Trading Soriano

[CubColtPacer]

 

Wood might have potential to be a #3.

 

Career FIP- 92.

 

He's a strong No. 3 right now. This has nothing to do with his potential. He's already performed at an above-average level for a starting pitcher.

 

number three starters/above-average starters throw more than a hundred innings a year. i'm a big fan of travis wood and think he's going to do well, but let's not go crazy.

 

He threw over 200 innings in 2010 and 158 last year. There isn't a real durability question with him, it's just being given the chance to throw all those innings in the majors.

[treebird]

 

Wood might have potential to be a #3.

 

Career FIP- 92.

 

He's a strong No. 3 right now. This has nothing to do with his potential. He's already performed at an above-average level for a starting pitcher.

 

number three starters/above-average starters throw more than a hundred innings a year. i'm a big fan of travis wood and think he's going to do well, but let's not go crazy.

 

He threw 202 innings two years ago, and 158 last year. It's not his fault that the Dusty Bakers of the world would rather trot out Bronson "Shawn Estes" Arroyo.

 

i know, and i think that's great, but i don't want to say he's an established third starter when he's not pitched close to a full season in the major leagues. happily, i don't believe this is a conversation we'll be having a year from now.

[Guest]

Can I get an actual case for Sappelt being a substandard MLB starter, and not just the generic label?

 

Project his slash line, project his defense, and tell me where that would have ranked among MLB LF starters last year.

 

I like Sappelt fine, and would rather he get at bats than Campana or Johnson or Soriano, but it's not really a difficult path to Dave Sappelt: sub-2 WAR player.

[Guest]

Can I get an actual case for Sappelt being a substandard MLB starter, and not just the generic label?

 

Project his slash line, project his defense, and tell me where that would have ranked among MLB LF starters last year.

 

If you're responding to what I said (since I used that term), I did cover my ass against this response by saying I wasn't attempting to speak to Sappelt's abilities at all.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Can I get an actual case for Sappelt being a substandard MLB starter, and not just the generic label?

 

Project his slash line, project his defense, and tell me where that would have ranked among MLB LF starters last year.

 

I like Sappelt fine, and would rather he get at bats than Campana or Johnson or Soriano, but it's not really a difficult path to Dave Sappelt: sub-2 WAR player.

 

There'd be a lot more to discuss if someone would actually post that path instead of just spamming "Everyone thinks he's a fourth outfielder" or whatever.

 

There were 20 qualified left fielders last year.

 

The midway point was between Josh Willingham (2.1 WAR, .809 OPS, bad defense) and Martin Prado (1.6 WAR, 685 OPS, good defense). Both played in about 130 games.

 

Prado at 260/302/385 with good defense is actually a pretty good downside projection for Sappelt, imo.

[toonsterwu]

 

Wood might have potential to be a #3.

 

Career FIP- 92.

 

He's a strong No. 3 right now. This has nothing to do with his potential. He's already performed at an above-average level for a starting pitcher.

 

This is what Moneyball was all about, and it's amazing that a decade later our front office is still able to take such great advantage of it. Lazy thinkers try to slap labels on guys instead of getting down into the nitty-gritty of what they have produced and what they project to produce in the future.

 

You are really going to pimp his FIP- till the start of the season aren't you?

 

I'll point out some points I've made elsewhere -

 

- We've got 2 partial season data points. Leaving aside the whole 2 points issue, I still think it's risky to presume that you can combine 2 partial season data points into 1 whole season and make an assumption on that (which then negates the value of the 2 data points for analysis if you want to presume it to be one)

 

- Since you want to mark out on career FIP- off 2 partial season data points, then I'll make a flawed argument. He's trending the wrong way. Decreased K rate, increased BB rate, ERA-/FIP-/FIP/xFIP/SIERA/tERA any stat you want is headed in the wrong direction. Yes, flawed argument ... BUT with young pitchers in baseball, guys who struggle in their 2nd season like this often have scouts wondering whether or not teams simply figured him out.

 

My point isn't that I think negatively of Travis Wood. I think Wood/Volstad/Randy Wells/Maholm (if he's signed) are all 4/5 starters who could put together a strong year and be closer to a 3. My point is, though, that B2B's statement that he is more of a potential 3, and not a lock to be a 3, has enough statistical support to make an argument for, and that your assertion that he's a strong 3 also has enough statistical support to be argued against. All your usage of Career FIP- as a factor to define him as a strong 3 can be challenged.

 

* A mildly interesting note on Wood's first two seasons is that his strikeout rate was a fair amount higher on the road than home. Probably nothing, but would be curious if there was some data on pitch usage home vs. road, which I'm too lazy to try and find right now, to see if he was a different pitcher.

[toonsterwu]

Can I get an actual case for Sappelt being a substandard MLB starter, and not just the generic label?

 

Project his slash line, project his defense, and tell me where that would have ranked among MLB LF starters last year.

 

I like Sappelt fine, and would rather he get at bats than Campana or Johnson or Soriano, but it's not really a difficult path to Dave Sappelt: sub-2 WAR player.

 

There'd be a lot more to discuss if someone would actually post that path instead of just spamming "Everyone thinks he's a fourth outfielder" or whatever.

 

There were 20 qualified left fielders last year.

 

The midway point was between Josh Willingham (2.1 WAR, .809 OPS, bad defense) and Martin Prado (1.6 WAR, 685 OPS, good defense). Both played in about 130 games.

 

Prado at 260/302/385 with good defense is actually a pretty good downside projection for Sappelt, imo.

 

I think a solid Sappelt guess for next year would be Sam Fuld with a bit less power (before we go into the minor league profiles again, I'm point to Fuld's .120 ISOP last year) and a less walks and less SB's (Fuld had 20 last year, which personally, I doubt he repeats). Rough paper guess on his WAR would put him roughly in that 1.5-1.6 category, probably a touch below average (so if standard is average, then using the term substandard is fair).

 

It's possible that Sappelt has a hot season. I'd hardly call Prado's 2011 season as a downside projection for Sappelt. I'd call it a pretty middle of the road projection. Expecting Sappelt to be an elite LF is plausible, but I don't think you ever project anyone to be elite at something, and Prado was, relative to UZR, one of the best in LF. Prado has more power and struck out a lot less than Sappelt's profile projects that he would. If people that are arguing that Sappelt is substandard as a starter utilize standard as average, then I think there's easily a case that Sappelt could be a substandard LF. It's possible that he has a really hot year and is above standard.

 

If the argument is whether or not Sappelt can be a decent starting LF, particularly in a rebuilding year, then without a doubt, he can.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

You are really going to pimp his FIP- till the start of the season aren't you?

 

I'm going to flog it until it becomes not true, yes.

 

- We've got 2 partial season data points. Leaving aside the whole 2 points issue, I still think it's risky to presume that you can combine 2 partial season data points into 1 whole season and make an assumption on that (which then negates the value of the 2 data points for analysis if you want to presume it to be one)

 

His minor league numbers are consistent with the "partial seasons."

 

- Since you want to mark out on career FIP- off 2 partial season data points, then I'll make a flawed argument. He's trending the wrong way. Decreased K rate, increased BB rate, ERA-/FIP-/FIP/xFIP/SIERA/tERA any stat you want is headed in the wrong direction. Yes, flawed argument ... BUT with young pitchers in baseball, guys who struggle in their 2nd season like this often have scouts wondering whether or not teams simply figured him out.

 

His decreased season was *still* right around league average, aka a No. 3 pitcher. His "struggles" were not all that struggly.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think a solid Sappelt guess for next year would be Sam Fuld with a bit less power (before we go into the minor league profiles again, I'm point to Fuld's .120 ISOP last year) and a less walks and less SB's (Fuld had 20 last year, which personally, I doubt he repeats). Rough paper guess on his WAR would put him roughly in that 1.5-1.6 category, probably a touch below average (so if standard is average, then using the term substandard is fair).

 

I have absolutely no idea how Fuld and Sappelt are remotely comped. I just don't see it at all.

 

But if you are talking about the Sam Fuld who put up 1.9 fWAR in 105 games last year (career fluke, but nonetheless), then that's not damning of Sappelt in any way.

[toonsterwu]

 

- Since you want to mark out on career FIP- off 2 partial season data points, then I'll make a flawed argument. He's trending the wrong way. Decreased K rate, increased BB rate, ERA-/FIP-/FIP/xFIP/SIERA/tERA any stat you want is headed in the wrong direction. Yes, flawed argument ... BUT with young pitchers in baseball, guys who struggle in their 2nd season like this often have scouts wondering whether or not teams simply figured him out.

 

His decreased season was *still* right around league average, aka a No. 3 pitcher. His "struggles" were not all that struggly.

 

94 qualified pitchers last year. Had he qualified and somehow kept the same numbers,

 

His SIERA would've ranked 87th. His xFIP would've ranked 90th. tERA would've been 80th.

 

Even FIP only comes in tied for 62nd.

 

I only point this out because you're making the argument that you can judge Sappelt as a possible league average starter off of baseline measures of players that qualified last year. I'll pre-empt another point - additional innings for Wood could've led to better results, BUT the likelihood (using 3 month data points) is that he would've had worse results. From April-June, he was trending the wrong way performance wise each month, with FIP/xFIP getting progressively worse each month.

[toonsterwu]

I think a solid Sappelt guess for next year would be Sam Fuld with a bit less power (before we go into the minor league profiles again, I'm point to Fuld's .120 ISOP last year) and a less walks and less SB's (Fuld had 20 last year, which personally, I doubt he repeats). Rough paper guess on his WAR would put him roughly in that 1.5-1.6 category, probably a touch below average (so if standard is average, then using the term substandard is fair).

 

I have absolutely no idea how Fuld and Sappelt are remotely comped. I just don't see it at all.

 

But if you are talking about the Sam Fuld who put up 1.9 fWAR in 105 games last year (career fluke, but nonetheless), then that's not damning of Sappelt in any way.

 

I'm comping Fuld's line to what I expect Sappelt to do, but we've had the conversation on Sappelt vs. Fuld before. I don't know many Reds fans that really thought he would put up ISO's anywhere near what he did in Louisville. So you have two similarly sized guys, considered slightly average in CF, good to plus in LF, below average power, and some speed. It's not the best comp out there, but it's hardly bad. That said, considering Fuld's significantly better discipline/approach at the plate, yes, it's not the best comp.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

94 qualified pitchers last year. Had he qualified and somehow kept the same numbers,

 

His SIERA would've ranked 87th. His xFIP would've ranked 90th. tERA would've been 80th.

 

Even FIP only comes in tied for 62nd.

 

That sounds about right to me.

 

Being the 87th, 90th, 80th or 62nd best starting pitcher is right exactly where I was placing him: A solid No. 3 starter.

 

Using "qualified" usually undersells a player (and yes, I did it too with LFers earlier) because the bad players don't play enough to be qualified.

[jersey cubs fan]

94 qualified pitchers last year. Had he qualified and somehow kept the same numbers,

 

His SIERA would've ranked 87th. His xFIP would've ranked 90th. tERA would've been 80th.

 

Even FIP only comes in tied for 62nd.

 

That sounds about right to me.

 

Being the 87th, 90th, 80th or 62nd best starting pitcher is right exactly where I was placing him: A solid No. 3 starter.

 

Using "qualified" usually undersells a player (and yes, I did it too with LFers earlier) because the bad players don't play enough to be qualified.

 

I think a lot of the talk about whether a guy is a 3, 4 or 5 is a bunch of nonsense, but I'll comment anyway because I'm drawn to nonsense. Maybe that qualifies a guy to being labeled an average pitcher on an average team, but better pitching staffs are going to have better guys as their 3rd best. I wouldn't call such a player a player a "solid #3", he's a #3 if you are comfortable with a pitching staff that probably isn't good enough to be playoff caliber. If you are thinking about being a good team, you don't want such a guy as your 3rd best starter unless you have the best offense around, and even then you're probably spending half the season looking at finding a better pitcher to slot ahead of him.

 

Also, it's not just bad performers that aren't qualifying, it's good guys who deal with injury, or good call-ups.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Third-best starting pitchers on recent world series winners (being lazy and going to B-R so I'm using ERA+):

 

2011 Cardinals: Jaime Garcia, 102

2010 Giants: Matt Cain 124

2009 Yankees: Andy Pettitte 111

2008 Phillies: Joe Blanton 105

2007 Red Sox: Daisuke Matsuzaka, 107

 

I'm not even going to post the 2006 Cardinals because it'd just be trolling, but it's bad.

 

There's no template for a good playoff team, but you can do just fine with a barely-above-average No. 3.

[Backtobanks]

94 qualified pitchers last year. Had he qualified and somehow kept the same numbers,

 

His SIERA would've ranked 87th. His xFIP would've ranked 90th. tERA would've been 80th.

 

Even FIP only comes in tied for 62nd.

 

That sounds about right to me.

 

Being the 87th, 90th, 80th or 62nd best starting pitcher is right exactly where I was placing him: A solid No. 3 starter.

 

Using "qualified" usually undersells a player (and yes, I did it too with LFers earlier) because the bad players don't play enough to be qualified.

 

I think a lot of the talk about whether a guy is a 3, 4 or 5 is a bunch of nonsense, but I'll comment anyway because I'm drawn to nonsense. Maybe that qualifies a guy to being labeled an average pitcher on an average team, but better pitching staffs are going to have better guys as their 3rd best. I wouldn't call such a player a player a "solid #3", he's a #3 if you are comfortable with a pitching staff that probably isn't good enough to be playoff caliber. If you are thinking about being a good team, you don't want such a guy as your 3rd best starter unless you have the best offense around, and even then you're probably spending half the season looking at finding a better pitcher to slot ahead of him.

 

Also, it's not just bad performers that aren't qualifying, it's good guys who deal with injury, or good call-ups.

 

Exactly my point about Wood and Sappelt. On a poor team they are a #3 starter and a starting OF. On a decent team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood might be a #3 starter. On a good team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood is a #4 starter. I realize we're punting 2012, but some of you need to be reminded that we're a large market team.

[Tracer Bullet]

94 qualified pitchers last year. Had he qualified and somehow kept the same numbers,

 

His SIERA would've ranked 87th. His xFIP would've ranked 90th. tERA would've been 80th.

 

Even FIP only comes in tied for 62nd.

 

That sounds about right to me.

 

Being the 87th, 90th, 80th or 62nd best starting pitcher is right exactly where I was placing him: A solid No. 3 starter.

 

Using "qualified" usually undersells a player (and yes, I did it too with LFers earlier) because the bad players don't play enough to be qualified.

 

I think a lot of the talk about whether a guy is a 3, 4 or 5 is a bunch of nonsense, but I'll comment anyway because I'm drawn to nonsense. Maybe that qualifies a guy to being labeled an average pitcher on an average team, but better pitching staffs are going to have better guys as their 3rd best. I wouldn't call such a player a player a "solid #3", he's a #3 if you are comfortable with a pitching staff that probably isn't good enough to be playoff caliber. If you are thinking about being a good team, you don't want such a guy as your 3rd best starter unless you have the best offense around, and even then you're probably spending half the season looking at finding a better pitcher to slot ahead of him.

 

Also, it's not just bad performers that aren't qualifying, it's good guys who deal with injury, or good call-ups.

 

Exactly my point about Wood and Sappelt. On a poor team they are a #3 starter and a starting OF. On a decent team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood might be a #3 starter. On a good team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood is a #4 starter. I realize we're punting 2012, but some of you need to be reminded that we're a large market team.

 

No one needs you to remind us of that several times.

[Little Slide Rooter]

94 qualified pitchers last year. Had he qualified and somehow kept the same numbers,

 

His SIERA would've ranked 87th. His xFIP would've ranked 90th. tERA would've been 80th.

 

Even FIP only comes in tied for 62nd.

 

That sounds about right to me.

 

Being the 87th, 90th, 80th or 62nd best starting pitcher is right exactly where I was placing him: A solid No. 3 starter.

 

Using "qualified" usually undersells a player (and yes, I did it too with LFers earlier) because the bad players don't play enough to be qualified.

 

I think a lot of the talk about whether a guy is a 3, 4 or 5 is a bunch of nonsense, but I'll comment anyway because I'm drawn to nonsense. Maybe that qualifies a guy to being labeled an average pitcher on an average team, but better pitching staffs are going to have better guys as their 3rd best. I wouldn't call such a player a player a "solid #3", he's a #3 if you are comfortable with a pitching staff that probably isn't good enough to be playoff caliber. If you are thinking about being a good team, you don't want such a guy as your 3rd best starter unless you have the best offense around, and even then you're probably spending half the season looking at finding a better pitcher to slot ahead of him.

 

Also, it's not just bad performers that aren't qualifying, it's good guys who deal with injury, or good call-ups.

 

Exactly my point about Wood and Sappelt. On a poor team they are a #3 starter and a starting OF. On a decent team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood might be a #3 starter. On a good team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood is a #4 starter. I realize we're punting 2012, but some of you need to be reminded that we're a large market team.

 

I think that Wood could a good starter. As for Sappelt as a starter, that poor mans team would probably have to star Charlie Sheen, Wesley Snipes, and Dennis Haysbert. This being said, if we did trade Soriano and Byrd and didn't sign Cespedes, I don't see the harm in giving him the job for the year or at least a few months. It's not like we have anyone in the minors who will be coming for a corner OF job anytime soon.

[dew1679666265]

Third-best starting pitchers on recent world series winners (being lazy and going to B-R so I'm using ERA+):

 

2011 Cardinals: Jaime Garcia, 102

2010 Giants: Matt Cain 124

2009 Yankees: Andy Pettitte 111

2008 Phillies: Joe Blanton 105

2007 Red Sox: Daisuke Matsuzaka, 107

 

I'm not even going to post the 2006 Cardinals because it'd just be trolling, but it's bad.

 

There's no template for a good playoff team, but you can do just fine with a barely-above-average No. 3.

 

You can do just fine with a barely above average No. 3, but you should shoot much higher. I don't have a problem with Wood and I'm happy to have him in the rotation as long as he's cheap, but I don't want him to be our third best starter beyond the current rebuilding phase. We can do better.

[davell]

Yes, we ARE a major market team. And finally, we're showing responsibility that comes with it. When we have enough pieces, we'll spend money like a major market team should. Smartly. Not like what we had been doing. Which was spending blindly.

[TruffleShuffle]

pretty much all those guys are better than travis wood.

[ctcf]

Well damn...

 

Jon Heyman @JonHeymanCBS

according to #cubs person, likely they start year with soriano in left field. should be in AL, but big $ to work out

[Clem Fandango]

You can do just fine with a barely above average No. 3, but you should shoot much higher.

 

Yeah, it worked out famously for the Phillies.

 

[/easysetup]

[davell]

Well damn...

 

Jon Heyman @JonHeymanCBS

according to #cubs person, likely they start year with soriano in left field. should be in AL, but big $ to work out

At some point, you had to figure this was going to happen. Maybe he starts off hot and he's movable at the deadline where we eat 25-30 mill instead of the 45-50 we'd probably have to right now. Trading Byrd probably becomes a priority now though, if we want to give Sappelt and/or Campana some playing time.

[Clem Fandango]

Do you see Brett Jackson starting out at AAA this year, even with a hot spring?

[KingCubsFan]

Well damn...

 

Jon Heyman @JonHeymanCBS

according to #cubs person, likely they start year with soriano in left field. should be in AL, but big $ to work out

At some point, you had to figure this was going to happen. Maybe he starts off hot and he's movable at the deadline where we eat 25-30 mill instead of the 45-50 we'd probably have to right now. Trading Byrd probably becomes a priority now though, if we want to give Sappelt and/or Campana some playing time.

No need to give Campana consistent playing time. His career is as a 5th outfielder, and he should be groomed for that. My guess is that Byrd gets traded early in the season, when Jackson is ready.