Re: Projecting the 2013 Cubs

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Is everyone saying no aware that Bryce Harper is going to be way, way better at baseball than Starlin Castro?

 

Everyone realizes that. What are the expectations though? If Harper becomes a perennial 8-9 win player and Castro becomes a perennial 5-6 win player, giving up Baez (potential 5+ win player), and one of Almora (potential 4+ win player) or Soler (potential 4+ win player) is probably going to end up hurting you more than it helps you. If you do that trade 100 times, there are probably plenty of times the side receiving Harper wins, I just don't think it would be more often than that side loses.

 

I do think it would be pretty close though. (repeating myself a bit from the previous post)

 

Yeah, if Harper is going to be an 8-9 win player and Castro 5-6, then the difference is completely worth two very high ceiling but still A--ball prospects.

 

I think the Harper side wins that trade 85 times out of 100.

[Guest]

Stop harping on IMB's comment and realize that there are people in here who wouldn't trade Castro for Harper, straight up, and would have to think about Trout. WTF???

[Cubswin11]

If only we still had Lahair as some trade fodder, wouldn't even need to bring Castro in this conversation.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Stop harping on IMB's comment and realize that there are people in here who wouldn't trade Castro for Harper, straight up, and would have to think about Trout. WTF???

 

I wonder how many more years of .335ish wOBA would mark the transition from "zomg look at all of the HOFers on his comp list" to "Consistent 4-win SS." Two?

[dew1679666265]

I'll defend myself slightly on the Castro/Harper thing. Harper at 19 posted a 4.5 fWAR and Castro at 20 posted a 2.0 fWAR, but a huge amount of that difference was wrapped up in UZR's love of Harper (9.5 for Harper vs -2.0 for Starlin). Harper's still better offensively, but it's not nearly as ridiculous and position importance played a big role in my thinking. That said, bWAR says I'm way wrong too, so I'll admit my error.

 

On Trout, I'll go ahead and admit I was wrong there. I was thinking about position importance and forgot just how ridiculously good Trout was last year.

[Guest]

I'm also confused as to why nobody mentioned Rizzo and Samardzija re: IMB's comment. It just went straight to Castro + top prospects.

[davell]

I'm also confused as to why nobody mentioned Rizzo and Samardzija re: IMB's comment. It just went straight to Castro + top prospects.

I indirectly did. It's why I said I'd trade any 2 guys for Harper. I'd have a hard time giving up Castro, Shark, AND Rizzo. I'd definitely trade Castro and one of them though.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Castro, Rizzo, Baez for Harper? I think so.

[imb]

id rather consolidate 9 WAR (or whatever stat you want to use) in one player than spread 11 out among 3 -- assuming castro is worth 5 and two other guys are 3 apiece. It's rudimentary but you get the point.

[Tracer Bullet]

Those hesitant on trading Baez for Harper because of "potential" you are aware Harper and Baez are virtually the same age, right?. Harper is like 1.5 months older than Baez. He has 3/4 year in MLB already, Baez won't even have 3/4 year in AA after this year. You trade Baez and any other combination of prospects all day for Harper and don't even think what his/their potential "could be." I get being hesitant giving up Castro +Baez and Soler/Almora, because of Castro but the minor leaguers I don't even hesitate on.

 

Baez was just one of the names included. No one has said they won't trade Baez or any 3 prospects for Harper.

[Tracer Bullet]

id rather consolidate 9 WAR (or whatever stat you want to use) in one player than spread 11 out among 3 -- assuming castro is worth 5 and two other guys are 3 apiece. It's rudimentary but you get the point.

 

But at some point is the difference high enough to keep the 3? If the 3 guys total 11 and Harper peaks at 7, do you want the 3?

[SABR Gamer]

Is everyone saying no aware that Bryce Harper is going to be way, way better at baseball than Starlin Castro?

 

Everyone SHOULD realize that. What are the expectations though? If Harper becomes a perennial 8-9 win player and Castro becomes a perennial 5-6 win player, giving up Baez (potential 5+ win player), and one of Almora (potential 4+ win player) or Soler (potential 4+ win player) is probably going to end up hurting you more than it helps you. If you do that trade 100 times, there are probably plenty of times the side receiving Harper wins, I just don't think it would be more often than that side loses.

 

I do think it would be pretty close though. (repeating myself a bit from the previous post)

No, everyone doesn't realize that. There's people saying they "probably" wouldn't trade Castro for Harper or only trading Starlin straight up for Trout.

 

Fixed

[SABR Gamer]

Is everyone saying no aware that Bryce Harper is going to be way, way better at baseball than Starlin Castro?

 

Everyone realizes that. What are the expectations though? If Harper becomes a perennial 8-9 win player and Castro becomes a perennial 5-6 win player, giving up Baez (potential 5+ win player), and one of Almora (potential 4+ win player) or Soler (potential 4+ win player) is probably going to end up hurting you more than it helps you. If you do that trade 100 times, there are probably plenty of times the side receiving Harper wins, I just don't think it would be more often than that side loses.

 

I do think it would be pretty close though. (repeating myself a bit from the previous post)

 

Yeah, if Harper is going to be an 8-9 win player and Castro 5-6, then the difference is completely worth two very high ceiling but still A--ball prospects.

 

I think the Harper side wins that trade 85 times out of 100.

 

So you think there is only a 15% chance that at least one of the guys included besides Castro doesn't bust? I would say that is pretty pessimistic.

 

I said I think it's a little less than majority that the Harper side wins, and you could make a case for it being 50/50, but I'd say there is at least a 50% chance that 1-2 of those 3 guys doesn't bust, and that's really all it could take to make it a mediocre trade.

 

Plus you (ETA: that was imb who cherry picked 9 WAR for Harper and 5 for Castro) keep dealing with the most extreme of the situation. The difference in that hypothetical could be as small as 2 wins between Castro and Harper. If even one of Almora, Baez, or Soler become a 4-5 win player, the Harper side would lose that trade.

[SABR Gamer]

id rather consolidate 9 WAR (or whatever stat you want to use) in one player than spread 11 out among 3 -- assuming castro is worth 5 and two other guys are 3 apiece. It's rudimentary but you get the point.

 

But at some point is the difference high enough to keep the 3? If the 3 guys total 11 and Harper peaks at 7, do you want the 3?

 

Take the group if the difference per player is greater than 2 WAR. So 3 guys at 12 = 1 guy at 8. Assuming 2 WAR is the average MLB player. Maybe value the single guy more if you are confident in your front office to fill those other 2 slots with above average players.

[neely crenshaw]

I know I mentioned Castro originally because Baez looked like the real deal. Of course nothing is a sure thing. I think they would be less likely to move Samardzija simply because we have so little pitching anywhere close to being ready but I do believe that with the holes we need to fill anything/anyone is movable.

Obviously if guys like harper and trout were involved anyone is in play.

 

Not to compare the two but one of my biggest criticisms of the previous administration was their unwillingness to trade any young prospects. At their peak what type of players could we have grabbed for guys like Marshall, Hill, Guzman, Brownlee, Christensen, Kelton, Dopriak,either Patterson, Pie, even Hee Sop Choy and Bobby Hill were top 25 prospects at one time. Yet for Hendry they were untouchable.

Prospects especially young, low level minor league prospects may reach their highest value as trade bait rather than ever reaching the major leagues

[Guest]

Olney with a tidbit on Castro:

 

There's no getting around it: Starlin Castro just looks older. His face looks different, his upper body has filled out, and he just seems older. Teammates have noticed it, too, in little things, like how he runs out to his position, how he carries himself on the field, how much more focused he is. And there is this: "He's stopped swinging at so many bad pitches," said one teammate.

 

The first segment of Castro's career has been pretty good, albeit marked by moments of immaturity, like the night he wasn't watching as his teammate pitched. Castro turned 23 eight days ago, and since 1961, only five other players have had more hits than Castro and his 529 before their 23rd birthday, according to the Elias Sports Bureau. Since 1920, only 14 players have more hits than Castro before their 23rd birthday.

 

If Castro continues to develop his plate discipline, he could be a very different and even more dangerous hitter this season.

 

Paul Sullivan has nine questions about the Cubs.

 

This really stinks: Darwin Barney cut his knee in the Cubs' final exhibition game, and may start the year on the disabled list.

[Gilby]

Stop harping on IMB's comment and realize that there are people in here who wouldn't trade Castro for Harper, straight up, and would have to think about Trout. WTF???

 

I wonder how many more years of .335ish wOBA would mark the transition from "zomg look at all of the HOFers on his comp list" to "Consistent 4-win SS." Two?

 

I feel like I've seen you post about Starlin's HOF track during one of the many times you have bemoaned Theo for not taking advantage of what he was given.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I feel like I've seen you post about Starlin's HOF track during one of the many times you have bemoaned Theo for not taking advantage of what he was given.

 

Yes, and?

 

I think he might be on a HOF track. I'm curious how many stagnant years it would take before that isn't the case anymore.

Edited April 1, 2013 by Hairyducked Idiot

[SouthSideRyan]

I like that we're just going with the Bryce Harper = 9 WAR player now.

[davell]

I like that we're just going with the Bryce Harper = 9 WAR player now.

As opposed to you thinking a 23 year old Starlin is evidently more valuable going forward than a 20 year old Harper?

[Guest]

I like that we're just going with the Bryce Harper = 9 WAR player now.

 

Of course, for now, he probably only has to be half that to be more valuable than Castro.

[Guest]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-0401-cubs-opening-day-chicago-20130401,0,5881899.story?track=rss

 

Either way, President Theo Epstein says he is satisfied Sveum was the right choice to manage the rebuild, citing his communication skills, the players' preparation and work ethic, and the "culture of accountability" Sveum established in the clubhouse.

 

But if the Cubs struggle as badly in 2013, can Sveum's job performance be fairly evaluated?

 

"We try to evaluate him on all those things, and on wins and losses," Epstein said. "It's just we evaluate wins and losses realistically. If we give him a team with a true talent level. … Last year we felt like we were a 69-win team heading into the season. We were on pace for 69 wins at the trade deadline, and then we traded everyone and people got hurt.

 

"So we evaluated him relative to our own internal expectations, not wins and losses."

 

Epstein didn't project how many wins he believes the Cubs will finish with in 2013, though obviously he has a number in mind. But he likes the team's makeup and firmly believes in his blueprint.

 

"We have a chance to be good this year," he said. "There are some talented players here. We're going to be better down the road than we are now. That's just the bottom line."

 

Thought the bold was interesting (in that he'd say that... and that that's what they thought).

[Guest]

http://i.imgur.com/DSIRwlv.png

 

Even in the outcome that's more optimistic to Harper's career path than Castro's, his increased value is little more than a rounding error each year.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If two wins a year from a single player is a rounding error, then I think the valuation method may be ill-considered.

 

(aka, I still hate linear $/WAR, no matter what Dave Cameron says)

[davell]

TT, I appreciate the graph. But it SHOULD be swayed towards Harper. He had the highest WAR ever for a 19 year old position player. Getting 46 WAR seems like a major accomplishment over the next 7 years, but I do think its hitting him light(I'm guessing you took Griffey's career? Haven't looked it up). Harper's also getting penalized by you playing him out year for year, dollar-wise, when its at least likely that the Nats lock him up on a longterm deal fairly soon, considering how its happening with almost everyone. I could see a 10 year, 225 mill deal or something like that happening a year or two from now.(likely backloaded) That would change things a good bit here, as would the idea that the guy with the highest ever 19 year old season WAR, could put up a few 10 WAR seasons over that 7 year stretch. I love Castro and think its fair how he was projected out. But I do think Harper outproduces what you've got him doing.