• Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!

MLB 2013 Season Thread

ugdVOEb.jpg
 
I am probably overly cynical about baseball awards in general now and don't care all too much because I think 50% of the voters have no idea what they're doing but reading other forums with people whining that Farrell got cheated brought a smile to my face. Probably the dumbest award, or should just be more aptly named "this was a nice team with a nice narrative" trophy.
 
pretty awful set of awards this year, especially assuming cabrera wins mvp... hurdle is just a bad manager (saying this as a pirates fan) who had a good team playing for him, he continually made poor decisions that often cost them games, but they were still good enough to make the playoffs anyways. Trout clearly deserves mvp over cabrera (again). farrell should have won al manager over francona... i guess if mccutchen wins that will be the only one that was really "correct" other than the cy youngs which were pretty blindingly obvious this year (although anibal sanchez had a compelling argument over scherzer)
 
Imanalt said:
pretty awful set of awards this year, especially assuming cabrera wins mvp... hurdle is just a bad manager (saying this as a pirates fan) who had a good team playing for him, he continually made poor decisions that often cost them games, but they were still good enough to make the playoffs anyways. Trout clearly deserves mvp over cabrera (again). farrell should have won al manager over francona... i guess if mccutchen wins that will be the only one that was really "correct" other than the cy youngs which were pretty blindingly obvious this year (although anibal sanchez had a compelling argument over scherzer)
Click to expand...

nah, Sanchez didn't have much of an argument against Scherzer at all - unless we want to ignore the 30 inning gap in value, but those two were essentially the same pitcher with a 30 inning gap in how much they played. What's amazing and hopefully doesn't go unnoticed is how good Detroit's staff was - Justin Verlander's 'ineffectiveness' relative to those two was overexagerated on a rate basis in terms of performance by the media and most of the negative feedback associated with his performance is just that he 'lost' more games. The performance of that staff as a whole has an argument to be one of the best staffs of all time, in line with 2011 Phillies and mid-late ninetees Braves (though I am obviously missing some other staffs)

Managers winning those awards is just dumb. Why should Farrell have even won it? Because the team went last to first? Because players started played better when he arrived? The latter obviously can't be reflective of his ability, or else the players in Toronto would have performed well by the same logic. We just tend to sensationalize managers to have the same sort of impact as players do and that obviously isn't true, which is what makes it all kinda silly. If we went by quantifiable decision making I'd say just default it to Maddon every year.
 
yeah i pretty much agree with you on manager of the year i suppose...

Sanchez had significantly better overall rate stats, 2.57 vs 2.90 era, despite 50 point higher babip (.307 vs .259) and a comparably better fip (2.39 vs 2.74). Their rotation was certainly amazing though, just imagine what they could have done with a nonterrible defense behind them...
 
This was actually a thought exercise for myself but I ended up looking into the coefficient for league average FIP because before I made my initial post in reply to yours I was wondering why Scherzer's xFIP was still higher than Sanchez's (as if we normalize both of their HR/FB% Sanchez faces more of a regression and Scherzer has superior rate stats for K% and BB%) but it turns out I was just being silly and ignoring the difference in ground ball% that causes the gap in home run totals.

for other's reference, here is a list of the top starting pitching seasons by a team in the past 25~ years based on WAR.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.as...nd=1&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0
 
tbh if you want to argue that Trout is the more complete player that's fine, but I don't disagree with Cabrera getting the award this year. they both the have the same level of offensive talent around them (on paper), and even if you dislike batting average as a stat cabrera is the first person to win the batting title 3 years in a row since hornsby. it shouldn't be a binary decision between "who has the most WAR" and "who comes closest to winning the triple crown".

that said, the BBWAA running the awards is dumb because you can write about baseball for 10 years, then mail in your ballot every year without ever watching another game (which is what some voters actually do).
 
Girardi should have won Manager of the Year.. Francona got to beat up on bad teams for the last month of the season.

he actually got to do that all season playing in the AL Central. The Indians had a terrible record against the Tigers.
 
tennisace said:
tbh if you want to argue that Trout is the more complete player that's fine, but I don't disagree with Cabrera getting the award this year. they both the have the same level of offensive talent around them (on paper), and even if you dislike batting average as a stat cabrera is the first person to win the batting title 3 years in a row since hornsby. it shouldn't be a binary decision between "who has the most WAR" and "who comes closest to winning the triple crown".

that said, the BBWAA running the awards is dumb because you can write about baseball for 10 years, then mail in your ballot every year without ever watching another game (which is what some voters actually do).
Click to expand...
the problem is that trout is a comparable offensive player to cabrera.

let that sentence sink in, this isnt by war, this is by most any measure. hes a slightly worse hitter, but this is adjusted for by being a very valuable base stealer. If we can accept that theyre comparable offensive players, i dont think theres really any argument. Trout is a better defensive player, playing in a position that generates significantly less offense in general
 
holy fuck texas is dumb... prince is only a solid player (roughly 4 war/year average over his last 5 years, which shoudl be his peak), vs kinsler who was over 5 war/year over that same period agewise. Kinsler is older but shoudl also last better than prince... it would be a pretty mediocre trade if the money evened out, but with the contracts taken into account...
 
I think we're too quick to bias ourselves towards thinking Fielder's performance will last with that decline at that level, though obviously that change exists. The deal is much more even than people are making it out to be, with Detroit coming out the winner less so due to the value difference and more so due to the fact they needed financial freedom more so than a team like Texas. It's fine to Dodger it up every once and a while, especially when it allows you to improve more than a potential free agent would've.

I heard 30 million going the other way, is that what's been confirmed?
 
Well, there was no way Profar was going to be relegated to a bench role again, so the Rangers had to do something. Plus, they get a much-needed left-handed power hitter.
 
Del Rio said:
Well, there was no way Profar was going to be relegated to a bench role again, so the Rangers had to do something. Plus, they get a much-needed left-handed power hitter.
Click to expand...
thats an awfully aggressive position given how bad profar was this year. To me what would make sense would hve been to trade kinsler (but for more value, and potentially get a roughly league average to a bit below average second baseman plus some back) and then let the job be an open competition between profar and the guy you bring in, basically keeping you from being screwed if he doesnt develop yet
 
I don't think that's a fair assessment. We've seen plenty of times where a player was mediocre in a bench role, then finally earns a full-time starting job and runs with it. The thing that strikes me, though, is that the Rangers are essentially placing their trust in a 20-year-old. Obviously, the Rangers have a lot of confidence that Profar can step up even as young as he is. Whether or not Profar is ready for that type of responsibility yet remains to be seen, but I think his absolute floor next season is a serviceable second baseman.
 
tennisace said:
How Stallion is feeling currently:

ounym.jpg
Click to expand...

Honestly I'm sick of Kinsler and I'm sick of first base being a black hole. I'm not a big Prince Fielder fan though, I really do wish we traded for an elite first basemen instead. We did need to do something to get a power bat though cause we struggled to hit for pop with Cruz suspended. Time will tell if this works out I spose.

Edit: We got 30mill too. I say we win this trade then.
 
Considering that Dan Uggla and Darwin Barney are starting 2B, I think Profar will do just fine. Worst case, he's all glove no bat and has some jitters early-mid season. Best case, he's an All-Star caliber player for the next X number of years. The Rangers aren't going to be significantly hurt in the worst case (assuming they find an OF that can hit without the use of PEDs), and the best case speaks for itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top