Granderson to Yankees in 3-way trade? p. 20

[ConstableRabbit]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

Did you read what Seidman said before calling him crazy?

 

Yes, those numbers would look great in CF. The point is, you're not going to get those numbers from Byrd when he's not playing half his games in Arlington.

Granderson, on the other hand, would be more likely to put up better numbers because he wouldn't be playing 81 at Comerica.

[fromthestretch]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

 

Byrd is a 32-year old that benefited greatly from playing in Texas. Away from that stadium, his slugging percentage is around .415 over the past three seasons. If the price for Byrd is $16-18 million over two seasons, then pass.

[Sever82]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

Did you read what Seidman said before calling him crazy?

 

Yes, those numbers would look great in CF. The point is, you're not going to get those numbers from Byrd when he's not playing half his games in Arlington.

Granderson, on the other hand, would be more likely to put up better numbers because he wouldn't be playing 81 at Comerica.

 

I agree man, I still dont get how some fans and Baseball writers are so blind by the stats. Have people learned nothing from Gary Mathews Jr, Aaron Miles, Zito, Etc. how you should'nt give players raises just because of fluke seasons or because they're coming off their best season? I mean wow, its just annoying that people are so eager to pay byrd what he wants despite the fact that he played in a hitter friendly park.

[Rob]

Who wants to pay Byrd what he wants? And how much does he want?

[Serge]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

 

Byrd is a 32-year old that benefited greatly from playing in Texas. Away from that stadium, his slugging percentage is around .415 over the past three seasons. If the price for Byrd is $16-18 million over two seasons, then pass.

 

You can't just look at what a player does on the road and call that his true talent level. The majority of players play better at home than they do on the road. Just this year there was a .037 point difference between road and home OPS across the league(.267/.340/.429 home to .258/.322/.406 away). Not to mention, if you believe in Baseball-Reference's park factors, Wrigley Field is a more hitter friendly park than Arlington is.

[fromthestretch]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

 

Byrd is a 32-year old that benefited greatly from playing in Texas. Away from that stadium, his slugging percentage is around .415 over the past three seasons. If the price for Byrd is $16-18 million over two seasons, then pass.

 

You can't just look at what a player does on the road and call that his true talent level. The majority of players play better at home than they do on the road. Just this year there was a .037 point difference between road and home OPS across the league(.267/.340/.429 home to .258/.322/.406 away). Not to mention, if you believe in Baseball-Reference's park factors, Wrigley Field is a more hitter friendly park than Arlington is.

 

I'm aware of that, and I never called it his true talent level. However, his differences were much greater than .037:

 

2009: .133

2008: .139

2007: .201

 

Furthermore, he's 32 and is going to demand a multi-year deal worth a few million more annually than he's ever made in a single season. His OPS over the past three seasons is .820. On top of that, he's probably a tick below average defensively in CF, where his offense would have more value. Would you really want to wager that kind of money that he's going to continue to produce at that level in a Cubs uniform over the course of a multi-year contract?

 

Let me put this another way, were you happy with the production the Cubs got from Jacque Jones in the first year of his contract? I ask because that's most likely the high end of what Byrd would offer in terms of offense, and it would probably cost the Cubs more than it did to get that from Jones.

[davell]

Who wants to pay Byrd what he wants? And how much does he want?

 

 

From what I've read, he supposedly wants a 2-3 year deal at 8 mill per......

[Serge]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

 

Byrd is a 32-year old that benefited greatly from playing in Texas. Away from that stadium, his slugging percentage is around .415 over the past three seasons. If the price for Byrd is $16-18 million over two seasons, then pass.

 

You can't just look at what a player does on the road and call that his true talent level. The majority of players play better at home than they do on the road. Just this year there was a .037 point difference between road and home OPS across the league(.267/.340/.429 home to .258/.322/.406 away). Not to mention, if you believe in Baseball-Reference's park factors, Wrigley Field is a more hitter friendly park than Arlington is.

 

I'm aware of that, and I never called it his true talent level. However, his differences were much greater than .037:

 

2009: .133

2008: .139

2007: .201

 

Furthermore, he's 32 and is going to demand a multi-year deal worth a few million more annually than he's ever made in a single season. His OPS over the past three seasons is .820. On top of that, he's probably a tick below average defensively in CF, where his offense would have more value. Would you really want to wager that kind of money that he's going to continue to produce at that level in a Cubs uniform over the course of a multi-year contract?

 

Let me put this another way, were you happy with the production the Cubs got from Jacque Jones in the first year of his contract? I ask because that's most likely the high end of what Byrd would offer in terms of offense, and it would probably cost the Cubs more than it did to get that from Jones.

 

Jacque Jones' 2006 out of a CFer would be damn good. He hit .285/.335/.499, for a CFer that's pretty damn awesome.

 

But really, if the rumors of his demands are true, that he wants 2-3 years at about 8 million per year, he should most likely be worth that much, with a good bit of upside. Even looking at it conservatively: let's say he's a slightly below league average bat, with a slightly below league average glove in CF, and he'll give us 600 PA's in CF. That would make him roughly a 2 win player, which would make him worth a little more than his 8 million per year. However, his bat the past three years has been a good bit above average(roughly league average on the road, well above that at home) averaging a little over 8 runs above average per year. And that's park adjusted too so it should deal with most if not all of the Arlington effect. And according to UZR his glove is almost exactly average, while the Fan's Scouting Report likes his glove as above average.

 

Conservatively he's about a 2 win player, more than likely around a 3 win guy. I mean the splits are a little scary, but that could be explained by any number of things such as random variation, the fact that he has to play a bunch of road games each year in pitchers havens Safeco and Mcafee, or he could simply be a guy that does much better at home because he prefers sleeping in his own bed. I mean it happens sometimes, Derrek Lee for instance the past three years is a .284/.365/.454 guy away and a .326/.404/.578 guy at Wrigley.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

It doesn't appear there's going to be much contractural difference, so I don't see any reason to pursue Byrd over Cameron.

[fromthestretch]

Jacque Jones' 2006 out of a CFer would be damn good. He hit .285/.335/.499, for a CFer that's pretty damn awesome.

 

While I agree that would be good to get from CF, that's the HIGH end of what to expect from Byrd. More than likely, you'd probably get an OPS in the .770-.790 range.

 

The one good thing I can say about him is that he hits lefties and righties pretty much equally over the course of his career.

 

To me, he's just not the bat the Cubs need, especially for the money and contract length he wants.

[Cubswin11]

Jacque Jones' 2006 out of a CFer would be damn good. He hit .285/.335/.499, for a CFer that's pretty damn awesome.

 

While I agree that would be good to get from CF, that's the HIGH end of what to expect from Byrd. More than likely, you'd probably get an OPS in the .770-.790 range.

 

The one good thing I can say about him is that he hits lefties and righties pretty much equally over the course of his career.

 

To me, he's just not the bat the Cubs need, especially for the money and contract length he wants.

I agree, I would rather we sign Cameron. Offensive production would be similar, Byrd would probably hit for a higher average, while Cameron draws more BB. OPS wise they come in about the same give or take .010 points. Cameron is going to play superior defense and is apparently a great clubhouse guy. IDK what kind of guy Byrd is, I would assume with the Bradley fiasco "character" and "team chemistry" is going to play a factor in who we bring in this offseason. I would rather have Cameron for 1-2 years for $4-6 per. Than Byrd for a 2-4 year deal for around $8-10 per.

[Serge]

Jacque Jones' 2006 out of a CFer would be damn good. He hit .285/.335/.499, for a CFer that's pretty damn awesome.

 

While I agree that would be good to get from CF, that's the HIGH end of what to expect from Byrd. More than likely, you'd probably get an OPS in the .770-.790 range.

 

The one good thing I can say about him is that he hits lefties and righties pretty much equally over the course of his career.

 

To me, he's just not the bat the Cubs need, especially for the money and contract length he wants.

I agree, I would rather we sign Cameron. Offensive production would be similar, Byrd would probably hit for a higher average, while Cameron draws more BB. OPS wise they come in about the same give or take .010 points. Cameron is going to play superior defense and is apparently a great clubhouse guy. IDK what kind of guy Byrd is, I would assume with the Bradley fiasco "character" and "team chemistry" is going to play a factor in who we bring in this offseason. I would rather have Cameron for 1-2 years for $4-6 per. Than Byrd for a 2-4 year deal for around $8-10 per.

 

I'd definitely rather have Cameron too. I was just pointing out that Byrd's a pretty good option as well. That being said though, Cameron comes with plenty of risk too. He's going to be 37 next year. Next year could finally be the year where he stops producing.

 

However if he keeps hitting and playing D like he always has then he's definitely the best and most cost effective solution. The difference he makes to our club, just defensively alone, would be huge. If you trust UZR, then conservatively, Fukudome's something like -10 runs in CF and +10 in right field; Milton Bradley's probably something like -5 runs in RF; and Cameron is a +10 guy in CF. So we're talking about something like a +20 run swing in CF and a +15 run swing in RF. That's even before taking into account the offensive improvement from a typical Cameron year to Bradley's down 2009. Just a potentially huge improvement, although it does come with some risk.

[Backtobanks]

Jacque Jones' 2006 out of a CFer would be damn good. He hit .285/.335/.499, for a CFer that's pretty damn awesome.

 

While I agree that would be good to get from CF, that's the HIGH end of what to expect from Byrd. More than likely, you'd probably get an OPS in the .770-.790 range.

 

The one good thing I can say about him is that he hits lefties and righties pretty much equally over the course of his career.

 

To me, he's just not the bat the Cubs need, especially for the money and contract length he wants.

I agree, I would rather we sign Cameron. Offensive production would be similar, Byrd would probably hit for a higher average, while Cameron draws more BB. OPS wise they come in about the same give or take .010 points. Cameron is going to play superior defense and is apparently a great clubhouse guy. IDK what kind of guy Byrd is, I would assume with the Bradley fiasco "character" and "team chemistry" is going to play a factor in who we bring in this offseason. I would rather have Cameron for 1-2 years for $4-6 per. Than Byrd for a 2-4 year deal for around $8-10 per.

 

I never said Byrd was my first choice for CF, but his 3-year numbers away from Arlington are .281/.328/.414/.742 (which aren't too terrible for a CF). Of course, everybody's cherry-picking stats to make their point, but let's not forget Granderson against LHP. The original discussion centered on trading blue chip prospects for Granderson or a short term deal for Byrd and my point is that depending on the costs (players, money, and years) involved, the choice might not be as obvious as expected. The same is true for Cameron. Is Cameron going to settle for as little as 1 year/$4 million? There's no way Byrd is going to get 4 years @ $10 million per.

[Cubswin11]

Jacque Jones' 2006 out of a CFer would be damn good. He hit .285/.335/.499, for a CFer that's pretty damn awesome.

 

While I agree that would be good to get from CF, that's the HIGH end of what to expect from Byrd. More than likely, you'd probably get an OPS in the .770-.790 range.

 

The one good thing I can say about him is that he hits lefties and righties pretty much equally over the course of his career.

 

To me, he's just not the bat the Cubs need, especially for the money and contract length he wants.

I agree, I would rather we sign Cameron. Offensive production would be similar, Byrd would probably hit for a higher average, while Cameron draws more BB. OPS wise they come in about the same give or take .010 points. Cameron is going to play superior defense and is apparently a great clubhouse guy. IDK what kind of guy Byrd is, I would assume with the Bradley fiasco "character" and "team chemistry" is going to play a factor in who we bring in this offseason. I would rather have Cameron for 1-2 years for $4-6 per. Than Byrd for a 2-4 year deal for around $8-10 per.

 

I'd definitely rather have Cameron too. I was just pointing out that Byrd's a pretty good option as well. That being said though, Cameron comes with plenty of risk too. He's going to be 37 next year. Next year could finally be the year where he stops producing.

 

However if he keeps hitting and playing D like he always has then he's definitely the best and most cost effective solution. The difference he makes to our club, just defensively alone, would be huge. If you trust UZR, then conservatively, Fukudome's something like -10 runs in CF and +10 in right field; Milton Bradley's probably something like -5 runs in RF; and Cameron is a +10 guy in CF. So we're talking about something like a +20 run swing in CF and a +15 run swing in RF. That's even before taking into account the offensive improvement from a typical Cameron year to Bradley's down 2009. Just a potentially huge improvement, although it does come with some risk.

I like Byrd, he'd be a good option for the right price. But it appears Cameron will be cheaper and offensively they are very close while defensively Cameron is clearly better. Like you were getting at we could take on Cameron and even if he regressed to say 15HR and a .750 OPS his defense alone (along with moving Kosuke to RF) would be a major improvement to the team from last year.

[davearm2]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

Seems to me that if you want to take issue with Seidman's stance on Byrd, then you have to at least address the home/road split issue.

[JonJayCutler]

While I'm not fan of Byrd, I much rather sign him as opposed to trading away prospects for Granderson at a time when our farm looks the best it has in years. I haven't read this whole thread, but I'm sure most feel this way. If we do trade for Granderson, Castro should absolutely be off-limits. I'm open to trading Vitters, Cashner, and Jackson, as long as its not all three of them. Yeah I probably just said everything thats already being said in this thread. Oh well.

[Backtobanks]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

Seems to me that if you want to take issue with Seidman's stance on Byrd, then you have to at least address the home/road split issue.

 

My point is that all 3 players have some negatives and the Cubs have to factor in the cost and the negatives for each to determine the best fit for the team. All things being equal, I think we all agree that we would rank them Granderson, Cameron, and then Byrd, but all things aren't equal. An issue that hasn't really been discussed is that I think there will be a lot more interest in Granderson and Cameron, which will drive up their price.

[fromthestretch]

I never said Byrd was my first choice for CF, but his 3-year numbers away from Arlington are .281/.328/.414/.742 (which aren't too terrible for a CF). Of course, everybody's cherry-picking stats to make their point, but let's not forget Granderson against LHP.

 

No one is cherry-picking stats. We're simply taking a deeper look than the three-year splits you posted.

 

The original discussion centered on trading blue chip prospects for Granderson or a short term deal for Byrd and my point is that depending on the costs (players, money, and years) involved, the choice might not be as obvious as expected. The same is true for Cameron.

 

The discussion has evolved. No one is looking at this as an "either Granderson or Byrd" option. As you said, Cameron has been discussed, as well. I'm sure there are other options to consider.

 

Personally, if Byrd was willing to take a one-year deal for $5 million or less, I wouldn't be against it. However, he's going to get more years and more money than that.

 

As for Cameron, even if age does catch up to him offensively, he's still a much better option defensively than Byrd.

[davearm2]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

Seems to me that if you want to take issue with Seidman's stance on Byrd, then you have to at least address the home/road split issue.

 

My point is that all 3 players have some negatives and the Cubs have to factor in the cost and the negatives for each to determine the best fit for the team. All things being equal, I think we all agree that we would rank them Granderson, Cameron, and then Byrd, but all things aren't equal. An issue that hasn't really been discussed is that I think there will be a lot more interest in Granderson and Cameron, which will drive up their price.

All I'm pointing out is that the slash stats you pointed out above are misleading. Byrd's home park is a hitter's haven, and Granderson's is a hitter's graveyard. Of course the fact that Byrd gets a boost from hitting in Arlington is what formed the basis for Seidman's conclusion.

 

Here is what the two guys have done in road games 2007-2009:

Byrd: .281/.328/.414/.742 (684 AB) (Home OPS of .897)

Granderson: .289/.361/.535/.896 (912 AB) (Home OPS of .802)

 

Now we can debate whether a .742 OPS is 4th OF caliber or not, but you can't very well argue that Byrd is a reasonable comp for Granderson.

[Backtobanks]

I never said Byrd was my first choice for CF, but his 3-year numbers away from Arlington are .281/.328/.414/.742 (which aren't too terrible for a CF). Of course, everybody's cherry-picking stats to make their point, but let's not forget Granderson against LHP.

 

No one is cherry-picking stats. We're simply taking a deeper look than the three-year splits you posted.

 

The original discussion centered on trading blue chip prospects for Granderson or a short term deal for Byrd and my point is that depending on the costs (players, money, and years) involved, the choice might not be as obvious as expected. The same is true for Cameron.

 

The discussion has evolved. No one is looking at this as an "either Granderson or Byrd" option. As you said, Cameron has been discussed, as well. I'm sure there are other options to consider.

 

Personally, if Byrd was willing to take a one-year deal for $5 million or less, I wouldn't be against it. However, he's going to get more years and more money than that.

As for Cameron, even if age does catch up to him offensively, he's still a much better option defensively than Byrd.

 

How is it not "cherry-picking stats" if you're talking about his numbers only on the road? Let's not forget there are a few "hitter's parks" on the road in the NL.

 

Personally, if Granderson wasn't going to cost us 4 top young players, I wouldn't be against it either.

[Backtobanks]

From Baseball Prospectus:

 

Guancous (Silver Spring, MD): Wiser for the Cubs: Short-term deal for Marlon Byrd or trade blue chip prospects for Curtis Granderson?

 

Eric Seidman: Granderson is a legit starter, Byrd is a fourth outfielder with a power surge in Texas that masked his true abilities, who will cost much more than he merits. Go for Grandy.

 

I think Seidman is crazy to call Byrd a 4th OF. While we would all love to see Granderson on the Cubs, I don't think Byrd is a bad option. Of course, you would have to factor in the cost (in prospects) of getting Granderson with the cost (in dollars and years) to get Byrd.

2007-2009:

Byrd - .295/.352/.468/.820

Granderson - .277/.350/.499/.849

 

Looking at those numbers, there aren't many teams that wouldn't love to have Byrd's numbers for their CF. I think it's a tough decision if you're talking 3-4 players from Marmol, Vitters, Castro, Casner, Jackson, etc. for Granderson as opposed to $16 - $18 million over 2 years for Byrd.

Seems to me that if you want to take issue with Seidman's stance on Byrd, then you have to at least address the home/road split issue.

 

My point is that all 3 players have some negatives and the Cubs have to factor in the cost and the negatives for each to determine the best fit for the team. All things being equal, I think we all agree that we would rank them Granderson, Cameron, and then Byrd, but all things aren't equal. An issue that hasn't really been discussed is that I think there will be a lot more interest in Granderson and Cameron, which will drive up their price.

All I'm pointing out is that the slash stats you pointed out above are misleading. Byrd's home park is a hitter's haven, and Granderson's is a hitter's graveyard. Of course the fact that Byrd gets a boost from hitting in Arlington is what formed the basis for Seidman's conclusion.

 

Here is what the two guys have done in road games 2007-2009:

Byrd: .281/.328/.414/.742 (684 AB) (Home OPS of .897)

Granderson: .289/.361/.535/.896 (912 AB) (Home OPS of .802)

 

Now we can debate whether a .742 OPS is 4th OF caliber or not, but you can't very well argue that Byrd is a reasonable comp for Granderson.

 

No where in this discussion did I say Byrd is a reasonable comp for Granderson. My point is that resulting cost factored in to obtain Granderson and Byrd (or Cameron) might make the decision more equal than the first look. As for debating Byrd's .742 OPS is 4th OF caliber or not, how about debating Granderson's .577 vs. LHP is platoon OF status? Granderson is going to have lots of teams driving the price up. I think Cameron is going to get more money/years because of his reputation. Byrd just might fly (no pun intended)under the radar and end up without the contract he wants. Playing with a contender in Wrigley Field and reuniting with Jaramillo might be deciding factors.

[fromthestretch]

I never said Byrd was my first choice for CF, but his 3-year numbers away from Arlington are .281/.328/.414/.742 (which aren't too terrible for a CF). Of course, everybody's cherry-picking stats to make their point, but let's not forget Granderson against LHP.

 

No one is cherry-picking stats. We're simply taking a deeper look than the three-year splits you posted.

 

 

How is it not "cherry-picking stats" if you're talking about his numbers only on the road? Let's not forget there are a few "hitter's parks" on the road in the NL.

 

So trying to qualify your generic three-year splits is cherry-picking? OK.

 

I never said it was the only reason to dismiss him, just that it's a reason for caution, considering where he's been playing half his games the last three seasons. There are certainly other things that raise a red flag, such as a low walk rate, his age, his mediocre-at-best defense.

[Backtobanks]

I never said Byrd was my first choice for CF, but his 3-year numbers away from Arlington are .281/.328/.414/.742 (which aren't too terrible for a CF). Of course, everybody's cherry-picking stats to make their point, but let's not forget Granderson against LHP.

 

No one is cherry-picking stats. We're simply taking a deeper look than the three-year splits you posted.

 

 

How is it not "cherry-picking stats" if you're talking about his numbers only on the road? Let's not forget there are a few "hitter's parks" on the road in the NL.

 

So trying to qualify your generic three-year splits is cherry-picking? OK.

 

I never said it was the only reason to dismiss him, just that it's a reason for caution, considering where he's been playing half his games the last three seasons. There are certainly other things that raise a red flag, such as a low walk rate, his age, his mediocre-at-best defense.

 

My point is that there's "reason for caution" for each of them. Granderson can't hit LHP and is going to cost us probably 4 good young players. Cameron, because of his reputation, will get more money and years than he's worth. I think Byrd is a pretty good option as a third choice assuming his demands aren't outrageous..

[inari]

Cameron will probably get less money and years than he's worth. His reputation is someone who hits not all that well, when in fact he hits very well.

[Backtobanks]

Cameron will probably get less money and years than he's worth. His reputation is someone who hits not all that well, when in fact he hits very well.

 

It wouldn't surprise me to see Cameron get more money and possibly more years than Byrd.