rox at friars 9/21 to 9/23

[Roxpert]

Right, we don't know what the future holds for Holliday, but if Heltonfan's analysis is anywhere near the mark, it would behoove the Rockies to ATTEMPT to sign Mattt this offseason to a deal such as the one I described above.

The great thing about a deal like that for the Rockies is that if indeed it turns out to be a discount to his true market value in 2009, it's an eminently tradebale contract. So, the Rox would have an asset tied up through 2015, or could opt to move him if the right baseball deal came along. Hopefully, any no-trade clause would be limited to a few teams or, preferrably, there would be no no-trade clause at all.

[hiaspire]

Originally Posted by Heltonfan

No. But you need them in order to understand how many wins he's actually worth over the course of a season (WAR stands for Wins Above Replacement), and you need to know how many wins he's worth in order to know how much he should be paid.

It is fine if you want them, but you don't NEED them. They have been deciding values on open markets between supply and demand for centuries before needing someone to tell everyone what everyone else is worth with no other answers accepted.

How many wins were Durham (.218/.299/.351 ), JD Drew (.261/.365/.397 ), Schmidt (6.31 ERA 1.79 WHIP), and Mussina (4.96 ERA, 1.44 WHIP, .305 BAA) supposed to be worth this year again to their teams? Those were some of the top "values" according to the numbers posted here last off-season.

That is not the only answer. Not by a long shot. It's just one way of looking at things and often an incomplete picture IMO but each is entitled to their own.

Holliday's value to this organization is not just tied up in numbers either as they try to turn their business around.

[BigRapidsJackass]

Aspire, you're letting yourself get caught up in the perceived arrogance of the statheads.

There is, of course, no guarantee that any particular player won't seriously under/overperform his projection. But when you're assembling a team of 25 different bodies, you've got to have a rational basis for determining how many wins on average a certain mix of 25 will buy you. Some will overperform, some will underperform It's an inexact science, but it's better than just doing everything by seat of the pants "feel."

And by the way, the market for players is remarkably efficient now. GMs are looking at exactly what Heltonfan is looking at.

[hiaspire]

There is no guarantee, but most off-seasons I bet against the "superior" numbers and usually come out ahead. Most of the time it is common sense seeing something off with those numbers. As it is inexact, you need to see beyond them to view the whole picture.

You aren't "flying by the seat of your pants" or a moron as some like to call them in the game if you go by a different means of evaluation. It doesn't take rocket science to know which players are better and which are better fits for your team and your specific strategy, nor to balance a checkbook in looking at the prices of players and spending accordingly.

[Nate505]

Originally Posted by Roxpert

Right, we don't know what the future holds for Holliday, but if Heltonfan's analysis is anywhere near the mark, it would behoove the Rockies to ATTEMPT to sign Mattt this offseason to a deal such as the one I described above.

If they don't make an attempt to sign Holliday, it'll be tough for me to make an attempt to go to games next season.

I can understand if they try to sign him and just can't get it done if he demands some insane contract, but losing a talent like Holliday would be disgusting if it's because of the Monfort's cheapness/idiocy.

[John Cocktoston]

Originally Posted by Newman

I don't know why right wing conservatives are soooooooooooo emotional. Why don't they edit themselves BEFORE they make their jerky comments?

Newman, no matter how many times you repeat it to yourself and click your ruby red slippers together, it simply isn't true. I am a registered Independent who voted against Bush in the last two elections. Just because I think very little of your MoveOn.org brethren and don't find even remotely compelling the political opinions of Sean Penn, Kevin Spacey or Danny Glover (or Devito for that matter) that doesn't mean I'm a "right-wing conservative" in anyone's book but yours. And maybe your new radio buddy Sandy, who you've turned into an apologist for of late?

[BigRapidsJackass]

You aren't "flying by the seat of your pants" or a moron as some like to call them in the game if you go by a different means of evaluation.

Aspire, I agree with you on some things. For one, I am an extreme skeptic when it comes to minor league stats ("Minor League Equivalents"). And so no, there's nothing "moronic" about saying that Franklin Morales "looked" ready to contribute on the big league level even though his AA stats gave little reason for optimism.

But you do have to try to quantify things. As HF notes, it's not just important to know that Holliday is "better" than Carlos Lee. It is just as important to know how much better if we're going to have any sense of his worth on the free agent market. And that calls for some kind of best estimate -- a real number, not just "I think Lee is a productive left fielder but I think Holliday is considerably better."

[indianadrew]

Originally Posted by BigRapidsJackass

There is, of course, no guarantee that any particular player won't seriously under/overperform his projection. But when you're assembling a team of 25 different bodies, you've got to have a rational basis for determining how many wins on average a certain mix of 25 will buy you. Some will overperform, some will underperform It's an inexact science, but it's better than just doing everything by seat of the pants

kinda like carrying a map when you think you know how to get there.