California 2039.1 - An arrogant Jerk's Guide to Sustained Winning, Appendix A

[handaspencer]

If I were running a team that needed a CF I'd not be worried about his "wrecked" status so much as the fact that he hasn't been able to stay on the field long enough to make 2 WAR for the last two seasons, and that he'll be 28 next year. I agree he's not a huge risk because you can generally eat a $5M loss. But like I said before, I'd say "I have $5M to invest in a guy. I want to optimize my chances of getting at least 2 WAR. Is Robson such a good bet that I'm willing to give away additional value to make it happen?" Different people will have different answers. Mine would be to find a $500K guy buried in my (or someone else's) minors if I couldn't find a FA at that level who I wouldn't need to give up value for.

Quoting myself here...

For me, this also gets into your conversation about hording. Why give up value from my horde to add a guy if I can add someone similar without giving up anything but future revenue?

Although I agree with most of your points I will differ on this one point. I do think Robsons value to play 4-6 positions at average or above average level defensively provides extra value that the typical WAR calculation don't capture. The ability to use 1 guy to cover 3 roster spots provides value and flexibility to add to more critical areas on your team. I would probably settle in the middle on this discussion.

[RonCo]

Don't get me wrong. If he stays healthy Robson is worth his money. Maybe even a bit more, though that "bit more" is partially what we're are talking about in the hording part of the conversation.

[Ted]

If I were running a team that needed a CF I'd not be worried about his "wrecked" status so much as the fact that he hasn't been able to stay on the field long enough to make 2 WAR for the last two seasons, and that he'll be 28 next year. I agree he's not a huge risk because you can generally eat a $5M loss. But like I said before, I'd say "I have $5M to invest in a guy. I want to optimize my chances of getting at least 2 WAR. Is Robson such a good bet that I'm willing to give away additional value to make it happen?" Different people will have different answers. Mine would be to find a $500K guy buried in my (or someone else's) minors if I couldn't find a FA at that level who I wouldn't need to give up value for.

Quoting myself here...

For me, this also gets into your conversation about hording. Why give up value from my horde to add a guy if I can add someone similar without giving up anything but future revenue?

I don't know Ron. You win. You have exhausted my ability to care. I apologize for not being able to be perfectly right every time I post something. So you are right. Bryan Robson has no value. To anyone. Certainly not to the GM who just won 100+ games and has won over and over using him and players like him and would be happy to use him next year if he didn't have another option. You have argued me into submission. I give up.

[RonCo]

I didn't realize we we're arguing, so I apologize.

I thought we were discussing the game theory that is player value.

To me Robson is probably properly priced, though risky. That makes him hard to move in a trade market if you're trying to get value in return. That doesn't mean Robson had no value to anyone ever. If you wanted to dump him for essentially free in order to get him off your payroll, then I think lots of teams should at least look at him.

[RonCo]

The charts I posted above say that if Robson is the sub-1 WAR guy he's been the past two years, then he's highly over paid. If he does do 2-2.5 WAR, which seems to be his career peak, then he is either properly paid or a bit of a deal. That said, every player can suddenly burst out with a big season. Maybe this is Robson's year.

[Ted]

I didn't realize we we're arguing, so I apologize.

I thought we were discussing the game theory that is player value.

To me Robson is probably properly priced, though risky. That makes him hard to move in a trade market if you're trying to get value in return. That doesn't mean Robson had no value to anyone ever. If you wanted to dump him for essentially free in order to get him off your payroll, then I think lots of teams should at least look at him.

Your last paragraph is nonsense. First you say he's appropriately priced, though risky. Then you say it's hard to get value for him in a trade and I should dump him for free to get people interested? So are you saying that appropriately priced players have no value, or that they should be given away for free? Or is it that any player with any risk should instantly be free? If that's the case, I will be submitting a trade for all of your prospects who are not developed yet.

As far as arguing:

ar·gue
/ˈärɡyo͞o/
Learn to pronounce
verb
1.
give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view.

Yes, this is what you are doing. It is what you do every time I post anything it seems, and I don't know why I even bother anymore. To be honest, I don't know why I am in this league. I'm bored with winning. I'm bored with writing fake stories. Really the only joy I get is out of analysis, and you insist on picking apart anything I do, which isn't a lot of fun.

[RonCo]

We are analyzing together, so okay. Again, I apolgize for arousing offense.

But, yes, if a guy is appropriately priced I am unlikely to want to trade for him by giving value. This is because if he's appropriately priced, it means I should be able to go to the market and get the same thing without giving anything up. I mean, that's the core of your whole "hording" thing, right? Don't give up valuable things for things with less value than you already have. In this case of Robson, if I want to think about acquiring him, I have $4.8M in future revenue to spend and I have other organizational value (prospects or whatever). My choices are:

1) Spend that $4.8M in future revenue in the FA market to get a 2-WAR player without giving up anything of value.
2) Keep my $4.8M (use it on someone else) and find a super-cheap guy somewhere who might only get me 1.5WAR, but what the hell
3) Give you something of value for the $4.8M Robson and his inherent injury risk.

No offense meant at all, seriously, none. But I think my advice to me would be to explore #1 and #2 instead, and only go to #3 if I was in more dire need. And if I were to go to #3, I'd probably spend considerable time looking to give someone something of value for a CF who had less injury risk before looking at Robson. I could be totally wrong here, and feel 100% free to tell me I am. But I -think- this thought pattern is the entire core concept of your whole Guide to Sustained Winning.

[recte44]

I like Robson.

[Ted]

We are analyzing together, so okay. Again, I apolgize for arousing offense.

But, yes, if a guy is appropriately priced I am unlikely to want to trade for him by giving value. This is because if he's appropriately priced, it means I should be able to go to the market and get the same thing without giving anything up. I mean, that's the core of your whole "hording" thing, right? Don't give up valuable things for things with less value than you already have. In this case of Robson, if I want to think about acquiring him, I have $4.8M in future revenue to spend and I have other organizational value (prospects or whatever). My choices are:

1) Spend that $4.8M in future revenue in the FA market to get a 2-WAR player without giving up anything of value.
2) Keep my $4.8M (use it on someone else) and find a super-cheap guy somewhere who might only get me 1.5WAR, but what the hell
3) Give you something of value for the $4.8M Robson and his inherent injury risk.

No offense meant at all, seriously, none. But I think my advice to me would be to explore #1 and #2 instead, and only go to #3 if I was in more dire need. And if I were to go to #3, I'd probably spend considerable time looking to give someone something of value for a CF who had less injury risk before looking at Robson. I could be totally wrong here, and feel 100% free to tell me I am. But I -think- this thought pattern is the entire core concept of your whole Guide to Sustained Winning.

My entire point about Robson and this entire piece regarding players like him is that they aren't readily available for less than 5 mil on the FA market. So doing number 1 is hard. Sure, number two is a possibility, but again, the point is that you can't do that with your whole roster. as for number three, it seems to me that you insinuate here again that he has no value as he is currently priced, which I disagree with.

I don't know what you want. I've tried arguing that I think he has value. You rebut that he doesn't. I tried giving up, and sarcastically saying we disagree, and you won't let me. I really don't know what you want here. You do this all the time. You take apart the analysis of other people, and when they try to reply with their thoughts, you pick those apart. At some point, it just feels like you have to be right. And I don't care enough to figure out who is, or argue with you about it any further. I'm good at this. California is good. That's enough for me. I'm done arguing with you.

[RonCo]

Okay, Ted. Sorry to offend. Here's my pinkie swear promise...you keep writing your fantastic guide, and I will do nothing but read it.

[Ted]

The charts I posted above say that if Robson is the sub-1 WAR guy he's been the past two years, then he's highly over paid. If he does do 2-2.5 WAR, which seems to be his career peak, then he is either properly paid or a bit of a deal. That said, every player can suddenly burst out with a big season. Maybe this is Robson's year.

Ron, I'll take one last crack at this, because I took a nap and I'm not as mentally worn out from bickering. I don't mind the discourse. It's the relentlessness of your rebuttal that wears me out. I don't think you're trying to be offensive. But I also feel like I'm defending a thesis with the way you keep after things like this. It takes what starts as interesting discourse and makes it feel like a desperate attempt to defend your intellectual honor. Maybe I'm nuts.

Second, it's extremely frustrating when you argue and make claims that are objectively not true. Let's look at the above statement. Before you do, go look at your chart again, or pull it up for side by side.

According to it, Bryan Robson is paid LESS than a typical 0.6 to 1.1 WAR player currently is. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that bar is OVER 5 mil. So his is not "highly over paid" as per your statement. If he returns to his career norms (which I agree isn't entirely likely) he would be a steal, whereas you say he would be properly paid or a bit of a deal. Again, the 1.6 to 2.1 bar is just under 8 mil, and the 2.1-2.6 bar appears just under seven mil.

I've also said I think your chart shows that many batters are a bit overpaid as per my method,and if you want to debate that concept, fine. I certainly do agree that 4.3 mil is far to much for a sub 1 WAR player. That's fine. I have no problem with that assertion. I don't think it's too much for a 1.1-1.6 WAR player at a critical position, and that's likely a bad case scenario for Robson. Even with the last two years, he has averaged 1.7 WAR per 400 PA's (excluding his underdeveloped rookie season). Last year was his only year where he missed a LOT of time from injury, and the previous season was just one of those odd OOTP down years. It would not be unreasonable to get 300-400 PA's out of him next year, which would likely be 1.2 to 1.7 WAR. I believe appropriately priced players have value, because I think most players are overpriced. Given that my model says 5 mil for a 2 win player is a good pace, and he is 4.3 mil for 1.2 to 1.7 WAR at a hard to fill position, I think that's close enough to say he has value within my model, which I again think prices players at better than market value. And your chart agrees with this. The low point in players creating 0.6 to 2.6 WAR in your chart is right around Robson's AAV, and 3 out of 4 bars are above it. So yes, there is value in him in my eyes.

However, should he not make 300-400 PA's due to injury, then yes, he is over priced. I also get that sometimes when I post stuff, I make errors and make claims that are objectively wrong. That's going to happen because I'm not going to put the effort into this to be right every time. I feel any original poster of material should be allowed that. To ahve to do the amount of work to make everything right the first time would make this not fun. However, I feel that if you are going to critique someone's logic, you should have your facts right, especially if you are going to make multiple counterpoints and not let an issue go.

[RonCo]

Thanks, Ted.

I meant what I said. I'm not trying to piss anyone off. You write 'em, I'll read 'em!