MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

[kenp86]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

WTNY, you're a Cameron guy, right?

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-v...yle-schwarber/

Thoughts?

Schwarber belongs in the AL. DH is the perfect spot for him with first base a backup option in my mind. His power is great and with that short porch out in right, that would up his numbers(I.E. Granderson). Trade seems to help both clubs in my eyes.

[cubsgocontinental23]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Schwarber belongs in the AL. DH is the perfect spot for him with first base a backup option in my mind. His power is great and with that short porch out in right, that would up his numbers(I.E. Granderson). Trade seems to help both clubs in my eyes.

If the Cubs give up Schwarber I don't know if I could forgive them. This guy has one of the best swings and approaches in baseball easily top 10 or top 5 hitter in 2 years

[Scrapps]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

I'm sorry, but I couldn't give up Schwarber (who has plenty of team control left), for a reliever that is going to throw maybe another 30 innings, this year. Is the 12 innings Miller is going to throw in the postseason, worth 4 or 5 years of Schwarber? Not in my opinion.

[KBLover]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

I want to see Schwarber traded for a pair of relievers (albeit awesome ones). That would be the irl version of the game loving to trade a young Bryce Harper for Tyler Clippard or whoever that reliever was that the game always seemed to do.

His defensive value was -0.7 dWAR according to baseball reference (fangraphs is broken or something). For all the bad talk about Schwarber's defense, I was expecting to see a number that would make Manny Ramirez look like an elite fielder...or maybe a number equal to Manny's.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

WTNY, you're a Cameron guy, right?

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-v...yle-schwarber/

Thoughts?

Funny that you bring this up and I hope you're kidding about me being a Cameron guy, lol. For the record, I think Dave Cameron is one of the weaker writers at FanGraphs and his whole raison d'etre is to take a contrarian position and spin a counter-narrative whether it's a tenable position/narrative or not.

But it's funny that you mentioned this article because I typed out 500 critical words of it last night in the Pro Baseball Forum, but decide not to post it. Yes, I am biased for Kyle Schwarber, but I really thought Cameron's data interpretation (the 25 y/o and under table based on Z-contact was lol-worthy as evidence of Schwarber being a future mediocre bat) was lacking. I thought it silly to propose that HR/XBH% is actually a thing and that lefty pull hitters can't post decent BABIP anymore due to shifting. I also thought him extending those things to shackle Schwarber's future hitting ability was laughable. The big lol moment, though, was his conjured out of thin air 20% future WAR discount rate--without any context of what the value of WAR will actually be or if the Cubs will be in the midst of a dynasty at that point--for no other reason than to make Schwarber and Miller's projected WARs closer together and justify his original narrative that he sat down to advance before he researched the article.

TL;DR: Did not like, would not recommend. Do not agree with his position. Would like Andrew Miller to be a Cub, but not for Kyle.


EDIT: To clarify what I mean about the Z-contact table being lol-worthy...I plotted Career Z-Contact% vs Career wRC+ values given in Cameron's table and the correlation was virtually non-existent. R^2 = 0.04. It looks like a blob. His using Z-Contact% to predict future value of Schwarber's bat is dumb mostly because there's no such relationship. Some bats do more damage per contact made and you'd think anyone of Cameron's standing (he's 3000+ articles deep into his FG writing career) would realize that. Likely what he did was, wanting to write an article that the Cubs should consider trading Schwarber because everyone else said they shouldn't deal him for relievers, he scrolled through Schwarber's FanGraphs page looking for any signs of weakness, found a relatively low contact rate, and then tried to trump that up. And an article was born.

[Tmizzle]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Spend a day at work and miss some good stuff. Also, To the Cubs and good old Kyle, The Cubs offered me Schwarber for Tyler Jay earlier in the year and I turned it down. I already had a DH type in Arcia and Park but thought about moving him to 1B or Catcher. I eventually moved on from the deal though and continued my season.

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

That kind of **** is why I pay 0 attention to his trade value series. It was a terrible article and when it got pointed out in the comments the echo chamber attacked him.

[KBLover]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

That kind of **** is why I pay 0 attention to his trade value series. It was a terrible article and when it got pointed out in the comments the echo chamber attacked him.

It reminded me of why I go to fangraphs for the objective data and guts of baseball, not the subjective writing part.

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Sullivan and Fagerstrom are solid guys who shouldn't be burdened with pushing out so much content but Cameron is just really, really bad at this.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

That kind of **** is why I pay 0 attention to his trade value series. It was a terrible article and when it got pointed out in the comments the echo chamber attacked him.

The FG echo chamber is one of the reasons I don't even look at the comments there. It should be a good place for discussion, but it isn't. Dave Cameron could make a post that simply said "Ted Williams was a bad baseball player" and there'd be a groundswell of: right on, Dave! I *knew* he was overrated this whole time comments....Absurd.

Sullivan and Fagerstrom are solid guys who shouldn't be burdened with pushing out so much content but Cameron is just really, really bad at this.

I like Jeff Sullivan's work because he keeps it short and entertaining while not taking himself so seriously/trying to prove his worth with every article.

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Sullivan and Fagerstrom are solid guys who shouldn't be burdened with pushing out so much content but Cameron is just really, really bad at this.

Eno Sarris does good work on Pitchers and objective pitch data but Cameron is only good for his connections in front offices

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Eno Sarris does good work on Pitchers and objective pitch data but Cameron is only good for his connections in front offices

Yeah actually I was just thinking about the guys who take a majority quantitative approach, you're right. Eno Sarris is probably my favorite active baseball writer. I'm a pitcher when I play and I absolutely 99% of the stuff he writes. His interviews and breakdowns are wonderful.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Plus his name is "Eno" which is different. Counts for something.

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Plus his name is "Eno" which is different. Counts for something.

I'd say it affects his discounted WAR by +0.5 per year. Look at me, I can write for FanGraphs now too!

[Tmizzle]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

What would Travis Wood cost?