Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus (Update: Finalized!)

[skmsw]

The problem with "getting younger" and "relying more on the system" is that it can't be done over night. Especially if the system isn't ready to be tapped. So there may be some moves that look conflicting, but I've yet to really see any.

Really? None?

Miles for $1.4mm instead of any AAA utility infielder playing for the league minimum?

Izturis for ~$3mm instead of Ryan, since no matter how bad Ryan turns out to actually be, it is still almost inconceivable that Ryan could be substantially worse than Izturis?

In return for Edmonds, accepting exactly the kind of player in return whom we are actively declining to commit opportunities to right now vis a vis the above?

Committing that $13mm bucks to Pineiro, who projects out to pretty much a replacement level pitcher, instead of just using a more affordable replacement level pitcher?

Obviously some of those characterizations are very open to debate, but you don't see philosophical contradictions with a plan to get younger and more sysem-reliant in any of them?

[tenniseleven]

on the Rolen/Mulder/Clement question:


some of us believe that Rolen was nearly worth his contract even last season, at what may be his bottom, considering that he posted a .260+ EQA and saved 25+ runs on defense...

he was a 3-4 win player last year even playing the way he did...

by comparison, other 3-4 win players in this market are getting 10+M a year (Guillen, Matthews Jr)

the 2006 version of Rolen was a 7 win player...not the prime Rolen, but the 2006 Rolen...

[skmsw]

on the Rolen/Mulder/Clement question:


some of us believe that Rolen was nearly worth his contract even last season, at what may be his bottom, considering that he posted a .260+ EQA and saved 25+ runs on defense...

he was a 3-4 win player last year even playing the way he did...

by comparison, other 3-4 win players in this market are getting 10+M a year (Guillen, Matthews Jr)

the 2006 version of Rolen was a 7 win player...not the prime Rolen, but the 2006 Rolen...

According to PMR -- my personal favorite of the publicly available defensive metrics, and which takes into account the difficulty of the plays made and not made -- Rolen was well below his usual standards defensively in 2007, in fact pretty much equivalent to Glaus. He was worth about 9 extra outs (102.97% of league average), and Glaus was worth about 7 extra outs (102.78% of league average) -- just a couple runs apart defensively. With Rolen's shoulder problems, it can reasonably be speculated that Rolen's defensive return towards the pack will continue.

[planet planet]

In response to Fat Strat updating the payroll thread, I don't take it for granted that the physicals will pan out. I'd say there's a 25% chance the deal falls through because of the physicals.

[Magneto2.0]

The problem with "getting younger" and "relying more on the system" is that it can't be done over night. Especially if the system isn't ready to be tapped. So there may be some moves that look conflicting, but I've yet to really see any.

Really? None?

Miles for $1.4mm instead of any AAA utility infielder playing for the league minimum?

Izturis for ~$3mm instead of Ryan, since no matter how bad Ryan turns out to actually be, it is still almost inconceivable that Ryan could be substantially worse than Izturis?

In return for Edmonds, accepting exactly the kind of player in return whom we are actively declining to commit opportunities to right now vis a vis the above?

Committing that $13mm bucks to Pineiro, who projects out to pretty much a replacement level pitcher, instead of just using a more affordable replacement level pitcher?

Obviously some of those characterizations are very open to debate, but you don't see philosophical contradictions with a plan to get younger and more sysem-reliant in any of them?

Other then Ryan/Izturis thing, which I agree with, every one of these trades/signings were made because we currently have nothing on the horizon to fill those roles for 2008. Miles isn't even going to be a starter. Who cares? Every team has veterans on the bench. And the Edmonds deal is exactly the kinda deal rebuilding teams do. I have no idea how that can be looked at as contradictory to a rebuilding process?

[Secret Weapon]

Miles isn't even going to be a starter. Who cares?

Signing Miles pretty much guarantees Ryan won't make the roster out of spring training. Ryan may not be great, but why not try to see what he has over a full season rather than bringing back someone who won't be part of the long term future?

[Magneto2.0]

Miles isn't even going to be a starter. Who cares?

Signing Miles pretty much guarantees Ryan won't make the roster out of spring training. Ryan may not be great, but why not try to see what he has over a full season rather than bringing back someone who won't be part of the long term future?

That's a fair point. I didn't think of it from that perspective. I thought they'd still have room for Ryan even if Miles made the team. If not, then yeah, that deal is pretty bad.

[Secret Weapon]

Well there's 6 infield spots:

Pujols
Glaus
Kennedy
Izturis
Spiezio
Miles

These guys are all making over a million dollars and pretty much locked into their positions.

It appears Ryan/Jiminez/Barden/Hoff are all on the outside looking in, competing to be the first one called up.

[Fat Strat]

In response to Fat Strat updating the payroll thread, I don't take it for granted that the physicals will pan out. I'd say there's a 25% chance the deal falls through because of the physicals.

I agree, but I'm being optimistc.

[cpebbles]

According to PMR -- my personal favorite of the publicly available defensive metrics, and which takes into account the difficulty of the plays made and not made -- Rolen was well below his usual standards defensively in 2007, in fact pretty much equivalent to Glaus. He was worth about 9 extra outs (102.97% of league average), and Glaus was worth about 7 extra outs (102.78% of league average) -- just a couple runs apart defensively. With Rolen's shoulder problems, it can reasonably be speculated that Rolen's defensive return towards the pack will continue.

Out of curiosity, why do you prefer PMR to UZR?

For people unfamiliar with them, there are two differences between them: UZR uses Stats Inc.'s PBP data while PMR uses BIS's PBP data, and PMR incorporates line drive data while UZR doesn't (Most research indicates that line drive defense is purely a matter of opportunity, with no discernible skill involvement).

I know UZR has some controversial results from time to time, but so does PMR (Pinto's RF ratings a year or two ago were almost exactly the opposite of what the other systems, and general consensus, held). They correlate reasonably well as defensive statistics go, but I tend to lean on UZR a bit more myself, mostly out of a gut feeling that MGL is more of a stickler to the small details. I can't imagine he would leave something like line drive data in the system when presented with evidence that it's not a measure of a repeatable skill.