85 replies to this topic

[hallas]

If we believe in our Player Development... it's a temporary hiccup to give up all those years of team control for 1 year for Ohtani and a comp pick? That feels like a stretch. 

 

 

So Fangraphs treats net present value of prospects like an annuity that compounds annually at 8% interest.  If you follow this formula, 114 million in future value that starts paying dividends in 2024 would have a value of ~87 million in 2023.  If you buy Ohtani as a 10+ win player as both a hitter and pitcher next year, then he'll be worth 70 million in surplus value (~100 million in performance - 30 million in salary) in 2023.  When you factor in the fact that Ohtani's wins are providing value for a team that is likely in the playoff hunt, and the pick we're getting, I think that the trade is pretty close even for a rental.  The better situation is obviously that we sign him to an extension, but even if we aren't able to agree to one it's not bad.  Maybe it's a stretch that offloading that many prospects is temporary hiccup, but it's actually  decent value.

 

The assumptions made here are that, Ohtani will set the record for largest arbitration award in 2023, and it still won't come close to his actual value as a player.  If Ohtani's arb award deviates from this it will change the calculus pretty substantially.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Ohtani is 1 of 1.  Just an incredible talent.  

I don't care if he's a 10 win player in '23...   I'm not giving up Mountcastle, Hall, Cowser, Westburg, and Mayo for him (or Hays vs one of the prospects) if you only have for him '23. 

That would be horrible imo.   

 

[You Play to Win the Game]

If they were an Ohtani away from being a bonafide World Series contender, I’d do it.

[Mackus]

Ohtani is 1 of 1.  Just an incredible talent.  

I don't care if he's a 10 win player in '23...   I'm not giving up Mountcastle, Hall, Cowser, Westburg, and Mayo for him (or Hays vs one of the prospects) if you only have for him '23. 

That would be horrible imo.   

 

 

He's not including Mountcastle in his proposed trade.  It was Hall, Cowser, Westburg, and Mayo.

 

I'm with Ricker.  I'd do it, even as a rental, if we were already a 90+ win team and Ohtani pushes us to a legit division winner potential.  But we're more like a 75-win team on paper if we're being optimistic, so adding Ohtani doesn't help enough to be worth all that loss of prospect talent.  If I can get him to agree to an extension, then I'm again interested and willing.  Especially if I can swap out a prospect with Hays, but there is no way the Angels would prefer Hays to any of those other guys.

[BSLChrisStoner]

If they were an Ohtani away from being a bonafide World Series contender, I’d do it.

They might be.  He gives them a cleanup hitter, and an ace.  

But I'm not giving up something like 28 years of team control for 1.   

Westburg should be the starting 2nd baseman next year. 
Hall has debuted. Cowser will likely debut.  Mayo could possibly.   

I'd much rather have all of that team control and an extended window.

 

I'm not opposed to trading some package of Stowers, Mayo, Cowser, Norby, Vavra, Prieto, and Rom for a real piece... but if I make a trade like that, it's for someone that has additional control.

[BSLChrisStoner]

He's not including Mountcastle in his proposed trade.  It was Hall, Cowser, Westburg, and Mayo.

Ahh, thanks.  Sorry Hallas. 

And still no for me. 

[hallas]

He's not including Mountcastle in his proposed trade.  It was Hall, Cowser, Westburg, and Mayo.

 

I'm with Ricker.  I'd do it, even as a rental, if we were already a 90+ win team and Ohtani pushes us to a legit division winner potential.  But we're more like a 75-win team on paper if we're being optimistic, so adding Ohtani doesn't help enough to be worth all that loss of prospect talent.  If I can get him to agree to an extension, then I'm again interested and willing.  Especially if I can swap out a prospect with Hays, but there is no way the Angels would prefer Hays to any of those other guys.

 

I think that we're a 75 win team this year, and with a full year of Adley and Henderson next year, we're at least an 81 win team, maybe higher.

[You Play to Win the Game]

They might be. He gives them a cleanup hitter, and an ace.

But I'm not giving up something like 28 years of team control for 1.

Westburg should be the starting 2nd baseman next year.
Hall has debuted. Cowser will likely debut. Mayo could possibly.

I'd much rather have all of that team control and an extended window.

Any of those guys have just as much a chance at being replacement level or worse, as they do being solid contributors. Them being AS level or above is statistically unlikely. Only Adley, Gunnar and GrayRod are untouchable for me. I obviously would have to bite down/hold my nose, etc and do that if it were a rental. But it’s a no brainer with a contract extension.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Any of those guys have just as much a chance at being replacement level or worse, as they do being solid contributors. Them being AS level or above is statistically unlikely. Only Adley, Gunnar and GrayRod are untouchable for me. I obviously would have to bite down/hold my nose, etc and do that if it were a rental. But it’s a no brainer with a contract extension.

Law of averages say there will be a flameout or two.  And that most of them won't reach their ceiling. 
I'm aware of that.  Doesn't change my opinion. 

 

 

I'm not sure I'd do it with the contract extension either. 
Same argument I made when we were talking about Soto. 

[Mackus]

 

I think that we're a 75 win team this year, and with a full year of Adley and Henderson next year, we're at least an 81 win team, maybe higher.

 

I'll stick with 75 on paper for next year if no improvements are made.  Probably less than that, actually.  My main fear is that the pitching staff is gonna regress hard without external additions, even adding in Rodriguez and Hall.  We've gotten 450 IP of sub-4 ERA from Kremer, Bradish, Wells, Voth, and Watkins in 2022.  Optimistic about the younger guys, but not the journeymen who found success this season.  350 IP of 2.25 ERA from Bautista, Lopez, Perez, Tate, Krehbiel and Akin.  I again am optimistic about some of those guys, but would expect a lot less as a group in 2023 (and obviously Lopez is gone).

 

Sign two SP and it looks a lot better.  Then you're figuring out 3 spots to begin the season between Rodriguez, Bradish, Kremer, Wells, and Hall.  If that's Wells and Hall to the pen, that could cover a lot of backslide from guys like Akin, Krehbiel, Perez and Tate.  Bautista I now believe in, but 27 y/o rookies aren't the most reliable bet.

[hallas]

I'll stick with 75 on paper for next year if no improvements are made.  Probably less than that, actually.  My main fear is that the pitching staff is gonna regress hard without external additions, even adding in Rodriguez and Hall.  We've gotten 450 IP of sub-4 ERA from Kremer, Bradish, Wells, Voth, and Watkins in 2022.  Optimistic about the younger guys, but not the journeymen who found success this season.  350 IP of 2.25 ERA from Bautista, Lopez, Perez, Tate, Krehbiel and Akin.  I again am optimistic about some of those guys, but would expect a lot less as a group in 2023 (and obviously Lopez is gone).

 

Sign two SP and it looks a lot better.  Then you're figuring out 3 spots to begin the season between Rodriguez, Bradish, Kremer, Wells, and Hall.  If that's Wells and Hall to the pen, that could cover a lot of backslide from guys like Akin, Krehbiel, Perez and Tate.  Bautista I now believe in, but 27 y/o rookies aren't the most reliable bet.

I personally think that the stadium dimensions are obscuring some of the supposed gains in pitching.  There's definitely a big error bar on the pitching, both because we can't tell if the breakouts are sustainable, and because there's a lot of uncertainty regarding how much of it is due to the stadium.  If the stadium accounts for a significant portion of the gains then you'd think it will carry over into next year.  But I'm an optimist.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

If they were an Ohtani away from being a bonafide World Series contender, I’d do it.

They can be and not with some huge FA signings

[Nigel Tufnel]

The O's ERA has dropped by 1.94 from 2021 vs 2022 (5.84 to 3.90), but on the road the decrease has been 1.54 (5.69 to 4.15) from 2021 to 2022, compared to by 2.33 at home (5.99 to 3.66).  That could mean that the 1.54 reduction is due to talent, and 0.40 (1.94 - 1.54) is due to the wall.  There are probably some ancillary benefits from the wall (pitcher confidence, not overtaxing the bullpen, etc.) that have an impact even on the road, though.

[JStruds]

I think that we're a 75 win team this year, and with a full year of Adley and Henderson next year, we're at least an 81 win team, maybe higher.

Me too. Because Rutschman, Henderson, Stowers and even Vavra are gaining experience this year. Having them batting ahead/around Mountcastle and Hays should improve those two, and assuming Rodriguez is the real deal plus (maybe) half a season from Means I think 85 is expected. Add a solid FA hitter and SP, and that number would be disappointing.

[Mackus]

The O's ERA has dropped by 1.94 from 2021 vs 2022 (5.84 to 3.90), but on the road the decrease has been 1.54 (5.69 to 4.15) from 2021 to 2022, compared to by 2.33 at home (5.99 to 3.66). That could mean that the 1.54 reduction is due to talent, and 0.40 (1.94 - 1.54) is due to the wall. There are probably some ancillary benefits from the wall (pitcher confidence, not overtaxing the bullpen, etc.) that have an impact even on the road, though.

Gotta look at hitting as well as pitching to get a loose idea of the impact of the wall. What was a big disparity early in the season in favor of the park favoring pitchers has leveled out. Two huge offensive days made a big difference. Still need years before we really have a precise idea.

8.28 runs/game on the road
8.37 runs/game at home

[JStruds]

I'll stick with 75 on paper for next year if no improvements are made. Probably less than that, actually. My main fear is that the pitching staff is gonna regress hard without external additions, even adding in Rodriguez and Hall. We've gotten 450 IP of sub-4 ERA from Kremer, Bradish, Wells, Voth, and Watkins in 2022. Optimistic about the younger guys, but not the journeymen who found success this season. 350 IP of 2.25 ERA from Bautista, Lopez, Perez, Tate, Krehbiel and Akin. I again am optimistic about some of those guys, but would expect a lot less as a group in 2023 (and obviously Lopez is gone).

Sign two SP and it looks a lot better. Then you're figuring out 3 spots to begin the season between Rodriguez, Bradish, Kremer, Wells, and Hall. If that's Wells and Hall to the pen, that could cover a lot of backslide from guys like Akin, Krehbiel, Perez and Tate. Bautista I now believe in, but 27 y/o rookies aren't the most reliable bet.

Based on not enough innings, I don't see Hall in the BP. Not enough control. It feels like we've seen enough of Bradish and Kremer to judge that they are the real deal. I think one FA SP - even one just a bit better than Lyles - is enough for 2023 - assuming Means is back @ mid season.

[hallas]

Gotta look at hitting as well as pitching to get a loose idea of the impact of the wall. What was a big disparity early in the season in favor of the park favoring pitchers has leveled out. Two huge offensive days made a big difference. Still need years before we really have a precise idea.

8.28 runs/game on the road
8.37 runs/game at home

 

The key here is that we have a pretty limited view on what the situation is regarding park effects.  The best guess here is that the park went from like 103 or 104 to 95-99, but the error bars here are huge.  Last I checked, Fangraphs was using the 1 year park effect, and they'll be updating the park-adjusted stats using park effects data going forward.  (e.g. after 2024, the 2022 park adjusted stats will be finalized using the 3 year park effects from 2022-2024.) If OPACY stabilizes to like 95 then that will likely carry over.

 

There's also a bigger error bar relating to rules changes regarding the shift.

[Mackus]

The key here is that we have a pretty limited view on what the situation is regarding park effects. The best guess here is that the park went from like 103 or 104 to 95-99, but the error bars here are huge. Last I checked, Fangraphs was using the 1 year park effect, and they'll be updating the park-adjusted stats using park effects data going forward. (e.g. after 2024, the 2022 park adjusted stats will be finalized using the 3 year park effects from 2022-2024.) If OPACY stabilizes to like 95 then that will likely carry over.

There's also a bigger error bar relating to rules changes regarding the shift.

I don't know how frequently they update park factors, but with the current run totals the stadium is now over 100 for the season. It was still under 100 last time I checked a couple weeks ago, so it's jumped a lot recently with some high scoring home games and low scoring road games.

Even the 3- or 5- year effects calculations have lots of noise. ESPN posts 1-year numbers each year and you can see the wild year to lol year variance.

[hallas]

I don't know how frequently they update park factors, but with the current run totals the stadium is now over 100 for the season. It was still under 100 last time I checked a couple weeks ago, so it's jumped a lot recently with some high scoring home games and low scoring road games.

Even the 3- or 5- year effects calculations have lots of noise. ESPN posts 1-year numbers each year and you can see the wild year to lol year variance.

 

I've been looking at the statcast park factors, and right now it's at 100 for the single year park factor,  The 2021 3-year rolling park factor was 105 and its 1 year park factor was 110.  So there's a lot of potential for movement.

 

As far as I can tell, lowering the RF wall by 4 feet in 2012 added about 1-3 points to OPACY's park factor.  I think the 2022 LF change is much more significant, and I'd be shocked if the net change was less than 4 points.  That would put OPACY at 98-101, compared to 102-105.

[Mackus]

Yeah I think that's a reasonable estimate, right around neutral. The R/L splits will be interesting to watch as well.

Also curious to see if it's just in-season noise, but the park was playing as a borderline extreme pitchers park for the first three months or so then has seemingly all of a sudden shifted drastically enough to actually be a very slight hitters park (may round to 100, I didn't finish the math just found per game averages).