Article: BREAKING: Twins to Sign Versatile Marwin Gonzalez

[TheLeviathan]

 

There's no hill. There are just different aspects I am interested in. The platoon aspect, the potential starter replacement aspect, etc. And these aren't knocks on Gonzalez or this deal -- it's simply speculation about his potential role, that's all.

Sano was -0.5 bWAR last year, in half time. He wasn't even hurt, was he? He was awful both defensively and offensively.

By comparison, Schoop's bad year was still 1.4 bWAR with a steady glove. Cron has been a 1-2 bWAR regular the last 3 years. And in the context of this org, we already had a top prospect at 2B repeating AAA, a 1B prospect who should hit AAA soon, and another AAAA 1B.

But prior to Gonzalez, we had no one behind Sano at 3B except Adrianza or Torreyes.

The front office probably can't admit it publicly, but I suspect they'll always make extra sure Gonzalez has a 3B glove ready!

 

Why are a random sample of  300 ABs by Sano reason to put him above Schoop or Cron?  Especially given the organizational investment and upside?

 

There's just no good reason to put Sano above those two.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Why are a random sample of  300 ABs by Sano reason to put him above Schoop or Cron?  Especially given the organizational investment and upside?

 

There's just no good reason to put Sano above those two.

I'm talking specifically about Sano at 3B, not Sano in general. There's more than 300 PA that suggest Sano at 3B could be problematic. I expect if he's healthy, he would move to 1B, or even DH if it's available. Cron or Schoop would instead go to the bench or leave the org.

 

And it's not necessarily a matter of putting him "above" the other two, in a general context. We just didn't have any realistic options to replace Sano, before Gonzalez. So in speculating about reasons behind the Gonzalez signing, and a usage plan for him looking ahead, it's fair to single out 3B as being of particular importance, that's all.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I'm talking specifically about Sano at 3B, not Sano in general. There's more than 300 PA that suggest Sano at 3B could be problematic. I expect if he's healthy, he would move to 1B, or even DH if it's available. Cron or Schoop would instead go to the bench or leave the org.

 

And it's not necessarily a matter of putting him "above" the other two, in a general context. We just didn't have any realistic options to replace Sano, before Gonzalez. So in speculating about reasons behind the Gonzalez signing, and a usage plan for him looking ahead, it's fair to single out 3B as being of particular importance, that's all.

 

I don't consider Nick Gordon any better a player than Austidillo at this point.  Or Adrianza, hence why Schoop would immediately come to mind.

 

And if Sano is being move to 1B....the guy getting benched is Cron, not Sano.  You're trying to put the spotlight on Sano, but I'm trying to show you the insurance is more evenly spread out than that.  In fact, if I had to order it....2B, 1B, CF (by way of RF), 3B would be the top four with quite a drop off after that.

 

I think this is ride or die time for Sano and the organization will give him that chance.  Cron and Schoop?  They don't have any equity to struggle.

Edited February 23, 2019 by TheLeviathan

[Brock Beauchamp]

Am I going crazy? Is the site filtering the word "platoon" from my posts?

 

I was responding to another poster who said to me: "you simply are not accounting for the very real benefit in platoon splits that Gonzalez permits."

 

A 104 (or 103) wRC+ can be valuable. A guy who can fill in at a lot of positions can be valuable too. I wasn't saying anything to the contrary in that post.

 

I just can't give that guy *bonus credit* for a platoon benefit, beyond the value of his 103 (or 104) wRC+ and versatility, when I don't see a strong case for it.

Got it. I totally misunderstood your post.

[LylesCrocodiles]

I don’t expect a 4 WAR from Marwin. But which is more likely? Marwin > 4 WAR? Or entire starting 9 > WAR than Marwin?

 

I’m a fan of the deal because Marwin should be so valuable. He could allow the team to make other moves. Trade a Sano/Kepler/Rosario next offseason to add a pitcher. He himself could be flipped for pitching. Marwin could challenge the guys on the cusp (Gordon Rooker Kirilloff Lewis) because in some small way he is a new roadblock to playing time. He could flame out and the Twins can eat the 21M. But right now he is a valuable asset.

 

I think most of us are optimistic about the moves in general. But we question if it’s anything more than a push toward mediocrity. Which is why the fan base is clambering for more additions.

 

Is a 4-year guaranteed deal where you draw the line on Keuchel or Kimbrel? Or is 3 years the magic number? I think I could endorse 3 year deals for either.

[Channing1964]

Whenever i look at the team assembled i was so scared of the situation at 3b. I sooo cheer for Sano and hope he will finally get it this year. IMO having Cruz and to some extent Schoop around will help him immensely. I did not know about Adrianza's injured shoulder. It does seem a little odd that it requires 6-8 months for recovery but it is what it is. This actually makes the Gonzalez signing make even more sense. I have been screaming for the team to acquire an insurance policy at 3b all winter. I felt there would be no chance at Gonzalez so i focused on players like Moustakas. To get Marwin makes us better in so many ways that cant be seen on paper anal-lytically. The one i am thinking of first is that 2017 World Series ring and the experience he gained being a part if it. Now things just changed for Everyone. Jake Cave prolly start the year in Rochester. Adrianza will go on the 60 day I.L. Tyler Austin, you better make sure you pay attention in outfield drills and prove you can at least once in a while hit rh pitching. CJ Cron is on thin ice because your job is up for grabs big time. Mitch Garver you are not safe either. If Austidillo straight up beats you out you are a Red Wing. Rocco, making out this line-up is gonna be an amazing and fun challenge. At the end of the day we dont wanna lose any of these players and we will do whatever we can to keep them all. Sorry Austidillo and Cave fans, but those guys go to AAA mainly because they are the only ones with options. I doubt there will be any eye popping surprises. Now the bullpen....Thats a vastly different story.

[yarnivek1972]

60 day DL can't be retroactive earlier than opening day. He would have to be inactive for the first 60 days of the regular season. But they could put him on the 60 day any time now to get the roster spot, if they wanted.

I could be wrong (a quick search was unsuccessful for confirmation), but I believe the 60 day DL comes into play on the day of first ST games, which is usually March 1.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I could be wrong (a quick search was unsuccessful for confirmation), but I believe the 60 day DL comes into play on the day of first ST games, which is usually March 1.

I know the Twins put Michael Pineda on the 60 day DL on February 17 last year, and Trevor May on Feb. 18. So it could just be after players report?

 

And May wasn't eligible to be activated until June 1st or so (60 days from opening day).

[KirbyDome89]

 

Utility player is an unfair term. He is average to above at every position he plays by wRC+

He's capable of playing multiple positions and he'll be the first in line to slide into a starting spot at nearly every one of them should injury or ineffectiveness occur. I'm not sure there's a better definition of utility. 

 

Yeah, he's a league average offensive player, and a clear improvement over Adrianza, but nobody is contesting that. My point was that his addition doesn't now set the floor for this team at a level above .500. 

[Brandon]

Last season we had a vortex of bad things happen to the Twins.

C Castro was out out for the year by the end of the first month of the season.

1B Mauer missed just over a month with concussion symptoms

2B Dozier was hurt but kept playing cause everyone else was hurt.

SS Polanco missed hakf a season to drug suspension.

3B Sano missed 6 weeks or so to loose weight and start over.

OF Buxton missed most of season to headaches, injury, roster mismanagement, performance.

Rosario missed a few weeks too.

DH Morrison was so bad and we had no choice but to keep playing him cause there was no one else.

 

We had Adrianza, Escobar, and eventually Garver as solid replacements. Cave too.

 

Now we have replacements for the replacements.

 

likely bench:

Gonzales

Adrianza (DL to start season)

Austin or Duda

Garver

 

With these guys ready to be called up:

Astudillo

Cave

Torres

 

And there is still Gordon and Rooker who could be available as well at some point this season. That is a lot of flexibility and safety net after the disaster of last season as all thise guys deserve to be on a major league roster at this point. And that is why the bench was constructed this way. Layers of depth for worst possible outcomes.

 

On pitching I think management feels we have this same kind of depth internally and that is why only a high end pitcher will make a difference. (Lets get Kimbral already).

[Physics Guy]

Here is my view:

 

http://twinsdaily.com/blog/324/entry-11389-getting-gonzalez-ab/

 

[h2oface]

While I love this addition.... we are still coming in at 0%, But Hey, we are not alone. 10 teams tied for the bottom third.

https://markets.predictwise.com/sports/2019-mlb-world-series

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

In case anyone wants a national perspective, here's Jay Jaffe (tldr, he likes it and thinks the Twins got better).

 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/twins-add-wins-with-marwin-gonzalez/

Interesting that the Fangraphs article on the signing was titled "Twins Add Wins with Marwin Gonzalez". Note the plural "wins".

 

Fangraphs Depth Charts projections have now been updated to include Gonzalez, and they moved our median projection by just a single win, from 82 wins to 83 wins. This is a numerical illustration of my opinion that the signing did more to improve our floor / solidify our current projection, than it did to improve our projection or ceiling. (cue Seinfeld's "Not that there's anything wrong with that")

 

Gonzalez himself is projected at 1.5 WAR in 504 PA, though, which could still qualify as plural "wins" especially if you round up.

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=ALL&teamid=8

[Otto von Ballpark]

Don't know where else to put this, but the Twins just DFA'd Granite to make room for Gonzalez.

 

A little surprising, since Granite has options remaining and Reed doesn't. But perhaps this is a good time to sneak Granite through waivers, as opposed to Reed?

[Danchat]

Don't know where else to put this, but the Twins just DFA'd Granite to make room for Gonzalez.

 

A little surprising, since Granite has options remaining and Reed doesn't. But perhaps this is a good time to sneak Granite through waivers, as opposed to Reed?

It makes sense to sneak him through waivers now while he has just one option left and coming off a year where he hit .210 at AAA. Though I’m unsure of the plan with Reed, as he will have to clear waivers if he doesn’t make the team.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

It makes sense to sneak him through waivers now while he has just one option left and coming off a year where he hit .210 at AAA. Though I’m unsure of the plan with Reed, as he will have to clear waivers if he doesn’t make the team.

Yeah. Maybe they think Reed is the better player, and they'd rather wait to pass him through waivers at the end of spring training when other clubs are facing their own roster crunches (assuming a spot doesn't open up for him here in the meantime).

 

Of course, then they risk losing both Granite and Reed this spring. But they can probably take that risk now, with Gonzalez signed for 2 years plus Cave with 2 option years left. An open 40-man spot might be just as valuable to us as another fungible outfielder.

[stringer bell]

The Gonzalez acquisition knocked both Reed and Granite back a peg. I would hope the Twins could get Granite to Rochester. They really need more guys 23-40 with options.

[Doomtints]

THE TEAM IS BREAKING: Twins to Spend Last Bit of Cash on Utility Player; Block Astudillo For Two Years

Edited February 26, 2019 by Doomtints

[TheLeviathan]

 

He's capable of playing multiple positions and he'll be the first in line to slide into a starting spot at nearly every one of them should injury or ineffectiveness occur. I'm not sure there's a better definition of utility. 

 

Yeah, he's a league average offensive player, and a clear improvement over Adrianza, but nobody is contesting that. My point was that his addition doesn't now set the floor for this team at a level above .500. 

 

Eh, I just think that term is loaded with meaning for people.  And it just doesn't apply to Gonzalez.

 

The ceiling/floor argument doesn't do much for me.  I want Kimbrel signed, but I'm not sure he's going to radically increase our ceiling either.  Not for wins any way.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Interesting that the Fangraphs article on the signing was titled "Twins Add Wins with Marwin Gonzalez". Note the plural "wins".

 

Fangraphs Depth Charts projections have now been updated to include Gonzalez, and they moved our median projection by just a single win, from 82 wins to 83 wins. This is a numerical illustration of my opinion that the signing did more to improve our floor / solidify our current projection, than it did to improve our projection or ceiling. (cue Seinfeld's "Not that there's anything wrong with that")

 

Gonzalez himself is projected at 1.5 WAR in 504 PA, though, which could still qualify as plural "wins" especially if you round up.

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=ALL&teamid=8

I have to wonder if this is a place where prediction models fail. They account for playing time but I question how accurately they predict subpar replacement players. 

 

For example, Gonzalez is likely a step down from Polanco. But if Polanco gets injured, how much of a step up is Gonzalez from Replacement Player X? We all know the basic replacement player performance level but we also realize that replacement players aren't available all the time, or that a team may misjudge a "replacement player" and get something much worse in their place.

 

If Gonzalez starts 100 games because he's just pencilled in as a starter, we can pretty accurately judge his value to the team in wins.

 

If Gonzalez starts 100 games at three different positions because of injuries to starting players or general ineffectiveness, I have less faith a projection model is accurately judging his value to a team.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I have to wonder if this is a place where prediction models fail. They account for playing time but I question how accurately they predict subpar replacement players. 

 

For example, Gonzalez is likely a step down from Polanco. But if Polanco gets injured, how much of a step up is Gonzalez from Replacement Player X? We all know the basic replacement player performance level but we also realize that replacement players aren't available all the time, or that a team may misjudge a "replacement player" and get something much worse in their place.

 

If Gonzalez starts 100 games because he's just pencilled in as a starter, we can pretty accurately judge his value to the team in wins.

 

If Gonzalez starts 100 games at three different positions because of injuries to starting players or general ineffectiveness, I have less faith a projection model is accurately judging his value to a team.

 

Those are interesting questions, but I'd argue that replacement players usually aren't that bad -- or more accurately, they're not given enough opportunity to be that bad. Their leash is much shorter. By virtue of being replacement level, a team really doesn't mind cycling through these guys quickly to find one that works (even temporarily). See how we wound up deploying Jake Cave for the second half last year, or even Bartolo Colon for the last few months of 2017.

 

The guys who really sink you are guys like Morrison, or Bartolo Colon with the Braves in early 2017, or Chris Davis, etc. -- guys to whom you've already committed a ton of opportunity by virtue of their contract, regardless of performance.

 

If Polanco went down for a long time, and we had to plug in Adrianza, I think we'd move along to Torreyes and others pretty quickly if necessary. You probably won't equal Polanco's performance with these replacements, of course, but generally you will come out of it with at least 0-1 WAR type performance. (And of course, if it's a shorter absence, that effectively caps how much negative value the replacement can contribute too.)

 

And most competent teams, at most positions, seem to have these replacement types available every year. It seems almost notable when a team doesn't, like the 2011 Twins after Mauer went down at catcher (a non-move which may have contributed to Smith's firing as much as some of his higher profile moves).

[Doctor Wu]

 

I hate to say it but I am a little ho hum about this signing.  Don't get me wrong Marwin is a solid and versatile player but he was not the droid I was looking for.  Really wanted to see the team solidify the pitching staff but I guess they are happy with what they have. 

 

Does this mean that Sano is no longer the starting third baseman?  That seems to be the only way this makes sense to me.  Things suddenly feel a little crowded in the infield.  Polanco, Schoop, Le Tortuga, Marwin are all good with the bat and can play their positions but currently someone needs to move.

 

I guess we are waiting for injuries to thin the crowd.  I should be excited heck I wanted the Twins to get this guy after we lost Escobar but after the Schoop signing and Polanco extension, Sano back in better shape, Wanting to see Le Tortuga play  I am struggling be as happy as should be about this.  This is a good signing.  His verstality covers a lot of area's for us.  Here's hoping this works out well for the team.

I have to say that I feel a bit "ho hum" about this signing too. I don't hate it, and look forward to seeing what Gonzalez can add to the team. Looking at his versatility and production the past two years, it seems like a solid move by the Twins. But I still wish they had used the money for a starting pitcher or another strong arm to add to the bullpen.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Those are interesting questions, but I'd argue that replacement players usually aren't that bad -- or more accurately, they're not given enough opportunity to be that bad. Their leash is much shorter. By virtue of being replacement level, a team really doesn't mind cycling through these guys quickly to find one that works (even temporarily). See how we wound up deploying Jake Cave for the second half last year, or even Bartolo Colon for the last few months of 2017.

 

The guys who really sink you are guys like Morrison, or Bartolo Colon with the Braves in early 2017, or Chris Davis, etc. -- guys to whom you've already committed a ton of opportunity by virtue of their contract, regardless of performance.

 

If Polanco went down for a long time, and we had to plug in Adrianza, I think we'd move along to Torreyes and others pretty quickly if necessary. You probably won't equal Polanco's performance with these replacements, of course, but generally you will come out of it with at least 0-1 WAR type performance. (And of course, if it's a shorter absence, that effectively caps how much negative value the replacement can contribute too.)

 

And most competent teams, at most positions, seem to have these replacement types available every year. It seems almost notable when a team doesn't, like the 2011 Twins after Mauer went down at catcher (a non-move which may have contributed to Smith's firing as much as some of his higher profile moves).

I generally agree but those bad performances don't go away because you replace them, they're only mitigated somewhat. And a roughly league-average replacement instead of dipping your toes into polluted water - no matter how briefly - has a positive impact on the season.

 

But we're also getting into cloudy territory with WAR itself here. For example, Logan Morrison was atrocious last season. Over ~350 PAs, he was "worth" -0.3 WAR. 

 

Over 21 PAs last season, Tayler Motter was "worth" -0.3 WAR.

 

Maybe my point isn't as much about projection systems not properly evaluating replacement players, it's about WAR being so shaky on partial seasons. Either way, I have little confidence in either accurately judging the value of someone like Gonzalez as a 10th starting man.

[Riverbrian]

Those are interesting questions, but I'd argue that replacement players usually aren't that bad -- or more accurately, they're not given enough opportunity to be that bad. Their leash is much shorter. By virtue of being replacement level, a team really doesn't mind cycling through these guys quickly to find one that works (even temporarily). See how we wound up deploying Jake Cave for the second half last year, or even Bartolo Colon for the last few months of 2017.

 

The guys who really sink you are guys like Morrison, or Bartolo Colon with the Braves in early 2017, or Chris Davis, etc. -- guys to whom you've already committed a ton of opportunity by virtue of their contract, regardless of performance.

 

If Polanco went down for a long time, and we had to plug in Adrianza, I think we'd move along to Torreyes and others pretty quickly if necessary. You probably won't equal Polanco's performance with these replacements, of course, but generally you will come out of it with at least 0-1 WAR type performance. (And of course, if it's a shorter absence, that effectively caps how much negative value the replacement can contribute too.)

 

And most competent teams, at most positions, seem to have these replacement types available every year. It seems almost notable when a team doesn't, like the 2011 Twins after Mauer went down at catcher (a non-move which may have contributed to Smith's firing as much as some of his higher profile moves).

You are right... replacement players are not given the opportunity to be bad... and this makes them bad. Actually worthless. If they can’t replace Morrison... they are the very definition of worthless wasted roster space.

 

The team may easily move from Motter to Petit to the next guy without thinking twice about it but that combination of expendables becomes a collective and Morrison is still killing us.

 

25 players who can play and 25 players who the manager trusts to play is more important than Harper by himself in my opinion.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I generally agree but those bad performances don't go away because you replace them, they're only mitigated somewhat. And a roughly league-average replacement instead of dipping your toes into polluted water - no matter how briefly - has a positive impact on the season.

 

But we're also getting into cloudy territory with WAR itself here. For example, Logan Morrison was atrocious last season. Over ~350 PAs, he was "worth" -0.3 WAR. 

 

Over 21 PAs last season, Tayler Motter was "worth" -0.3 WAR.

 

Maybe my point isn't as much about projection systems not properly evaluating replacement players, it's about WAR being so shaky on partial seasons. Either way, I have little confidence in either accurately judging the value of someone like Gonzalez as a 10th starting man.

 

It's worth noting that Taylor Motter wasn't really added to be a replacement. He was awful when we picked him up, and we added him to the bench for a little while when we were largely packing it in for the season (i.e. after we added Belisle to the pen). If we were actually looking for a guy to play regularly, and play somewhat well, I suspect we would have used more care and caution.

 

Negative performances do add up, but in small samples they generally can't be too negative. Chris Davis was one of the worst players in MLB history last year. He was worth -2.8 bWAR for the season. A replacement level type probably wouldn't even get one-tenth of his playing time before he was sent packing with that level of performance. And odds are unlikely you'd get repeated performances that bad from a series of replacement level players, unless you were so unprepared that you were signing guys off the street during the season (i.e. 2011 Twins at catcher). If one guy is -0.3 and gets cut, the next guy is still probably just zero or maybe even +0.3 or +0.6 or whatever, maybe not even through skill but just random variation. By the time you get up to Morrison's 350 PA level, you have likely settled on a Cave or Palka and are looking at a cumulative 0-1 WAR from the replacements.

Edited February 26, 2019 by spycake

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

You are right... replacement players are not given the opportunity to be bad... and this makes them bad. Actually worthless. If they can’t replace Morrison... they are the very definition of worthless wasted roster space.

I'm not sure I follow. The replacement level guys generally aren't on the roster if they're not getting a chance to replace somebody -- certainly not the 25-man roster, and often not the 40-man either. And a team not wanting to replace Morrison has nothing to do with Brock's question, which read to me as how much can a team count on getting ~0 WAR performance when it actually needs to turn to replacements. (I brought up Morrison of an example of a guy who will hurt you more than a bad replacement level player, because the team is committed to playing Morrison a lot more.)

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Maybe my point isn't as much about projection systems not properly evaluating replacement players, it's about WAR being so shaky on partial seasons. Either way, I have little confidence in either accurately judging the value of someone like Gonzalez as a 10th starting man.

I think you'd have more confidence if we could actual see the "confidence levels" of these projections. We see the median projection, but we don't see the 15th percentile one, the 85th percentile one, etc.

 

I suspect that adding a 10th starter like Gonzalez raises the median projection a little (as we saw at Fangraphs), raises the 85th percentile one a little less (not much ceiling added), and raises the 15th percentile projection more (a higher floor). If you're talking about the possibility of getting dragged down by replacements, you're really talking about what's going on around that floor -- but that effect is gradually reduced as you move up to the median and toward the ceiling projections. (Definitionally, your projected starters are going to be healthier and bust less as you move up to the median and ceiling projection levels, reducing the likelihood of replacements dragging you down.)

Edited February 26, 2019 by spycake

[Riverbrian]

I'm not sure I follow. The replacement level guys generally aren't on the roster if they're not getting a chance to replace somebody -- certainly not the 25-man roster, and often not the 40-man either. And a team not wanting to replace Morrison has nothing to do with Brock's question, which read to me as how much can a team count on getting ~0 WAR performance when it actually needs to turn to replacements. (I brought up Morrison of an example of a guy who will hurt you more than a bad replacement level player, because the team is committed to playing Morrison a lot more.)

Maybe I’m not following. Who Knows.

 

You seem to downplay adding another 2 WAR player to a bunch of 2 WAR players. You mentioned that adding Marwin upticked our win projection 1 win.

 

Brock stated that he doesn’t think they probably are not truly representing the replacement level player.

 

You replied that the replacement player doesn’t play enough and the players who play are the ones that do the damage.

 

I agree with you and I’m saying that’s the problem.

 

If removing a Ryan LaMarre type from the roster doesn’t increase our win projection. They are doing it wrong in my opinion.

 

Having 12 2 WAR guys increases the odds that one of them become a 5 but more importantly it provides the option of not playing 0 WAR Logan Morrison because of Taylor Motter wasting space.

 

If you can’t or won’t sign a 5 WAR guy. Your best option is to flood it with 2’s.

 

I agree with Brock. I’m not sure this properly calculated.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

If removing a Ryan LaMarre type from the roster doesn’t increase our win projection. They are doing it wrong in my opinion.

It does increase the win projection -- just like it did at Fangraphs. It's just that it increases it more towards the floor (where Brock's scenario of needing replacements is more common) than it does at the median or towards the ceiling.

 

 

more importantly it provides the option of not playing 0 WAR Logan Morrison because of Taylor Motter wasting space.

This is a separate issue, and not really a reflection of reality either. The Twins weren't playing Morrison because they had to roster Motter. They played Morrison because they were invested in him and felt he was the best bet; they rostered Motter as a reserve because they felt they had the space available to do so. There's not a competent front office in the world that would keep starting Morrison if they felt they had better options, just to keep Taylor Motter on the bench.

[Riverbrian]

 

It does increase the win projection -- just like it did at Fangraphs. It's just that it increases it more towards the floor (where Brock's scenario of needing replacements is more common) than it does at the median or towards the ceiling.

 

 

 

Well Good... I'm glad the floor is rising... because I'm tired of finding the floor every year. I'd love for it to be a shorter fall. 

 

Anyway, Projections are just projections and methodology is methodology.  I'm pretty sure they didn't project the Rays, A's and Brewers to do what they did and I'm pretty sure they didn't project the Nationals to do what they did. The Rays got actual performance out of those guys fangraphs thought would get 50 AB's and with the methodology... a 50 AB guy isn't going to make a dent. 

 

This is a systemic flaw and it will under value the raising of the floor.  

 

 

 

There's not a competent front office in the world that would keep starting Morrison if they felt they had better options, just to keep Taylor Motter on the bench.

 

Competent front offices would get better options... Like Marwin