Article: Following The Cubs' Blueprint

[jimmer]

 

Not sure you read that right......he didn't just lose power this year. And, shockingly, his WAR reflects that. When he doesn't hit, no amount of corner D makes him a good player. Have you actually looked at his WAR this year.....because that is what WAR says, he was mediocre overall.....

 

I remain boggled people want to not take into account any defensive "score" when deciding players are good or not...

Well, prior to this year he's been a corner OF with little power, so he must not be valuable because corner OFs need to be all offense and no defense to be valuable.  It's always been that way.  Now get your kids off my lawn!:-)

Edited October 27, 2016 by jimmer

[USAFChief]

When he doesn't hit, no amount of corner D makes him a good player.

 

Huh.  So what you're saying is...hitting is what matters for a corner outfielder.

 

Where have I heard that before?

[Mike Sixel]

 

When he doesn't hit, no amount of corner D makes him a good player.

 

Huh.  So what you're saying is...hitting is what matters for a corner outfielder.

 

Where have I heard that before?

 

No, because if you hit and can't field at all (Sano) in the OF, you aren't valuable either.....you can't only do 1 of those things, and do the other horribly, and be good......

[jimmer]

 

Not sure you read that right......he didn't just lose power this year. And, shockingly, his WAR reflects that. When he doesn't hit, no amount of corner D makes him a good player. Have you actually looked at his WAR this year.....because that is what WAR says, he was mediocre overall.....

 

I remain boggled people want to not take into account any defensive "score" when deciding players are good or not...

 

No, because if you hit and can't field at all (Sano) in the OF, you aren't valuable either.....you can't only do 1 of those things, and do the other horribly, and be good......

 

Why do you bother? ;-)

Edited October 27, 2016 by jimmer

[Major League Ready]

Yes, The Cubs have done several things well that the Twins could and should emulate.  However, to discount the impact of their revenue because some of the FAs are not contributing fails to recognize that these failures are normal.  In other words, it should be expected that some free agents will perform and others will not,  This strategy requires deep enough pockets to absorb the failures.  The Cubs are spending just shy of $115M this year on free agents.  The Indians and the Twins could not possibly follow this model so to say there is not a a material difference is conceptually flawed.

 

The Twins and Indians only hope of competing is to excel at drafting, development, and asset management.  The core of their problem was they did not embrace and invest in the practices crucial to excelling in these areas.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Yes, The Cubs have done several things well that the Twins could and should emulate.  However, to discount the impact of their revenue because some of the FAs are not contributing fails to recognize that these failures are normal.  In other words, it should be expected that some free agents will perform and others will not,  This strategy requires deep enough pockets to absorb the failures.  The Cubs are spending just shy of $115M this year on free agents.  The Indians and the Twins could not possibly follow this model so to say there is not a a material difference is conceptually flawed.

 

The Twins and Indians only hope of competing is to excel at drafting, development, and asset management.  The core of their problem was they did not embrace and invest in the practices crucial to excelling in these areas.

 

So much this....and no hitting coordinator in the minors?

[TheLeviathan]

 

Not sure you read that right......he didn't just lose power this year. And, shockingly, his WAR reflects that. When he doesn't hit, no amount of corner D makes him a good player. Have you actually looked at his WAR this year.....because that is what WAR says, he was mediocre overall.....

 

I remain boggled people want to not take into account any defensive "score" when deciding players are good or not...

 

Absolutely incorporate defense.  Just go into it being honest about what that looks like.  

 

The problem with Heyward was that, relative to other players, too much of his former value as calculated by WAR was defensive.  We're so drunk on that component that even when he can't hit, we're still doubling down on the absurd notion.  

 

I guess I just like to believe if we're going to be advocates for statistics we should be honest advocates.  Most of the time when people talk about WAR I feel like I'm being sold a lemon.  Sure, WAR is better than the past, but it's not the holy grail as it's often talked about.  Just because I'm taking a dog-sled to work instead of walking doesn't mean I get to call it a limousine.  WAR worshippers are becoming as bad as the Joe Morgan types they used to attack.

 

Sorry to derail the thread, it just bugs me to read utter garbage like that from Fangraphs.

[Doomtints]

Cubs:

 

- Top tier manager

- Hard working front office staff that get along with one another and have specialized roles

- Lots of youth (some home grown, some not)

- A nice share of upper tier free agent signings

 

Isn't this the model every GM not named Terry Ryan has talked about forever?

Edited October 27, 2016 by Doomtints

[Willihammer]

Absolutely incorporate defense.  Just go into it being honest about what that looks like.  

 

The problem with Heyward was that, relative to other players, too much of his former value as calculated by WAR was defensive.  We're so drunk on that component that even when he can't hit, we're still doubling down on the absurd notion.  

 

I guess I just like to believe if we're going to be advocates for statistics we should be honest advocates.  Most of the time when people talk about WAR I feel like I'm being sold a lemon.  Sure, WAR is better than the past, but it's not the holy grail as it's often talked about.  Just because I'm taking a dog-sled to work instead of walking doesn't mean I get to call it a limousine.  WAR worshippers are becoming as bad as the Joe Morgan types they used to attack.

 

Sorry to derail the thread, it just bugs me to read utter garbage like that from Fangraphs.

Its not like he had a huge WAR this year. He didn't hit, his defense is still good (defense never slumps). Overall his WAR is 1.5. What's the problem?

[gunnarthor]

 

I realize ALL winning teams do those things well, that was my point, they aren't unique to Chicago and therefore the Twins can follow that path.  

 

Significant FA signings the past few years:. 

I didn't want to clip your entire post.  Here's the point I'm trying to make.  Looking at only players who amassed at least 1 WAR, the Cubs this year got about 22 WAR from FA, that's the largest group of WAR talent on the team.  Trades and drafts combined for about 31 WAR.  

 

Cleveland got about 8 WAR from FA this year.  They got 39 WAR from trades and the draft.  That's the model the Twins will have to follow.

 

And the payroll differences of those teams and those groups is gigantic.  

Edited October 27, 2016 by gunnarthor

[TheLeviathan]

 

Its not like he had a huge WAR this year. He didn't hit, his defense is still good (defense never slumps). Overall his WAR is 1.5. What's the problem?

 

The problem isn't so much this year, though again I'd argue his defense is misleadingly calling him above average when he should really be a bench or situational player, it's over the course of the last few years lopsided defensive numbers have made a player who can't even crack the top 100 players by WRC+ over the last 5 years, the 12th best player by WAR.

 

I value defense, but that valuation is off from that position.  And it's because our way of measuring defense needs a lot of work.  We should have humility about that, not hubris.  

[dbminn]

A lot of good comments re: development, pitching, big moves etc...

 

Another way to emulate the WS teams is to improve the defense. The Cubs were the best defensive team in the majors this year. Cleveland was the best defensive team in the AL (9th overall).They graded out at 175 and 85 runs better than the Twins. Upgrading defense will immediately improve the team and give needed support to the pitching staff.

 

At SS, the Cubs and Cleveland graded between 30 and 40 runs better than the Twins on defense. I'd like to see the Twins get a solid defensive SS to bridge the gap until Gordon arrives. (Trade Dozier, Polanco to 2nd base)

 

In the OF, the Twins were -30 runs to Cleveland and -80 to the Cubs. In this case, improve the defense by subtraction. Grossman caused the most damage (-20 in 99 games). Release him and pick up a defensively competent 4th OF to fill the gap until the next prospect arrives. Otherwise, let the youngsters play.

 

Finally, acquire a veteran defensive catcher. Garver, Centeno and Murphy can battle for the backup (or co-starter) spot to start the season. 

 

 

 

[Willihammer]

The problem isn't so much this year, though again I'd argue his defense is misleadingly calling him above average when he should really be a bench or situational player, it's over the course of the last few years lopsided defensive numbers have made a player who can't even crack the top 100 players by WRC+ over the last 5 years, the 12th best player by WAR.

 

I value defense, but that valuation is off from that position.  And it's because our way of measuring defense needs a lot of work.  We should have humility about that, not hubris.

I think possibly you're conflating "average" and "replacement level." He has had a below average bat amongst a pool of players all above replacement level.

 

Baserunning has added to his value as well.

 

Ultimately the market rewarded him with a 9 figure salary so while the stats may be off on the margins (maybe the RF positional adjustment ought to be -10 runs instead of -7.5, for example), it gets pretty close. At least, the market thinks so (in addition to fangraphs, etc).

 

correction- the bat has been above average (111 wRC+)

Edited October 27, 2016 by Willihammer

[TheLeviathan]

 

I think possibly you're conflating "average" and "replacement level." He has had a below average bat amongst a pool of players all above replacement level.

Baserunning has added to his value as well.

Ultimately the market rewarded him with a 9 figure salary so while the stats may be off on the margins (maybe the RF positional adjustment ought to be -10 runs instead of -7.5, for example), it gets pretty close. At least, the market thinks so (in addition to fangraphs, etc).

correction- the bat has been above average (111 wRC+)

 

I did conflate those, I actually just re-read that and noticed the issue as well.  I meant "replacement", I'm just accustomed to saying "average".

 

His bat has been slightly above average.  The last five years have him at 108 wRC+, but that's noticeably behind many other players.  (He's roughly 120ish) Yet for WAR he'd rank 12th.  For me, that's too large a gulf for the defense to be making that big of an impact for a RF.

 

As for the market, it's welcome to value players any way it wants.  I try not to let money make that determination so much as what the player is actually providing on the field.  Heyward is a balanced player with some good strengths.  But a guy who isn't good enough as a fielder to play center and not a good enough hitter to play right....I feel like saying he's the 12th best player over the last five years is misjudging his value.  And the core of that problem is that we still can't measure defense very well and we have an even harder time comparing it across positions by one metric.

 

It's not the end of the world because WAR need not be the end of our pursuit of a valuable metric.  But we should recognize why it's not the end of that pursuit and why it's actually quite a long way from that goal.  Being the best of a bad group of alternatives doesn't make something "good".

[howieramone2]

 

Payroll should not be an excuse.  It's also a significant advantage.  Those are not mutually exclusive.

A significant advantage is another way of saying excuse.

[howieramone2]

 

Cubs:

 

- Top tier manager

- Hard working front office staff that get along with one another and have specialized roles

- Lots of youth (some home grown, some not)

- A nice share of upper tier free agent signings

 

Isn't this the model every GM not named Terry Ryan has talked about forever?

Not that I'm aware of.

Edited October 27, 2016 by howieramone2

[TheLeviathan]

 

A significant advantage is another way of saying excuse.

 

An excuse is:  a reason or explanation put forward to defend or justify a fault or offense

 

It need not be a fault or an offense for us to win a championship.  It's an extra obstacle, nothing more.

[KirbyDome89]

 

I didn't want to clip your entire post.  Here's the point I'm trying to make.  Looking at only players who amassed at least 1 WAR, the Cubs this year got about 22 WAR from FA, that's the largest group of WAR talent on the team.  Trades and drafts combined for about 31 WAR.  

 

Cleveland got about 8 WAR from FA this year.  They got 39 WAR from trades and the draft.  That's the model the Twins will have to follow.

 

And the payroll differences of those teams and those groups is gigantic.  

Using baseball reference, following your 1 or greater WAR criteria, I'm seeing about 12 WAR from FA signings and about 22 WAR from draft/trade players. Fangraphs is basically the same at 13 vs. 23. Fowler and Zobrist, the two highest contributors each have contracts the Twins absolutely can afford and they account for 8 of the 12 FA WAR. The Cubs don't have a bunch of FAs contributing heavily to the WAR total, its 2 guys. 

 

I'm not pushing for the Twins to focus most of their attention towards the FA market to acquire talent, I realize the importance of drafting, development, and trades. My point is that when you break down who is contributing to the Cubs run of success, how each was acquired, and how much they're being paid, apart from one contract it is definitely repeatable for the Twins. 

[Rosterman]

Well, you have to have veterans to trade (we have Ervin and Dozier). It's nice to have prospects in the minors (for the rotation we have Berrios, Gonzalves and Stewart). You need to spend some money on free agency (is there a catcher available).

 

Of course, the management team needs to be part of the management team on the field and hire who they think will work wonders. You can have the best pitchers in the world, but lousy pitching coaches.

 

You have to be prepared to spend money in advance to put a winning team on the field (which generates more money in the coffers). Don't base your 2017 budget on your 2016 results...please.

 

Have a five year plan. Really, know your organization!

[gunnarthor]

 

Using baseball reference, following your 1 or greater WAR criteria, I'm seeing about 12 WAR from FA signings and about 22 WAR from draft/trade players. Fangraphs is basically the same at 13 vs. 23. Fowler and Zobrist, the two highest contributors each have contracts the Twins absolutely can afford and they account for 8 of the 12 FA WAR. The Cubs don't have a bunch of FAs contributing heavily to the WAR total, its 2 guys. 

I think you might be ignoring the pitchers they signed in FA.  

[KirbyDome89]

 

I think you might be ignoring the pitchers they signed in FA.  

Good Call. I'm sticking with my stance though; lots of young talent acquired via drafting/trades and affordable FA contracts.

 

The real question is whether or not the players the Twins acquire/already have are lovable....

[jimmer]

http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/76285/the-cubs-will-probably-be-a-dynasty-but-nothing-is-guaranteed

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/this-is-how-dynasties-begin/