Edwin Jackson should still be here...
by EminenceFront on Jun 2, 2009 7:51 PM EDT
Email
Print
Edwin Jackson should still be here and we should have traded Sonnanstine for Joyce.
But he's not! GET OVER IT. It's done and you can't do anything about it.
GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT
GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT. GET OVER IT.
Until next time,
GET OVER IT.
This post was written by a member of the DRaysBay community and does not necessarily express the views or opinions of DRaysBay staff.
80 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm tired of it. Period.
Sign lady must die.
by EminenceFront on Jun 2, 2009 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions
You don't understand this place, do you?
Sign lady must die.
by EminenceFront on Jun 3, 2009 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions
'Hearing vs. Listening'
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
And I've been here longer than any of the writers
What’s your point? I still don’t get it, why should he?
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
Actually
Sadly, I think I’ve been here longer than anyone who’s still active, including PLK.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
Actually, I'm not too familiar with you. Period.
But your lack of appreciation for The Heater speaks volumes to me.
by Patrick L. Kennedy on Jun 3, 2009 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Just gets old after a while to me.
Most people are morons and I guess I just stop finding that amusing after a while.
I disagree.
I think idiocy is the gift that keeps on giving.
by Patrick L. Kennedy on Jun 3, 2009 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm tired of zombies. Period.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
HURF
HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF HURF DURF
Vogt early, Vogt often.
if you go back to almost all of the arguments about Jackson...
you will see they were started by someone who was pro-trade. all i do is respond when they say something. If you guys want the subject dropped stop bringing it up all the fucking time. All in all, this is a phenomenally worthless post.
And just like people told me when i complained about constant “heater” quotes in threads: don’t read it!
The thing is n baseball we trade people and sign players not knowng how successful he will be for your or the other team. Nobody predicted Jackson to be this good or Sonny to be this bad. Also how do we know that Detroit didn’t demand Jackson and wouldn’t take Sonny? they could have called and said we want Jackson not Sonnenstinefor Matt Joyce. And maybe Detrot actually has a good pitching coach to help him be effective.
Very few people question the trade
I’d say we are all in support of Joyce. I think what we question is that people thought that Sonny was going to have a better career going forward than Jackson. That literally has nothing to do with Joyce. If the Tigers demanded Jackson instead of Sonny in order for us to get Joyce then so be it. Good trade on both ends. If the FO valued Sonny much more than Jackson then that is the failure. That in itself has nothing to do with Jackson or Joyce. It is very possible the Rays valued Joyce properly and really undervalued Jackson whereas the Tigers undervalued Joyce and valued Jackson properly. That can still result in a good trade.
Truth be told I do no think Jackson is this good. He is not going to be a 3.25 FIP guy. I do think over the next 5 years he will average around a 3.75-4ish FIP though. I also think Joyce will rake. I think Sonnanstine will be around a 4.25-4.4 FIP. Basically it just comes down to many believing Jackson > Sonnanstine, but that doesn’t mean we disagree with the trade.
this is all true
except that we don’t know and never will how the Tigers valued Sonny. It seems crazy to think a team would ever say we want to give you Matt Joyce, you can choose which of two pitchers you give to us in return. The Tigers wanted Jackson, we wanted joyce, boom trade.
The only role Sonny played in this trade was the Rays had confidence in him to continue to be an effective #4 or 5 starter. The rotation opening was for Price.
I have no problem with Jackson for Joyce. None whatsoever.
Trades are all about value. There was no way the Rays could have predicted Sonny would collapse like this. If our best offer for Sonny was for a player inferior to Joyce then so be it. We made the right move.
Personally I would have moved Sonny last off-season instead of Hammel. My opinion was that Sonnys value was at his highest while Hammels was at its low end. Then again maybe the market was able to see thru Andy. We got Joyce for Ejax so that isn’t all bad. Especially since I think both players will be good.
It's unlikely that most teams valued Sonny as highly as Jackson
I also think it’s unlikely that the front office values Sonny as much as some of the people on this Board do. A lot of it just has to do with using somewhat flawed statistics to show how good he is, but I’m pretty confident that the Rays have better metrics than we do. It’s hard to ignore that people get hits off of him at a higher rate than they should (which has been true since AA), and if you take the tRA spreadsheet a couple more levels out, there are ways to account for that.
Still, the spreadsheet is a secondary concern for most GMs. The teams that value traditional scouting more probably pretty unanimously valued Jackson much higher than Sonnanstine.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
I totally agree with you
I cannot emphasize enough that I have no problem with the trade. I love Matt Joyce.
Dave Dombrowski is known to fancy hard throwers
Sonny doesn’t throw hard.
You can be almost certain that Sonny wasn’t valued by the Tigers nearly as much as Jackson.
"And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic..."
Yes.
By the way, what in the world happened to AN?
That place has turned into a joke for reasonable comments.
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 3, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Or the Rays knew the value of both players and were trading from a perceived strength to fill a perceived weakness, much as the Tigers did
I don’t see the Tigers fans bitching that they now have Josh Anderson and Maggs in the corners. I mean who knew Maggs would become completely sapped of power. A singles hitter that doesn’t play well defensively, they could really use Joyce at this point. So far, Edwin has pitched so well that it’s hard for them to complain, but once he evens out we’ll see.
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 3, 2009 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions
What do you mean by evening out?
Sure he won’t be a 3.25 FIP guy forever, but he won’t get close to a 4 FIP.
But again I’m not complaining about Jackson for Joyce. I’m okay with that trade. My gripe was the misvaluing of Sonny and Jackson.
I guess only time will tell whether the Sonny lovers or the Jackson backers were right. Personally I’d love it if both players ended up kicking butt.
Why do you continue to compare the two?
It wasn’t an either/or situation. Jackson was going somewhere regardless and not because they thought Sonny was the better pitcher. Sonny was cheaper and would continue to be cheaper. Why pay your 4-5 SP more than the league min? Only a handful of teams think they need to go out and have 5 aces.
Name……………Value………….Salary…………ROI
Sonnanstine..$2,000,000…$430,000…..4.65
Jackson ………$9,800,000…$2,200,000…4.45
The Value figure comes from Fangraphs.
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 3, 2009 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions
I was going to post this same to nolesblogger. Clearly there were more variables to include than just performance. Salary and control loom large in that respect.
I have a couple things to say. Firstly ROI doesn’t win championships and it doesn’t win games. Your value is in “baseball” dollars. That is all nice and all. But Edwin has eben winning games and Sonny hasn’t. Winning puts people in the seats. Winning gets extra playoff home games.
That doesn’t even include the problems with that type of analysis from a finance angle. Just looking at ROI gives a far incomplete answer. For example the NPV of Jackson is far higher than Sonny this year.
Hell having the team with the highest ROI is pretty easy under this type of valuation system. Just fill your team with young guys. They all make virtually nothing and nearly every single one outplays their cost in those years which results in a massive ROI……of course you may still end up with a top 5 pick in the draft….
And on a specific basis I also doubt Sonny will be here much longer. We have too much starting pitching so he will have to be traded. This thought was even more profound in the offseason prior to Kazmirs implosion.
From a layman' stand point
you’re right, ROI and dollars spent don’t add up to wins and losses. But we know the Rays work from a significantly smaller budget. Thus sometimes saving $1.5MM on guys that are valued close to the same (Sonny, Edwin) makes a difference to the Rays. The bigger market, higher spending teams may not think twice. By trading Sonny (just theorizing here), we don’t get Joyce, we get someone of lesser talent/value. Joyce adds nice depth and may allow us to make a better move down the road since he essentially makes some other expendable.
We can judge who had/has a better career between Sonny and E-Jax, but their impact on the Rays is profoundly different. Edwin contributed to our team, and then added mroe value by sending us Joyce for him. Sonny added value last year, and may yet add value this year.
I dont think the FO misjudged E-Jax. Maybe they knew what they were giving up, but to get Joyce, had no option. If we’re ok with the trade and think we got fair value, why are we contemplating the “if’s” of trading Sonny versus Edwin? We (presumably) couldnt have both Joyce and Edwin, so the FO got it done. Now we have depth at OF, still have depth at SP (without Edwin) and have the parts to make a move down the road if need be. I’d say thats a win for us (too lazy to look at it from Det standpoint)
Neither would have been anymore than a placeholder going into next year from January's POV.
I can’t explain to you how sick I am of arguing about this. Why do you continue to push it? We have heard your arguments many, many times. Your explanation of ROI sounds a lot like the Rays last year. With a few exceptions it was mostly guys either making the league minimum or signed to team friendly deals. How did that work out?
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 3, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn't make this fanpost
It is what it is. The proof is in the pudding. When people bring this topic up I look at it more of an opportunity to identify the errors of the past so it won’t happen again in the future. However if noone else talks about it then I won’t.
And yes the Rays had a very high ROI last year
However a high or low ROI doesn’t imply winning or losing.
I’m all for the Rays creating some special process to have a mega high ROI within a winning team and then passing on that cost savings to the fans. That woudl be perfect.
Of course this is still a discussion of baseball dollars rather than USD.
I agree with you on the ROI analysis...
nearly every team in the league can afford a 2.2 million dollar pitcher, so if asked would you rather have a pitcher making that much pitching like a 9.8 million dollar pitcher, or one making 430k pitching like a 2 million dollar pitcher, most would take the one pitching like a 9.8 million dollar pitcher.
I don’t like the trade based on we traded from a perceived position of immediate strength that now appears to be a deficiency.
Boom. Outta Here.
by Ryan Gilliss on Jun 3, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
The whole trade discussion is a moot point
Unless we know that Sonny would have brought back the same players that Edwin did.
The assumption is that one player (Sonny) brought back a specific mix of talent and the other player (Edwin) brought back another mix. We valued what Edwin brought back in trade more so than someone else (Sonny).
I didn't say I would have rather traded Sonny...
I wrote that I would have rather not made the trade at all.
Boom. Outta Here.
by Ryan Gilliss on Jun 3, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree what your outlook on ROI. In this context it is virtually useless to use ROI. Every single team would have taken Jackson over Sonny so far this year even though Sonny has a higher ROI. The only case where a person would take Sonny is if they had to employ a severe capital rationing strategy.
Of course I don’t fault the Rays for not seeing that Jackson would turn into Cy Young.
Yeah...
it’s better to look at it exponentially than a simple ROI.
Boom. Outta Here.
by Ryan Gilliss on Jun 3, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
The FO probably didn't misvalue them that much
This is really a trade of Jackson for 3 years for Joyce for 6 years and Sonny for 1 or 2 years (or 4 years if he blew up for some reason). I’d gander that likelihood that Sonny is still in the rotation 2 years from now is virtually zero.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
I'm on the same wavelength as you
My point is that since Sonny isn’t going to be in the rotation anyways then the value of the “team control” goes way down.
"If the FO valued Sonny much more than Jackson then that is the failure."
Why is that the failure based on given what we knew at the time?
by nolesblogger on Jun 3, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Wow.
Why is that the failure based on what we knew at the time?
That’s better.
by nolesblogger on Jun 3, 2009 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Because there were variables that pointed towards Jackson having a better future than Sonny
Sonny has had a better past (well previous to 2009). However there are more things to look at than just past performance. If we overweighted past performance for these two players then our forecast model was off.
That's debatable
There were also variables that pointed towards Sonny having a better future. When there are indications that both pitchers could have a better future than the other it would make sense to me to go with the one that seems to have figured it out already, instead of hoping the other can figure it out, especially considering the one with the better past is cheaper and under team control for longer.
by nolesblogger on Jun 3, 2009 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
This wasn't about projecting who had the best future
Sonny probably brought back players A or B in a trade and Edwin brought back players C and D. The FO obviously valued what they could get back in a trade involving Edwin more so than Sonny. Then they looked at that trade and thought the value added to our team from player C (Joyce) was more than what Edwin would provide.
Why pay $2.2MM for a #4/5 starter that may not be here or be in our rotation (Garza, Shields, Price, Talbot, Davis, Kaz if he recoupsSonny/Edwin and Niemann) when you can pay a little less, get value back at a position of need (everyday starting OF) and move a position of depth?
I agree
I was just arguing against his point that the FO failed by valuing Sonny more. We don’t even really know if they did or didn’t, but if they did there was justification for it.
by nolesblogger on Jun 3, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions
You are right I have no idea who and how the FO valued their players
My issue is more aimed at the bloggers here who clearly liked Sonny a hell of a lot more than Jackson based purely on past performance.
In the end I have no problems with the FO regarding Jackson since they got Joyce for him. Hopefully they valued him correctly, but even if they didn’t another squad offered a solid player for him. I have no problems whatsoever with it.
I agree with you
That is why I keep emphasizing that I agree with the trade. I have literally no problems with trading Jackson for Joyce. As I stated below if I have any issues regarding trades it is trading Hammel instead of Sonny. I think Sonny is a better pitcher, but I think we could have gotten more for Sonny in the past offseason than what we will the next. I also think we would have gotten more for Hammel during this season than what we did prior to the season.
In the short term sure
The argument on this blog was the difference between Price and Neimann was not substantial enough over the course of those outings so you could make the same case with Sonny and Hammel.
Of course it depends what are trade options were with Sonny.
Tool analogy
If there was a failure on Edwin, it would be on the pitching coaches for not arming Edwin with the tools that Detroit seems to have done relatively easily. The jury is still out for consistency, but in the long run, thats where the failure did occur if one did.
There is far more to an FO than the hiring of pitching coaches
Wiser to replace pitching coaches than the FO. One mistake also doesn’t have to be an execution of a pitching coach, but it would bea large item to look at wihin the bigger picture
I dislike Hickey
Next week after I’m finished this this big exam I plan on diving into some data with Hickey. My guess is that he is just a bad pitching coach.
However I’m not saying that we should fire our FO or that they are bad. They are great. They got a great return for Jackson. I’m a huge Joyce fan.
When I talk about the value of Sonny and Jackson I’m talking more about the posters on this blog.
I’m perfectly content with what Andrew did. My problem is that he sold low on Hammel, passed on a sell high for Sonny and will eventually have to sell low (or put him in the pen), and well totally screwed the pooch on Kaz. Those were Andrew’s errors. I’m not real upset with them because we don’t know all the details and what not. Hindsight is 20/20 with those details. Although I do question giving Kaz that extension at that time.
Sold low on Hammel?
Considering how flat his fastball had become, they probably sold high on him. His ERA was league average last year, and he was still young, and he still throws hard. We were able to get something better for him than I thought we would be able to get. Nobody’s going to drool over Hammel because of mediocre performance, but I think they sold him as high as he was going to get.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
I would have traded Jackson and Sonny. I saw Sonny as a candidate to put up worse numbers. Therefore we would maximize his trade value (since we have to trade him anyways). This would allow Hammel to go back into the rotation where hopefully he coudl have boosted his value a little bit.
Of course the return for Hammel is probably a moot point either way.
If this was true
Then the FO failed in properly forecasting Jackson based upon that variable. However that misstep was created by the failure of the pitching coach not maximizing the abilities of Jackson.
The problem with just using past performance to forecast (such as FIP) is that there is an assumption that the players ability in that given year was maximized. What if it was not? What if just telling him to throw a different pitch more often reduces his FIP by 10%?
What would Sonny have brought back?
Is it completely unreasonable to think he would have brought back something nearly equal to Joyce? Certainly not from the Tigers who are more scouting oriented, but couldn’t we have traded with another SABR FO and got something close to Joyce for Sonny.? As the mods of this board pointing out all of last season, Sonny was very good. Almost #1 SP good based on tRA. We really couldn’t have swung a deal to get something good for him? I agree with matthan we should have sold high on Sonny.
Also, rather ironic how the fanpost bitching about this discussion generated a new discussion.
SABR is the historic baseball committee
Saber is what you mean. We deal with swords and numbers.
/pet peeve
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 3, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't understand the "we should have sold high on Sonny" argument.
There weren’t indications that he had already peaked, and it was an organizational necessity to have him moved.
It wasn't needed
Plus it depends on his value on the market. Almost everyone thought it was highly doubtful that he would repeat his 2008 performance as well as highly doubtful that he would be in the 2010 rotation (esp the 2011). So essentially you can trade him after 2008 after most likely his best year (or equivalent) or 2009 after a possible poor year. The probability of Sonnys FIP/tRA rising was greater than it decreasing. At least from my vantage point.
In theory we would have gotten more for him after 2008 than after 2009. Of course with the modern day GM who knows what they would offer for Sonny.
It's impossible to avoid the Edwin Jackson argument.
It drives me insane. Kaz could come back in ace form to join Shields, Garza, and Price and people would still bitch that we don’t have a fifth badass pitcher and have to settle for Sonny/Niemann/Davis.
It's true.
I’d be on of them.
I also think topics like this will always generate a lot of discussion because there is no definitely wrong or right answer (although some may disagree with me on that). Other posts made — like some of the very detailed statistical analyses that RJ or Zorilla make — will never generate as much discussion because there isn’t anything to argue about. They are great posts and informative and I read every one of them, but I don’t think they will ever regularly lead to tons of comments.
"topics like this will always generate a lot of discussion because there is no definitely wrong or right answer"
Very true, just like attendance threads or, to some extent, topics like pitch counts, draft picks, etc. There is enough ambiguity that even lazy retards like myself can spout off while people like RJ do the analytical heavy lifting. Suckers.
baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator
Actually, I can figure out a way to avoid it.
Ban users who bring it up, delete all posts and threads.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
The army of winged monkeys clearly agrees with your decision.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
I'm not going to censor people.
People disagreeing with me has never been much of a problem with me. That’s the purpose of this site is to share information. I just don’t want every Matt Joyce thread turning into “WELL EDWIN SUCKS” or “WELL EDWIN IS BETTER” and I certainly don’t want threads that have nothing to do with Edwin turning into them. It’s just annoying rehashing the argument in every single thread. If I make an Edwin thread or if someone posts an Edwin fanpost, by all means, go at it.
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 3, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Obviously. I'm joking.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
I think most of the arguments about Sonny/Edwin are farily rational
Not a lot of screaming “Edwin is better.” I don’t think you have too much too worry about with it taking over the Joyce threads.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Please read our Community Guidelines.
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
DRB Suggestion Box
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
