http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/whats-...-baseball-team/

 

Looks at the "balanced" vs. "stars and scrubs" approach and finds pretty much no difference.

 

Also notes that it's much easier for a team like the White Sox (as currently comprised) to make an upgrade (trade deadline move, for example) at one terrible position compared to more balanced team struggling to find and pay for (money or prospects) an upgrade over a 2-3 war player.

 

 

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/whats-...-baseball-team/

 

Looks at the "balanced" vs. "stars and scrubs" approach and finds pretty much no difference.

 

Also notes that it's much easier for a team like the White Sox (as currently comprised) to make an upgrade (trade deadline move, for example) at one terrible position compared to more balanced team struggling to find and pay for (money or prospects) an upgrade over a 2-3 war player.

 

well this is on me and me being extremely tired. this reminds me of a math term called coefficient of determination.... where a model is used and that it will remain constant.

 

but using the advance metric, while it does help, does chg and it is not constant in performances on a yr in and yr out basis.

 

the unknown factor, esp for me, is that one or several super talented that brings that little extra, that chemistry, that special leadership skill that can not be seen in stats.

 

moneyball

well this is on me and me being extremely tired. this reminds me of a math term called coefficient of determination.... where a model is used and that it will remain constant.

 

but using the advance metric, while it does help, does chg and it is not constant in performances on a yr in and yr out basis.

 

the unknown factor, esp for me, is that one or several super talented that brings that little extra, that chemistry, that special leadership skill that can not be seen in stats.

 

moneyball

 

You've just found a new Moneyball niche, superstars with strong leadership skills and team-first oriented...we'll see how much that's worth when Andrew McCutcheon theoretically hits the trade market next year.

You've just found a new Moneyball niche, superstars with strong leadership skills and team-first oriented...we'll see how much that's worth when Andrew McCutcheon theoretically hits the trade market next year.

 

and that lead to another thread where another poster was responding to a post i made. that, ref the bold, that pitt may look to trade one of their very nice of'er. talk is the pirates what to sign him, only if they can do something this yr. they need pen pitcher and maybe a sp. i can see them going all in this yr.

 

but back to you post, i still will say, getting that special player can not be predicated .....

Pittsburgh is likely to wait until after this season.

 

They're still not 100% certain Polanco will be the special player he was projected to be.

Pittsburgh is likely to wait until after this season.

 

They're still not 100% certain Polanco will be the special player he was projected to be.

that is what a nother poster whom i really trust as being fair, said.

 

but my point, look at the NL central, now look at the division and now the wildcard team comes into play.

 

pirates will want to make that playoff, as it stands, they really need pitching to really do something special, and yet, at least some known and unknown prospects who make a name for themselves in ST.

 

they need to make a trade for pitching.

 

 

The best way to build a team? Be insanely rich like the Dodgers.

This is almost two years old, for what it's worth. Though it looks like Jonah revisited it in this week's Hot Takedown podcast?

Yep, at Nate Silver's site, where they were also debating the merits of the Angels trading Trout.

 

 

As far as the Dodgers go, all that spending hasn't won them a World Series, nor the Mariners, Angels, Tigers, etc.

The Red Sox, for three of four years now, have been a complete disaster.

 

If the Cubs do win, hopefully the lesson won't be spending on Heyward, Lackey and Zobrist rather than a wide swath of trades breaking their way for 3-4 years.

Edited February 17, 201610 yr by caulfield12

Yep, at Nate Silver's site, where they were also debating the merits of the Angels trading Trout.

 

 

As far as the Dodgers go, all that spending hasn't won them a World Series, nor the Mariners, Angels, Tigers, etc.

The Red Sox, for three of four years now, have been a complete disaster.

 

If the Cubs do win, hopefully the lesson won't be spending on Heyward, Lackey and Zobrist rather than a wide swath of trades breaking their way for 3-4 years.

 

and that is why they are going more of a fiscal route with smart trades instead of the one sided trades they were doing.

 

now they have to unload some of those $$$ laden contracts.

Yep, at Nate Silver's site, where they were also debating the merits of the Angels trading Trout.

 

 

As far as the Dodgers go, all that spending hasn't won them a World Series, nor the Mariners, Angels, Tigers, etc.

The Red Sox, for three of four years now, have been a complete disaster.

 

If the Cubs do win, hopefully the lesson won't be spending on Heyward, Lackey and Zobrist rather than a wide swath of trades breaking their way for 3-4 years.

 

As a fan of the Dodgers, I just wanted to point a couple things out...

 

1. The new ownership group vowed to make a splash the first couple of years, hence the big spending. They said it wouldn't last forever. They had a pending TV deal, and needed to make a splash.

2. They also vowed to build a top tier farm system and scouting staff, which would feed the MLB club. Until they are productive with such, they "have to buy" players.

 

Again, as a Dodgers fan, it kinda sucks watching them "buy" players but at the same time, I remember the days when Russell Martin, Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, Matt Loney, Jonathon Broxton, Andre Ethier and Dee Gordon were the "Youthful Core". The one thing Ned Colletti did right (at least the team did right while he was GM) was draft and develop star players. Hopefully they get back to that soon.

As a fan of the Dodgers, I just wanted to point a couple things out...

 

1. The new ownership group vowed to make a splash the first couple of years, hence the big spending. They said it wouldn't last forever. They had a pending TV deal, and needed to make a splash.

2. They also vowed to build a top tier farm system and scouting staff, which would feed the MLB club. Until they are productive with such, they "have to buy" players.

 

Again, as a Dodgers fan, it kinda sucks watching them "buy" players but at the same time, I remember the days when Russell Martin, Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, Matt Loney, Jonathon Broxton, Andre Ethier and Dee Gordon were the "Youthful Core". The one thing Ned Colletti did right (at least the team did right while he was GM) was draft and develop star players. Hopefully they get back to that soon.

The Dodgers have probably the best farm system in the MLB and have arguably the most depth of any team at the major league level (them or the Cubs). They have the luxury of being able to buy players while still stocking the minor leagues with their near monopoly on much of the international market. They're set up for present and future success more than any other team.