Look at Ray Ray Run

As long as he strikes people out and doesnt walk anyone I can walk away optimistic honestly.

I wouldnt touch gennett.

Yes, but as I said in the other thread about this... your company and my company are paying a hell of a lot more for analysts and modelers than MLB teams are currently. I think I'd really enjoy that work, but I wouldnt enjoy it enough to take a 50% paycut. Whenever I see an analyst position posted, and look at the pay for baseball, it's honestly laughable.

I would never ever use a recruiter unless you enjoy getting paid less than you're position is worth.

I will never live to work and I don't judge people who judge themselves based on their jobs and dedicate their lives to them, but I'll never understand it. I don't hate my job, and I'm humbly good at it, but if I never had to work another day in my life I wouldnt. We live one life and have a finite amount of hours on this earth... no ones whispering into their families ears in their death bed saying "I wish I worked more." So many things I want to experience, see and do and so little time in life to do them. I work to support those dreams and bucket list items, as well as to give my wife, and hopefully soon family, a comfortable life. I spent my first 8 years of my career working 60 hour weeks. You could never get me to do that every week today. I guess I paid my dues and Jack, as shitty as it is that's how you move up. If it never ends and you never progress the f your job and employer.

If the Sox made the decision that they'd acquire zero position players this offseason, focus solely on pitching, and then spend their entire position player budget on Mookie Betts after next year would anyone be mad? I don't think that happens, but if you want to know a guy I'd give 350+ million to its Mookie Betts.

Yeah, this sounds like it's about messaging. While I don't agree that the old guys should be telling the new guys to f off, when presenting new ideas the messaging needs to be understood and easily grasped.

So this is not the same as the quoted above, and this was the rumor before this season. Supposedly it changed and I said it before but a game plan is not advanced analytics and shouldn't be cited as such.

Yeah, I have no idea how you can be as smart and educated as he is, and not look around and see the immense benefit analytics have had on successful organizations. I am curious as to which analytics Eno is talking about though. Their scouting department certainly bought in and used advance analytics for drafting and trading. I would love to know where the disconnect is happening.

Well no, it was comparing what Edwin signed for on his last deal to JD - which, once again, are not really comparable since JD was a superior player the three years prior to signing... and contracts grow over time, they don't really stay stagnant, even if theyve grown slower.

Time? EE signed his contract after his good 2016, but at the time he was 33 years old, and his previous 3 seasons were not as good as JD's. Jd is 5.5 years younger, meaning at the time he signs his next 3 or 4 year deal he'll be 1.5 years younger than Edwin when he signed his deal. So to recap, JD is younger/will be younger and has been better for an extended period of time. Nice snarky response though.

Edwin Encarnacion hasn't had a wRC+ as high as JD has this year since 2015. EE is 4 years older. He hasn't had a WAR as high as JD's this year since 2016. EE is no where near the hitter that JD Martinez is.

Amazing that an NFL GM could have watched Watson, Mahomes and Trubisky and came away thinking Trubisky was the best of the bunch.

Why do Sox fans all put Tim Anderson 8th and 9th in the lineup ha?

Did you use WAR to evaluate David Ortiz as well?

I'll go ahead an take an elite hitter on the team.

People may not think they matter but name the last batting champion in the AL who was not a good baseball player. Bill Mueller the worst winner in the past 25 years. If you remove him, every player since about 1980 was a star with 1/2 of them being HOF'ers. Everyone else is a star. Getting hits still matters and matters even more for a guy like Tim Anderson.

Yes, which also means the first two WAR should almost be removed from the calculation as people will pay about 8-10 million for a 2 WAR talent. You can builed a scaled distribution with weights attached to each WAR that better tells what every dollar is worth. Also, when evaluating the value of 1 WAR you should use what teams paid based on a projected value and not what teams ended up paying based on the actual outcomes of the contract. Pujols stinks, but when assessing what teams pay for 1 WAR, you cannot use what he has become because the Angels did not intend to pay him all that money to be complete trash.

That means only 30% of his contract falls within his prime years of projection. That means 7 years of the contract fall outside of that.

In the modern game, yes it is. Primes are no longer 28-33 as they spiked too in the steroid er. Primes are 24/25-29/30 post steroid boom. You see significant and rapid aging impacts post 30 in baseball for many players. This is why free agency is dangerous and it's why players need to hit the market sooner to maximize their value.

Gains from free agency - in revenue and attendance - are short lived in baseball and rarely will pay for the enitirity of the contract. You really only see gains in year one and then you're back to having to win to draw. No one is paying extra to go watch Machado or bryce if their teams arent competitive. If those contracts hamper your abilities to be competitive, then in the long run they'll cost you just as much revenue as they earn you in year 1.

Those 5 years encompassed much of his prime years while the back end of this contract will encompass the post-prime aspect of his career. I think 30 is a decent precedent - assuming he puts in a couple 5+ WAR seasons. 3, 5, 4.4, 4, 3.5, 3, 2.6, 2.3, 2, 1.8 That is a back of a napkin calculation for his aging and giving him the benefit of first year pressures and no first year relaxation. For 300 million I'd want some 6+ WAR years to compensate for that age regression. Manny is no guarantee to get there. 28.6 come the duration above. I think I'd probably take the under based on that but 30 is a realistic goal for Manny and if he ages like Beltre (defense maintains its value and power plays up) he blows by the projection. I think the Padres found the most likely outcome to be 25-30 WAR while 30+ was much more likely than less than 25 which weighed heavily on their evaluation. Say 1 SD for them fell between 25-35, now you see what SD was thinking. For the Sox, maybe they valued him on the lower side being 22-30 being 1SD for their evaluation.

Once again, that is not what teams pay for 1 WAR it's what 1 WAR was worth in FA. There is a very big difference. Teams aren't paying guys to suck but guys who suck drag down the $/WAR number. Teams likely pay a good amount less, based on their internal projections, than that figure. WAR/$ also does not scale the same way - 1 WAR is worth about 4 million, while 4 WAR may be worth 30 million to a team. Depending on your value and rarity compared to your peers, you will make more. A 4 WAR catcher may make more than a 4 WAR LF.

Your arbitrary cut offs, absolutes and exaggerations are always interesting.

Dombrowski is awful.