BBA Today 52 - Milestones, Trades, Old Men Shouting at Playoff Clouds

[Ted]

*Sorry for the late post, folks. Couldn't work on this yesterday after it was recorded. Also, I quit editing after the trade discussion, so it's a bit more rambling after that.

Ron Collins and Ted Schmidt Check in on a few more milestones, discuss the recent injury and trade news around the BBA, and check in on a long ago top pick who is having a suspiring season. They then try to look at the MLB expanded playoff format as it would look in the BBA, but instead rail about playoffs in general like the two crotchety old men they are.

GET IT HERE!

[aaronweiner]

Palacios is definitely on a Hall of Fame track. His 162 game average is .309-.392-559 and 5 WAR. His peak seasons are outstanding. He was clearly the best player at his position. He was also clearly one of the best players in baseball when he posted back to back seasons of 6 WAR. He won multiple championships and was a key player on championship teams.

If you're just looking at the boring bottom WAR number he's only played nine seasons.

[RonCo]

Yeah. I think Palacios is on a proper pace. Like most guys 29, though, he's obviously still got work to go.

[aaronweiner]

Ouakili is a time horizon deal. I'm looking at one more season of Dave Martin (no chance he gets his $30 million either) and maybe watching Arthur Dempster fade in two years.

My time horizon for titles is short with the guys I have, and while those guys would have been helpful for a long-term rebuild I'm not really interested in a long-term rebuild at this point.

The only player on the list I'm really upset about losing is Makin, but he's exactly the sort of player who doesn't translate well to my ballpark.

The overpay (well recognized) is for Ouakili's contract; if you think of him as a 4 WAR player there might not be a player like him in the league, including most arbitration contracts.

[Ted]

Palacios is definitely on a Hall of Fame track. His 162 game average is .309-.392-559 and 5 WAR. His peak seasons are outstanding. He was clearly the best player at his position. He was also clearly one of the best players in baseball when he posted back to back seasons of 6 WAR. He won multiple championships and was a key player on championship teams.

If you're just looking at the boring bottom WAR number he's only played nine seasons.

What Ron said just below this. He is on the track. Sort of. The true no doubt HOFs make their case by 30-31. WAR, traditional milestones, awards, postseason excellence, whatever. Those plyers are the only one I would say are truly on a HOF track.

Palacios has work to do. If he were to retire today, he wouldn't be in. And any player can provide next to nothing at any time after age 30.

[Ted]

The other note I'd make about Palacios is that he his a BAD defender, and has been. Players that want into the Hall shouldn't be bad at either hitting or fielding. They can be a mediocre fielder, and a great hitter or a above average hitter, and amazing fielder. However, being downright BAD at defense has to be taken into account. That's the real knock on Palacios. If he's even an average fielder, I'd agree he's much closer to the no doubt track.

[aaronweiner]

The other note I'd make about Palacios is that he his a BAD defender, and has been. Players that want into the Hall shouldn't be bad at either hitting or fielding. They can be a mediocre fielder, and a great hitter or a above average hitter, and amazing fielder. However, being downright BAD at defense has to be taken into account. That's the real knock on Palacios. If he's even an average fielder, I'd agree he's much closer to the no doubt track.

You're right. Kick out Little Hurt.

[Ted]

The other note I'd make about Palacios is that he his a BAD defender, and has been. Players that want into the Hall shouldn't be bad at either hitting or fielding. They can be a mediocre fielder, and a great hitter or a above average hitter, and amazing fielder. However, being downright BAD at defense has to be taken into account. That's the real knock on Palacios. If he's even an average fielder, I'd agree he's much closer to the no doubt track.

You're right. Kick out Little Hurt.

That's an absurd comparison and you know it. (because you laughed.) But because I'm a pedantic asshat, here goes:

Thomas was the career leader in OPS all time for right handed hitters until he started to age. He played in a deadball era compared to Palacios, and STILL had a superior hitting numbers through the same age. Furthermore, DESPITE only being a DH he smoked Palacios in WAR. This shows 2 things:

1) It displays the difference in eras and talent relative to the league, i.e. Palacios numbers aren't as good relative to everyone else as Thomas' were.
2) It shows that Thomas was not a BAD fielder. He just wasn't one at all. That's better than Palacios, who hurt his teams in the field because he is a poor defender. Playing a guy who should have maybe been a DH in the OF doesn't make him more valuable or better than if he was a DH. It just squeezes the bat into the lineup. Maybe that's better for the team, but it's not an indication that the player is better.

Thomas was considered the best hitter in the league or among the top few for a big chunk of his career. Palacios is more like persistent top ten, largely because corner OF sluggers with subpar gloves have been so easy to come by.

[aaronweiner]

If it wasn't absurd I wouldn't have winked. Really, I was just hoping you'd give me a rousing defense of Little Hurt.

[Ted]

If it wasn't absurd I wouldn't have winked. Really, I was just hoping you'd give me a rousing defense of Little Hurt.

I know man, I'm just sensitive to these topics. I'm frustrated by what passes for debate these days. The degree of intellectual dishonesty that is commonplace is terrifying, and basically has derailed all discourse. It's everywhere. Not to be overly harsh, because I know you were joking, but "What about FTIII" is a distraction. It's not a legitimate argument and in a debate would be meant to force the debater to spend time debunking an absurd claim while the maker of that statement slips past the argument and in the process convinces a few gullible people of it's validity.

Distractions.
Gaslighting.
Whataboutism.
Star man arguments.
Ad-homenin
Personal attacks

It goes on and on and on. And because people mimic what they see on TV, and have been mentally poisoned by politicians and cable news, it's now commonplace to use these techniques in every day to day discussion of a topic.

I literally spend 80% of my time in any debate demonstrating to the person that what they think is a valid argument is in fact, nonsense. You never get to the meat of the discussion.

I am exhausted by this. I am frightened for what it has done to our society and it's ability to hold civil discourse.

So my reaction to these types of statements, even when when made in jest, is one of offense and anger. Just because I'm exhausted by them. We should all stop doing this. Perhaps we should stop doing this in jest, until it stops being so normal that people can't tell when others are serious or not without a winking emoji.

Don't mind me, I'll just go back to my no fun corner of the universe.

[RonCo]

I love me some Star Man arguments....

[Ted]

I love me some Star Man arguments....

I'm not even gonna fix it. Well done, sir.

[jleddy]

Well you guys sure put the hoodoo on Clulow, now didn’t you?

[CTBrewCrew]

Ok - this will be my listen on my morning walk tomorrow now. I also like to yell at clouds