Cubs trade for Ian Stewart/Weathers pg. 5 (Colvin+DJ)

[ConstableRabbit]

Really?

 

Yes. We had this discussion during the Kemp/Braun MVP debate. A narrow split doesn't absolve a player of playing in a friendly home environment.

 

So then the knocks of being helped by a home park or not "taking advantage" of it become two angles that can be used to support whichever side of an argument you choose to take? How convenient.

 

No. There's pretty much only one way to take it: Adjust for home park whether the splits show it or not.

I'm with Kyle here... why wouldn't you adjust? Park factors are park factors.

[RammyFanny]

Does anyone know when the wrist injury occurred? Before or after he slumped?

[WilcoFan]

 

I realize he stepped into a mess, but he has done nothing to inspire any confidence so far. I'm holding out hope that the Cubs are in on Fielder, or Darvish or the Cuban guys, because so far we have seen him acting like a small market Pres/GM.

 

 

IT. HAS. BEEN. ONE. MONTH.

 

 

This is ridiculous.

[Guest]

Is he "hiding himself in the most hitter-friendly situations possible to fool people into thinking he's adequate", or is he "doing a bad job of taking advantage of his home park"?

 

Both. I don't see how those are contradictory. The fact that his Coors numbers aren't wildly above his road numbers doesn't mean they wouldn't be even worse without them. This was pretty much universally agreed on (though in reverse with a pitcher's park) during the Kemp/Braun MVP discussion. But I suppose I'm just being contrarian by bringing it up now.

 

So what's the argument then, that Stewart is worse than his Coors numbers would predict, but somehow only at Coors because it doesn't show up anywhere else?

[Bryants Disco Ball]

 

I realize he stepped into a mess, but he has done nothing to inspire any confidence so far. I'm holding out hope that the Cubs are in on Fielder, or Darvish or the Cuban guys, because so far we have seen him acting like a small market Pres/GM.

 

 

IT. HAS. BEEN. ONE. MONTH.

 

 

This is ridiculous.

 

Cubsz

 

I do say this with the utmost respect, I really do, but I believe you are being really foolish right now. I believe you are acting like a child who wants that piece of cake before eating his corn.

 

Be inspired. Don't be inspired. I respect you either way. But I can't take anyone seriously if they need some instant gratification to feel good about the direction Theo is taking us.

 

Patience. We are all going to need some of it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So what's the argument then, that Stewart is worse than his Coors numbers would predict, but somehow only at Coors because it doesn't show up anywhere else?

 

Why not? It's 700 PAs of home/road and he still shows a small split. That's plenty of room for variance in there. A little positive variance on the road, a little negative variance at home, and boom, you are right where you'd expect.

 

I'm open to alternative theories, though. Is there something about Stewart's offensive skill set that makes him unable to take advantage of Coors Field's beneficial properties?

[OleMissCub]

Does anyone know when the wrist injury occurred? Before or after he slumped?

 

he sucked ass all year but his wrist injury was in August.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=stewaia01&t=b&year=2011

[ConstableRabbit]

Is he "hiding himself in the most hitter-friendly situations possible to fool people into thinking he's adequate", or is he "doing a bad job of taking advantage of his home park"?

 

Both. I don't see how those are contradictory. The fact that his Coors numbers aren't wildly above his road numbers doesn't mean they wouldn't be even worse without them. This was pretty much universally agreed on (though in reverse with a pitcher's park) during the Kemp/Braun MVP discussion. But I suppose I'm just being contrarian by bringing it up now.

 

So what's the argument then, that Stewart is worse than his Coors numbers would predict, but somehow only at Coors because it doesn't show up anywhere else?

Is your argument that Coors affects all hitters but Stewart?

[Guest]

Is he "hiding himself in the most hitter-friendly situations possible to fool people into thinking he's adequate", or is he "doing a bad job of taking advantage of his home park"?

 

Both. I don't see how those are contradictory. The fact that his Coors numbers aren't wildly above his road numbers doesn't mean they wouldn't be even worse without them. This was pretty much universally agreed on (though in reverse with a pitcher's park) during the Kemp/Braun MVP discussion. But I suppose I'm just being contrarian by bringing it up now.

 

So what's the argument then, that Stewart is worse than his Coors numbers would predict, but somehow only at Coors because it doesn't show up anywhere else?

Is your argument that Coors affects all hitters but Stewart?

 

No, my contention is that the split is irrelevant because his performance has not been buoyed by his home field, and he no longer has to play there more than 3 times year, so any park specific reason for his performance there is not our concern.

[davell]

Theo said we were looking for guys that we would be paying for future performance for, not their past. So far this offseason, there has been some closers signed, a 32 year old 1B for 275 mill, a 32 year old starter for 58 mill, a 30 year old starter that's started for 2 years for 77.5 mill and a SS with an injury history signed for 106 mill at 29. Still on the market is a 27 year old 1B with huge power, a 25 year old future ace, and a 26 year old Cuban with huge upside. Very few trades have went down, especially ones with impact players involved. So, with this being said, what exactly was Theo supposed to have done by now? Make Pujols sign last week, so Boras would get the market going for Fielder quicker? Maybe travel to Japan and post Darvish himself? He should have stayed on top of Cespedes, so he'd already have signing eligibility by now, right? Theo sucks, it's completely obvious. Give him time guys, he's inherited an absolute mess. There's no one we could have right now that's going to build this thing any quicker. We're like a month in, let's give him a few years before we even start to question what he's doing. And by then, there won't be any reason to question anything.

[RammyFanny]

Here's a couple Hoyer quotes that I don't think were posted:

"He obviously had a disappointing 2011 season, but we felt like there was a ton of potential there," Hoyer said. "He gives us a left-hand bat at third base, he's the right age, he's affordable, and we expect big things out of Ian.

 

"It was difficult to part with the two players we parted with -- both guys are homegrown and both guys have contributed a lot to the organization, but we felt to acquire a young talent like Ian Stewart at a position that's becoming difficult to fill, we felt it was the right move."

"We wouldn't have made this trade or given up the talent we gave up if he wasn't [healthy]," Hoyer said. "We're expecting Ian to come in -- and obviously he has to bounce back from last year -- but we're assuming he does and we're looking at him as our starting third baseman."

"With our first two significant moves, we've attempted to make the team less right-handed than it has been and we've attempted to add better defense," Hoyer said, including the acquisition of free-agent outfielder David DeJesus. "We feel very good with both moves that we've done that."

"We watched a lot of video and talked to our scouts quite a bit, and I think he was searching," Hoyer said. "I'm not sure what got him off to a slow start originally ... but it looked like he was changing his stance a lot, raising and lowering his hands, opening and closing his stance. It looked like a guy who was struggling and searching."

"I read a couple quotes from Ian Stewart at the end of the year that he didn't need a change of scenery and he wanted to see things through in Colorado," Hoyer said. "I respect that attitude, that he wanted to make it work there. I do think a change of scenery can work, and we're hopeful it does. Everytime you make a trade, you want the trade to work out for both sides. We're hopeful Colvin bounces back as well."

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Okay, agree to disagree on the park factor thing, acknowledging I was wrong on the platoon thing.

 

That leaves us with what he's actually done.

 

He's averaged 1.7 fWAR and 1.0 bWAR per 162 starts at the MLB level. He's always been a high-K player, which is a collapse-prone skillset, and he's just had a total collapse season. He's also coming off a type of injury that has been (anecdotally, at least) known to linger with hitters the next year.

 

So my questions are these:

 

As a starter, why would we want him at all?

 

As a backup, why would we want to pay a couple of million to a guy like that when our organizational strength was supposed to be a glut of guys who could do that for 400k?

[Guest]

This is the same DJ LeMahieu that doesn't have a position and had an OPS of .694 at AAA last year, right? There's isn't some other DJ LeMahieu?

 

The criticism after one MONTH of Epstein/Hoyer makes me think that Cubs' fans deserved Jim Hendry.

 

 

Seriously. I don't even think there's much of a prayer that that dude could put up the high 700s OPS's that Stewart did prior to this year.

[Guest]

Don't forget the scarcity of actual good 3Bmen nowadays. Finding even adequate production there is basically a plus.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

"We wouldn't have made this trade or given up the talent we gave up if he wasn't [healthy]," Hoyer said. "We're expecting Ian to come in -- and obviously he has to bounce back from last year -- but we're assuming he does and we're looking at him as our starting third baseman."

 

Okay, I promise right now to endlessly praise Epster the first time they make a move I really love, which I'm sure will be soon. Because I hate this one so, so, so much.

 

I would have rather had Ramirez back on a long-term deal at this point.

[Guest]

JESUS CHRIST, I CAN'T BELIEVE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS BOARD QUESTIONING THEO [expletive] EPSTEIN'S JOB PERFORMANCE AFTER LIKE 4 WEEKS.

[Guest]

"We wouldn't have made this trade or given up the talent we gave up if he wasn't [healthy]," Hoyer said. "We're expecting Ian to come in -- and obviously he has to bounce back from last year -- but we're assuming he does and we're looking at him as our starting third baseman."

 

Okay, I promise right now to endlessly praise Epster the first time they make a move I really love, which I'm sure will be soon. Because I hate this one so, so, so much.

 

I would have rather had Ramirez back on a long-term deal at this point.

 

Oh FFS.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

JESUS CHRIST, I CAN'T BELIEVE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS BOARD QUESTIONING THEO [expletive] EPSTEIN'S JOB PERFORMANCE AFTER LIKE 4 WEEKS.

 

That's funny, I can't believe there's a significant portion of this board who are glad our starting 3b for 2012 is coming off a sub-replacement season and we are hoping he bounces back to maybe average.

[Guest]

JESUS CHRIST, I CAN'T BELIEVE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS BOARD QUESTIONING THEO [expletive] EPSTEIN'S JOB PERFORMANCE AFTER LIKE 4 WEEKS.

 

That's funny, I can't believe there's a significant portion of this board who are glad our starting 3b for 2012 is coming off a sub-replacement season and we are hoping he bounces back to maybe average.

 

 

What are the other options? If you're seriously going to argue in favor of giving Aramis the long term deal which you have argued against so much, or if you're going to argue that your mish-mosh of crap platoon would've been a clearly superior option, I'm pretty much not gonna bother with the argument.

 

You've already made multiple wrong points because you are pulling whatever you want out of your ass to argue against the upside of this move...at least you admitted you were wrong when called on it, I guess.

[WilcoFan]

JESUS CHRIST, I CAN'T BELIEVE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS BOARD QUESTIONING THEO [expletive] EPSTEIN'S JOB PERFORMANCE AFTER LIKE 4 WEEKS.

 

That's funny, I can't believe there's a significant portion of this board who are glad our starting 3b for 2012 is coming off a sub-replacement season and we are hoping he bounces back to maybe average.

 

 

WHATEVER YOU SAY I WILL REPHRASE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION!

 

BOOM!

 

ROASTED!

[Guest]

So my questions are these:

 

As a starter, why would we want him at all?

 

As a backup, why would we want to pay a couple of million to a guy like that when our organizational strength was supposed to be a glut of guys who could do that for 400k?

 

Because he's 26 years old, has very good pedigree, and cheaply provides at least 1-2 WAR at a position where there is an extreme dearth of available talent.

 

We don't have a glut of guys who can do that with any certainty, and certainly not with the upside that Stewart provides. Put another way, do you think the chance of Stewart improving to be a solid regular and making good on his prospect status(as high as #4 in MLB) is worth the incremental 1 million or so he'll cost over DeWitt? Is there another 3B option you prefer that offers some better combination of performance, upside, and affordability?

[WilcoFan]

So my questions are these:

 

As a starter, why would we want him at all?

 

As a backup, why would we want to pay a couple of million to a guy like that when our organizational strength was supposed to be a glut of guys who could do that for 400k?

 

Because he's 26 years old, has very good pedigree, and cheaply provides at least 1-2 WAR at a position where there is an extreme dearth of available talent.

 

We don't have a glut of guys who can do that with any certainty, and certainly not with the upside that Stewart provides. Put another way, do you think the chance of Stewart improving to be a solid regular and making good on his prospect status(as high as #4 in MLB) is worth the incremental 1 million or so he'll cost over DeWitt? Is there another 3B option you prefer that offers some better combination of performance, upside, and affordability?

 

 

Response:

 

1. Question the locations at which the high performances occurred

2. Restate the problems from last year

 

 

Wash, rinse, repeat. I don't think this conversation is going anywhere. It will simply be a rehash of the points that have already been made--on both sides.

[XZero771679666304]

JESUS CHRIST, I CAN'T BELIEVE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS BOARD QUESTIONING THEO [expletive] EPSTEIN'S JOB PERFORMANCE AFTER LIKE 4 WEEKS.

 

That's funny, I can't believe there's a significant portion of this board who are glad our starting 3b for 2012 is coming off a sub-replacement season and we are hoping he bounces back to maybe average.

 

The .780-ish OPS' he posted in 2009 and 2010 aren't sexy, but they're not bad. This isn't an inspiring move, but it's nowhere near worthy of the kind of assault you're waging on it.

 

Would a .240/.330/.450 type season with improved defense for 2MM be that offensive to you?

 

If he flames out, the team is out 2MM. You'd rather have given Aramis a 3-4 year deal?

[XZero771679666304]

JESUS CHRIST, I CAN'T BELIEVE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS BOARD QUESTIONING THEO [expletive] EPSTEIN'S JOB PERFORMANCE AFTER LIKE 4 WEEKS.

 

That's funny, I can't believe there's a significant portion of this board who are glad our starting 3b for 2012 is coming off a sub-replacement season and we are hoping he bounces back to maybe average.

 

 

WHATEVER YOU SAY I WILL REPHRASE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION!

 

BOOM!

 

ROASTED!

Truly, his is a scathing wit.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

What are the other options? If you're seriously going to argue in favor of giving Aramis the long term deal which you have argued against so much, or if you're going to argue that your mish-mosh of crap platoon would've been a clearly superior option, I'm pretty much not gonna bother with the argument.

 

You've already made multiple wrong points because you are pulling whatever you want out of your ass to argue against the upside of this move...at least you admitted you were wrong when called on it, I guess.

 

I'm still waiting for a compelling argument in favor of it.

 

So far, I've got:

 

1) He used to be sort of close to average.

2) Maybe his terrible season last year didn't mean anything.

3) He's left-handed.

4) Our scouts see something in him they like.

5) Baseball America had a boner for him half a decade ago.

 

If it's early February and you've spent all offseason trying to dig up a credible third baseman and you haven't found anyone, then maybe you scrape up a busted prospect or injury reclamation for the league minimum. You don't settle on a guy who's both as your starting 3b on Dec. 8, knowing he's going to make a couple of million in arbitration.