Update: HOLLIDAY A CARD 7yr/120 million, p178

Classic threads for your viewing pleasure.
Locked
User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22626
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by haltz »

your better bet is his UZR/150 of +6.

In 2007 he as +47 on offense and this year he was +70.

User avatar
Richie Allen
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 7458
Joined: December 22 06, 1:06 am

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by Richie Allen »

haltz wrote:In 2007 he as +47 on offense and this year he was +70.
Which brings us full circle. Look at his 07 and 09 stats. The biggest difference? ICE? Home runs. And the obvious categories boosted by HR. The rest of his numbers are pretty damn close.

I would assume wild fluctuations in offensive numbers, although Albert HAS to be the single most consistent hitter in the history of the game.

User avatar
cardsfansince82
is shooing asian children away from his fridge.
Posts: 27776
Joined: May 17 06, 10:23 pm
Location: at the gettin' place

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by cardsfansince82 »

I haven't really followed this thread and I know my eyes count for jack [expletive] when discussing a player's value, but based on watching the games I thought Holliday was average at best defensively even for LF. And yes, I felt this way before the playoffs even started. Maybe he needed time to get used to Busch, but when he came over I heard he was a good defender. I wasn't impressed at all by his range, arm or confidence out there.

User avatar
Eephus Speed
All-Star
Posts: 1642
Joined: August 28 09, 5:33 pm

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by Eephus Speed »

Well, UZR tells us that Holliday was a little below average after the trade. Small sample. Career UZR/150 tells us he's an above average left fielder. Hitting, pitching and defense all fluctuate. They're all subject to random variation.

As haltz said, there's a point at which signing Holliday would be a mistake. Where exactly that point occurs is up for discussion (for me, I suppose it's somewhere around 7 years and $18 million/year). If we reach that point, my plan B would be Cameron/DeRosa/Craig. Not Jason Bay.

User avatar
Richie Allen
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 7458
Joined: December 22 06, 1:06 am

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by Richie Allen »

I think the question this winter is are we the team with our nuts in the drawer that really, really needs a player and doesn't see a reasonable plan B and ends up overpaying? Overpaying isn't always the wrong move, although it can quickly become less and less of a right move, as you guys have stated, when you start offering a lot more than they're worth. I'm just not sure there's one correct number out there, for all teams interested, and anything more is a mistake.

MrSaigon

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by MrSaigon »

Crasnick talked with 20 executives:
1.If money and length of contract were no object, which outfielder would you sign: Matt Holliday or Jason Bay?

Responses: Holliday 11, Bay 9. The two left fielders are the marquee names on the winter's free-agent market. Holliday, 29, is a three-time All-Star and finished second to Phillies shortstop Jimmy Rollins in the 2007 National League MVP balloting. Bay, 31, is a three-time All-Star with four 100-RBI seasons on his résumé. Holliday has a career .933 OPS to Bay's .896.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/s ... id=4637105

User avatar
redbirdjazzz
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4921
Joined: April 17 06, 10:50 am
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by redbirdjazzz »

MrSaigon wrote:Crasnick talked with 20 executives:
1.If money and length of contract were no object, which outfielder would you sign: Matt Holliday or Jason Bay?

Responses: Holliday 11, Bay 9. The two left fielders are the marquee names on the winter's free-agent market. Holliday, 29, is a three-time All-Star and finished second to Phillies shortstop Jimmy Rollins in the 2007 National League MVP balloting. Bay, 31, is a three-time All-Star with four 100-RBI seasons on his résumé. Holliday has a career .933 OPS to Bay's .896.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/s ... id=4637105
It looks to me like 45% of respondents got this badly wrong. What possible reasons would make you choose the older, worse defensive- and offensive player if money and contract length are no object?

Fat Strat
Official GRB Sponsor of Larry Bigbie
Posts: 28010
Joined: April 17 06, 9:16 pm
Location: No. 16 on the Cards Top 15 Prospect List

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by Fat Strat »

For the record, I'm no fan of Bay's. I think he's a great (not elite) hitter, but a horrible defender. I certainly think Holliday is a better player, but the gap isn't very large offensively. Defensively, UZR says it's a landslide for Holliday. I personally think it's closer (Holliday still being better).
I agree with this. No offense to those in the middle of the discussion, but comparing the merits of Bay and Holliday are a bit silly. Not because it's a silly discussion, but its silly not to couch the entire discussion in terms of money. Is Holliday a better all around player than Bay? Absolutely. Is Bay a better all around player than some combination of DeRosa/Cameron/Freese in LF? Absolutely.

You pay for production and sometimes the difference between really good and great is $5-$10 million annually.

And there's a bigger question, I think, that should frame this discussion. Are we interested in being a decent team going forward? A good team going forward? Or a great team going forward?

Because we're at the point as a ballclub where we're going to have to decide to spend millions extra for players that provide small but measurable benefits over other comparable players. Those small benefits lead to more wins, more margin for error within the marathon seasons, and better odds entering the postseason.

For my money it's Holliday at whatever cost. Both becasue I think (and know) that we can afford him at even $22 million per year AND I think that we've rather effectively proven that you can't just throw whoever "comparable value" players that you want out there and expect them to perform at their projections.

We have money. We have a great core group right now to build a small dynasty from. We have cheap fill-ins at less important positions that we can put out there and let succeed or fail without hurting the overall odds of this club reaching and succeeding in the postseason for the next 4-5 years.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50393
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by jim »

One thing that gets overlooked with Holliday is that he is considered (and numbers point it out) to be one of the better baserunners in baseball. I don't know how much value that adds to him, but over an entire year going from 1st to 3rd in a single, scoring from 1st on a double etc... has to add up to something.

User avatar
heyzeus
Everday Unicorn
Posts: 43220
Joined: April 21 06, 10:14 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Update: The Matt Holliday Off-Season Thread

Post by heyzeus »

de rotoworld:

Cardinals GM John Mozeliak said Monday that he hopes to meet with both Scott Boras and Matt Holliday before the general managers’ meetings end Wednesday.
Mozeliak said he's not sure if the meeting will happen and acknowledged that he's lining up contingency plans in case Holliday isn't interested in returning to St. Louis. "Is there one player who equals what Holliday brought to the club? Probably not," said Mo. "But there are different ways to go about fortifying your club." Holliday, who hit .313/.394/.515 this season, is already drawing interest from baseball's biggest spenders.

Locked