitches.

 

Two things:

 

1.) Relievers aren't going to have big home away splits by virtue of only throwing 30 or so innings at home or away in a given season. It's not enough innings to get a true grasp on it.

2.) I should note that from 2005-07 Bob Howry gave up 20 home runs. From 2005-07 Kevin Gregg gave up 25 home runs. Bob Howry also pitched more innings in that time frame and pitched in a park more prone to home runs. Kevin Gregg's been average when it comes to giving up long balls. He will be below average now that he's not in Yosemite.

[Guest]

btw - I understand that Ceda has some chance to become a good reliever, but very few relief prospects ever reach the level of Marmol's performance over the past couple years. Ceda's chances of reaching that level aren't substantially better than, say, Ascanio's because the chances of anyone reaching that level are so remote.

 

Alright I probably should not have Marmol's class. You're right, hardly anyone becomes that good...but I meant more or less comparable overall to Marmol in general. Dominant over-powering high strikeout reliever. I meant more or less the stuff, style more so than the actual production Marmol has given the last two years. Let's be honest, even Marmol has very little chance sustaining that run.

 

Anyways my gripes about moving Ceda in this deal aren't so much that I think Ceda's great or anything. I really believe that if you're going to acquire relievers for anything of value, you might as well get a great one. If there ever was a high quality closer prospect, Ceda is one. His upside is very high, and at the very least his stuff alone ought to give him Kevin Gregg upside in the near future. I don't understand why we're trading him for a reliever we can find in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart.

Ah, hyperbole free discussion - my favorite. :D

 

Yes, Ceda has great potential as a late inning reliever. But I don't like him any better as a prospect than Shark, Guzman or Cashner. And I think he has as many flags as any of those guys do. In fact, other than Guzman's injury record, I don't see a lot to separate those guys from one another. So while Ceda was one of the better prospects in a thin system, most every team has at least one guy like that on the farm at any given point in time. Most of them never pan out to be that dominant high strikeout reliever in the majors due to various issues.

 

Gregg is a guy who has put together a string of decent seasons in a row. He's nothing to get terribly excited about. But he's not as awful as you are painting him, either. If I thought his HR suppression was a fluke, I'd be very concerned. But he's had a very good track record there for years, so I'm hopeful of him being above average for another season.

 

There are a number of things that could make me upset with this trade - extensions, usage as setup with Marmol closing, etc. But I'm also hopeful that this was done for the right reasons and I see a very likely scenario where we get decent production for one year in an overrated position. Then we end up with a couple picks as a result to combine with the year of production as compensation for Ceda. While I don't know if I would have done the deal myself, it's not the sort of thing I'm going to hang Hendry for, either. There are much better reasons to complain than this, imo.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Kevin Gregg is a pitcher who gives up more flyballs than groundballs who walks a batter every other inning who pitched in a ballpark that is very forgiving to flyball pitchers. Now he doesn't. Bob Howry may give up a few home runs, but at least he won't walk 40 guys as a frickin relief pitcher.

 

Lou Piniella is going to hate this guy so much he's going to be actually wishing Gregg had Wuertz's control.

 

The last two years, the difference between Wuertz and Gregg is like 3 walks over 70 IP.

 

And Gregg has no platoon split and doesn't give up HR no matter where he pitches.

 

Two things:

 

1.) Relievers aren't going to have big home away splits by virtue of only throwing 30 or so innings at home or away in a given season. It's not enough innings to get a true grasp on it.

2.) I should note that from 2005-07 Bob Howry gave up 20 home runs. From 2005-07 Kevin Gregg gave up 25 home runs. Bob Howry also pitched more innings in that time frame and pitched in a park more prone to home runs. Kevin Gregg's been average when it comes to giving up long balls. He will be below average now that he's not in Yosemite.

 

That's an awfully convenient timeframe, removing Howry's awful 2008 and adding in Gregg's two worse HR years in the AL. Gregg has given up 3 HR in 64 IP away from Pro Player the last two years, hardly inconsequential.

[Mephistopheles]

I don't think Ceda is any better than those guys as a prospect, but he still has some value. I do think that we can get a similar quality reliever for the same amount of cash as we will give him in arby....and still keep Ceda. Relievers who can put RAs in the low to mid 4.00s grow on trees.

[Mephistopheles]

That's an awfully convenient timeframe, removing Howry's awful 2008 and adding in Gregg's two worse HR years in the AL. Gregg has given up 3 HR in 64 IP away from Pro Player the last two years, hardly inconsequential.

 

and bob howry gave up 4 hr in 71 ip away from wrigley in 06 and 07. i can play this game all night long. you're convienately making sure that gregg's outlier season is included. ditto for me.

 

And Gregg gave up 4 HR away from Pro Player in 2007 alone.

 

the fact is that kevin gregg, with the exception of 2008, has been very average when it comes to HR prevention. just because he was fine in 2008 it certainly doesnt mean he will be fine in 2009. the 2005-07 HR have more predicative value than his 2008 results or even 2007-08 results alone.

[Rob]

I'd feel a more comfortable if I could figure out whether Gregg is a groundball guy or a flyball guy, but his tendencies jump all over the place.

 

GB%

2004 - 42.5%

2005 - 48.0%

2006 - 35.7%

2007 - 29.0%

2008 - 44.8%

[Mephistopheles]

that's called being a reliever.

[Rob]

that's called being a reliever.

 

I didn't think GB rate took that many innings to stabilize, generally.

[Mephistopheles]

it doesn't. with the exception of 2007, his gb rate has been within about a stdev of the binomial expectation each season. as for 2007? i dont know. that was a huge outlier...

[Rob]

Fair enough.

[Mephistopheles]

either way it doesnt matter. hes shown to be a high FB pitcher. keep in mind league flyball rates are around 36 percent. greggs been at 42 percent for his career.

[CubColtPacer]

I can't find a single playoff team that had a 5M setup man. I'm not sure there's one in existence that wasn't paid by the Yankees. The draft pick is assuming that Gregg does well enough for us to qualify as an A in addition to not accept arb.

 

The Brewers had a few guys making around 5m as set-up guys. I think the Phillies also paid Tom Gordon around 5m, but he was on the DL. Plus nobody said that Gregg wouldn't end up being the closer next season. As for being a type A, Gregg just has be somewhat decent this year and he will. But after how he pitched the last two years, I don't know why we would suck next year at his age. Besides a two week stretch when Gregg was probably pitching hurt, he was pretty good last year.

Riske? Who'd they trade for him?

 

Actually, speaking of the brewers reminded me that the Torres trade is a pretty good comp...Ceda is much more highly thought of than either guy the Bucs got.

 

I think Torres is an ok comp, but not nearly close enough to get much true value out of the comparison. Torres was 5 years older, was coming off an absolutely awful season (5.47 ERA, 1.405 WHIP..advanced statistics show he was rather unlucky in 2007, but we know how much that actually factors into trade value). Plus there was no possibility of free agent compensation down the line because it was known that he was starting to get the itch to possibly retire. Plus, the highest number of games Torres had ever saved in a season was 12, and he was traded purely to be the setup man he had been for most of his career. Essentially, Torres last year would be Bob Howry this year if Howry was still under contract.

 

That's opposed to Gregg who is 5 years younger, is coming off 2 good years, has those back to back 29+ save campaigns which inflates his value, and is a good bet for compensation after the season. Those are quite a bit of differences for trade value, enough to make it really hard to be worthwhile to figure out exactly how much more trade value did Gregg have than Torres. All we know is that it was a significant amount.

 

ERA? Seriously?

2007 torres k/bb: 1.57

2008 gregg k/bb: 2.91

 

Torres had a babip 20 points over expected and a flukey hr/fb

 

greggs babip is 60 points under expected and the lowest hr/fb of his career

 

See my bolded above.

 

Sure, using ERA is a terrible way to judge relievers. It's slightly better for guys like Torres or Gregg, who tended not to come in or leave during the middle of innings (and therefore have to deal with less of the problem of which runs got charged to which pitcher during a big inning where both failed to do their job), but it's still terrible.

 

However, we weren't talking about their production as a comp. We were talking about their trade value. ERA becomes important in that case because GM's will treat it as important. Sure, they're willing to look at other stats, but even with they look at other stats it might actually have the opposite effect of what is intended. For example, look at LOB%. In 2007, Torres had an outlier year and only left 64.5% of his runners on. That was very unlucky of him and he could have been expected to bounce back on that. Show most GM's that number and they would say that Torres failed to do his job in 2007 of stranding runners, and that his value should go down as a result because they're buying low.

 

So yes, the Torres comp may be much closer when looking deeper at the production, but the ability to get a lot in trade was not close between the two. So looking at who the Pirates got back is not a good gauge of who the Marlins should have gotten back.

[SouthSideRyan]

I can't find a single playoff team that had a 5M setup man. I'm not sure there's one in existence that wasn't paid by the Yankees. The draft pick is assuming that Gregg does well enough for us to qualify as an A in addition to not accept arb.

 

Uh...........the White Sox?

 

Dotel at $5 million and Linebrink at $4 million, perhaps?

 

I was looking at just the best of the non-closers on those teams(i.e. Matt Thornton), but yes, the White Sox are a good comp, paying their 4th best bullpen arm 5 million dollars.

 

Scot Shields is another one and David Riske is pretty close

 

Scot Shields doesn't make 5M.

[SouthSideRyan]

Gagne 10 Million

Riske 4

Torres 3.3

Mota 3.2

 

1 good reliever out of 4 high priced contracts!! *shock* It's like nobody remembers Scott Eyre. Or Bob Howry. Or Mike Remlinger.

Edited November 14, 2008 by SouthSideRyan

[nilodnayr]

it doesn't. with the exception of 2007, his gb rate has been within about a stdev of the binomial expectation each season. as for 2007? i dont know. that was a huge outlier...

 

Yeah, hes faced ~300-350 batters faced. According to Pizza Cutter, the r-squared reaches 0.5 at 150 BF for GB% and 200 BF for FB%. So, while not entirely stable, at 300-350, its not unstable. I'm sure meph could provide a rough r-squared at 300-350 batters faced, so we could see how much is due to variation.

[nilodnayr]

Guys outside 10-15 look OK the year you draft them of course otherwise you wouldn't draft them, duh, its that their attrition rate is much higher (and Cashner at 19 was barely outside the range and we aren't going to get a 1st rounder for Gregg). Thats exactly the point, no one knows if Cashner is going to be as good as Ceda, but we DO know that Ceda will be as good as Ceda.

I definitely understand what you are saying and your point is valid. However, let's also face the fact that AA relievers with a history of weight & control issues also have a pretty high attrition rate.

 

And while your point about the possibility of not getting a first round pick for Gregg even as a type A is also valid, most type A's do net a first rounder because most teams don't sign more than one type A free agent in a given year. Sure, it does happen, but I believe odds are in the Cubs favor instead of against them. Particularly if Gregg closes and becomes a medium-level type A.

 

Yeah, they do...I guess we'll just have to see if his second half of last year, where he found control, is able to be maintained or not.

 

I think if hes signed as a closer, theres a pretty good chance that he'll go to a bottom 15 team (since he'd be a cheap closer) meaning that their first rounder will be protected. If hes signed as a set up man, theres a pretty good chance that he'll go to a big market team (since he'd be an expensive set up man), who will probably also sign another and better Type A FA. I haven't gone back and looked at the history of it, so its just a guess, but I'd put our chances of 1st round compensation at under 25%.

 

I just think 1) this was a dumb time to trade Ceda and 2) Gregg is relatively non-impactful. Ceda seemed to be making progress with his control and really thats the only thing thats holding him back from being an extremely effective reliever right now. If it were up to me, I would keep Ceda, start him back at AA as the closer and if he shows decent control for 2 months, bring him up and use him as a 6th inning guy. I'm not sold on Ceda long term because of the weight and injury history, but I think trading him now is giving up a decent opportunity to sell high on him.

[nilodnayr]

That's an awfully convenient timeframe, removing Howry's awful 2008 and adding in Gregg's two worse HR years in the AL. Gregg has given up 3 HR in 64 IP away from Pro Player the last two years, hardly inconsequential.

 

and bob howry gave up 4 hr in 71 ip away from wrigley in 06 and 07. i can play this game all night long. you're convienately making sure that gregg's outlier season is included. ditto for me.

 

And Gregg gave up 4 HR away from Pro Player in 2007 alone.

 

the fact is that kevin gregg, with the exception of 2008, has been very average when it comes to HR prevention. just because he was fine in 2008 it certainly doesnt mean he will be fine in 2009. the 2005-07 HR have more predicative value than his 2008 results or even 2007-08 results alone.

 

Since I still have pizza cutter's article up...HR/FB doesn't even reach a 0.5 r-squared at 650 batters faced.