Marlins trade Justin Bour to Phillies

[lou]

I tried to read this post, but got bored pretty quickly and just glossed over it. The $250 surplus value thing seems gigantically vague and subjective, but I don't want to bring that up for fear of a vague and subjective rebuttal. My favorite part was the "You sign Buster. You sign Miguel Cabrera...". Actually, there are MILLIONS of reasons you don't sign those guys. Miguel Cabrera? Oh my shit. Does he even play any more? He certainly is getting paid to - to the tune of $31M/season for the next FIVE years. I mean, he did hit .240 last year with a (you'll love this one) - a WAR of -.08. He did get his WAR up to +0.5 this year in the 38 games he played. But you HAVE to pay Cabrera, because when he was 12, he got a ring in FL. What's that done for Detroit? If the Marlins had to essentially pay the Yankees $50M to take on the contract of a young and still productive reigning MVP... what might it take for the Tigers to get Cabrera's owed $154M off their books? Albert Pujols? You have to sign him too?

That was the inane part of your post, the rest was just blather. This discussion began with - if it was in fact true that Soto was offered for Realmuto toward the deadline this year, I believed Soto was the pick. Risk of position health/longevity, team control, etc... doesn't mean I don't like Realmuto. I backed my point by noting that even the top two catchers of the last decade have put up unspectacular offensive statistics (Posey's 2012 a notable exception) - and Molina's defense is top notch (Posey's isn't - sorry). Then I showed that all the division leaders this year (save the Cubs) had backstops most fans have never heard of... Your comeback is blah, blah, WAR, blah, blah, you're stupid. And as I reflect on the couple of minutes I just spent typing this... I'm beginning to agree with you.

A lot to unpack here.

First, suggesting that surplus value is subjective is incorrect. WAR valuation isn't something that is made up https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-...agent-pricing/. If a player is paid $100 million, produces 40 WAR, and you round down $50 million to account for years where free agency wasn't valued as highly, you get to an objective level of surplus value pretty easily.

Second, this whole discussion started because of pre-free agency buyouts for Realmuto after year 4, so most of your Cabrera analysis (and Pujols) isn't what we're talking about here at all. To note, everyone agrees with you the recent Cabrera extension and Pujols deal when they were well after 30, are terrible deals that should not have been given. Cabrera years 5-13 (a 10 year arbitration buyout if that's what they did) produced 50 WAR, they paid him a little over $200 million, so he was just as valuable to the organization as Buster and Yadier were to their organizations based on what they were paid and produced. That is what we are talking about here. I hope you can see this. Miguel Cabrera is an awesome player to sign for his prime, even if those last few years aren't 7 WAR seasons. Hope you agree.

Third, regarding unspectacular catcher statistics, you were shown multiple times why Buster's HR/RBI numbers mean little to the overall valuation of the player. It doesn't account for his across the board production, i.e. a player's WAR, which is considered the best baseball evaluation by basically everyone (even if it does have "flaws"). Likewise, despite clearly reading everything and saying "this is boring" as a defensive tactic in trying to negate an argument you are woefully incorrect on, you keep failing to acknowledge a catchers, and really any, player's value nor understand how any player is replaceable by your own logic. I mean, good for the Red Sox - and their (negative) -.9 catcher WAR this year - that just means Mookie, JD, Benintendi, Sale, Xander, etc. are awesome players and masking an enormous weakness on their team. That doesn't mean you can take Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Buster Posey, etc. off of their championship teams and they still win. Star players are not replaceable commodities. The Indians are getting nothing at 1B this season. 1B is replaceable by this logic because a team can succeed without a 1B, just as teams succeed without catchers. Its about having better players wherever you can get them, and those CAN be catchers(!)

Fourth, and bringing this back to Realmuto, no one disagrees with you in suggesting trading Realmuto may be a better idea, and getting a player like Soto (or Robles) is a better longterm move. That could be the right answer. The problem is saying all catchers are "replaceable," no team has "ever" been built around a catcher, suggesting multiple times World Series wins don't matter and saying the Giants mortgaged their future signing Buster... ignoring they won the World Series so what was mortgaged?, etc. Do you get yet these are two entirely separate issues yet and the later is woefully wrong?

[Finsanity]

First, suggesting that surplus value is subjective is incorrect. WAR valuation isn't something that is made up https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-...agent-pricing/. If a player is paid $100 million, produces 40 WAR, and you round down $50 million to account for years where free agency wasn't valued as highly, you get to an objective level of surplus value pretty easily.

Actually, WAR is exactly something that is just made up. You're trying too hard to put finite measures on human performance... something that is far from finite. #1, you can't just say the comparison is to a "baseline" AAA player. There is no such thing. No two replacements could be the same. Are Ortega and Sierra the same "AAA" player? My gawd no, and it's SIERRA who is the far better "prospect" (prospect being someone's opinion - which takes us back to subjectivity). That's what makes being a GM, or playing GM on a message board so much fun (at least until your buzz-kill).

[lou]

Actually, WAR is exactly something that is just made up. You're trying too hard to put finite measures on human performance... something that is far from finite. #1, you can't just say the comparison is to a "baseline" AAA player. There is no such thing. No two replacements could be the same. Are Ortega and Sierra the same "AAA" player? My gawd no, and it's SIERRA who is the far better "prospect" (prospect being someone's opinion - which takes us back to subjectivity). That's what makes being a GM, or playing GM on a message board so much fun (at least until your buzz-kill).

The buzz-kill is posting that Buster Posey is a replaceable baseball player - and quadrupling down on it. That is a pit of sadness and wrong on any objective or subjective level.

WAR is not a made up number either, as there is a criteria to it (obviously). Saying "this guy is a 7.7 prospect" is a made up number. WTF does 7.7 mean? And yes, the "average baseline AAA player per position" is certainly variable team to team. I mean, Realmuto's value for a replacement level catcher is far higher for the Marlins if we want to go there as there isn't a replacement level catcher anywhere in the system (giving more credence to, oh maybe they should sign him as he's more valuable to the Marlins then other teams). No one is nit picking that though as there has to be some constant to figure out a reasonable value of what a player brings. The idea that a team can acquire a normal AAA player for "free" on the free market seems pretty safe to me in determining what a normal worst case scenario is, in order to value how much better any player is from that pit of sadness.

I take it that you agree Miguel Cabrera was a good player years 5-13? Do you agree a player at any position can produce value, including catchers?

[Finsanity]

I mean, good for the Red Sox - and their (negative) -.9 catcher WAR this year - that just means Mookie, JD, Benintendi, Sale, Xander, etc. are awesome players and masking an enormous weakness on their team. That doesn't mean you can take Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Buster Posey, etc. off of their championship teams and they still win. Star players are not replaceable commodities.

Confusing. This feels like a talking out of both sides of your mouth moment. The Red Sox win in spite of catcher play, but the Reds won because of it. You give me Mookie, JD, Benitendi, Sale, Xander, etc... I give you Rose, Morgan, Perez, Foster, Griffey, etc... funny, I never heard of them as the Big Red Bench. For all of Posey's charms, he just happened to play with arguably the best pitching staff of his era. Is Posey good? Absolutely. Is he great? Sure. Could the Giants have gotten by with Mathis, Avila & Murphy? The Diamondbacks are doing it this year. Or Iannnetta, Wolters & Murphy, like Colorado?

I think the RB position in football comparison is a good one. If you can put Barry Sanders out there, that's great. However, there are much more important positions to the success of a team, and teams can excel without a top end RB.

[fish16]

Finsanity's argument is absurdly nonsensical and circular. First off, the RB comparison is nonsensical because the catching position in baseball is pretty much the complete opposite. Stud catchers in baseball are almost impossible to find and therefore are valued and paid as such.

Second, just because a guy is on a team with other good/great players doesnt make that particular player not good or not great. The argument that you can find a platoon of 3 guys that puts up a .750 OPS so therefore you shouldnt pay the 1 guy who only takes up 1 roster spot and can put up an .850-.900 OPS annually is ridiculous.

Being able to win without a great player at a position does not make that position less valuable. Its baseball. there are tons of ways to create great teams. That doesnt make the scarce of available great catchers and the ability to find one and lock one up longterm any less valuable. Its the conflation of 2 separate arguments that doesnt equal the logical end that you think it does.

[lou]

Confusing. This feels like a talking out of both sides of your mouth moment. The Red Sox win in spite of catcher play, but the Reds won because of it. You give me Mookie, JD, Benitendi, Sale, Xander, etc... I give you Rose, Morgan, Perez, Foster, Griffey, etc... funny, I never heard of them as the Big Red Bench. For all of Posey's charms, he just happened to play with arguably the best pitching staff of his era. Is Posey good? Absolutely. Is he great? Sure. Could the Giants have gotten by with Mathis, Avila & Murphy? The Diamondbacks are doing it this year. Or Iannnetta, Wolters & Murphy, like Colorado?

I think the RB position in football comparison is a good one. If you can put Barry Sanders out there, that's great. However, there are much more important positions to the success of a team, and teams can excel without a top end RB.

It's not confusing to anyone but you and Lee. I said this before and you didn't quote this - Its about having better players wherever you can get them, and those CAN be catchers(!). Teams can excel without any position when it comes down to it. Clearly contending teams have had bad catchers, just as the Indians have a bad 1B this year. That doesn't mean a C or a 1B is replaceable. It means they have awesome players elsewhere to make up that problem. Buster is one of those epic "better players" that has produced hundreds of millions of dollars on value to the Giants. He happens to be a catcher and is not replaceable.

Buster is Barry Sanders in your analogy BTW.

[Lee Stone]

It's not confusing to anyone but you and Lee. I said this before and you didn't quote this - Its about having better players wherever you can get them, and those CAN be catchers(!). Teams can excel without any position when it comes down to it. Clearly contending teams have had bad catchers, just as the Indians have a bad 1B this year. That doesn't mean a C or a 1B is replaceable. It means they have awesome players elsewhere to make up that problem. Buster is one of those epic "better players" that has produced hundreds of millions of dollars on value to the Giants. He happens to be a catcher and is not replaceable.

Buster is Barry Sanders in your analogy BTW.

The whole Realmuto discussion has gone off line. The entire point was this: Do you shell out what may amount to 20-25% of team payroll to sign him or not? To me that's a big no. It makes no sense for Miami. Other teams in bigger markets will have lesser problems signing him.

[rmc523]

Confusing. This feels like a talking out of both sides of your mouth moment. The Red Sox win in spite of catcher play, but the Reds won because of it. You give me Mookie, JD, Benitendi, Sale, Xander, etc... I give you Rose, Morgan, Perez, Foster, Griffey, etc... funny, I never heard of them as the Big Red Bench. For all of Posey's charms, he just happened to play with arguably the best pitching staff of his era. Is Posey good? Absolutely. Is he great? Sure. Could the Giants have gotten by with Mathis, Avila & Murphy? The Diamondbacks are doing it this year. Or Iannnetta, Wolters & Murphy, like Colorado?

I think the RB position in football comparison is a good one. If you can put Barry Sanders out there, that's great. However, there are much more important positions to the success of a team, and teams can excel without a top end RB.

Uh. Every team is different. The Red Sox are able to "cover" for a not good catching setup because they have great other players. The same could be said if they had a great catcher but not a great shortstop or outfield or any position, as long as the other guys can make up for the lesser production of whatever position is. It doesn't matter what position. The Marlins have zilch, zero, nada in the way of catching aside from JT, and they certainly don't have the pieces around the diamond to make up for that spot being a black hole like the Red Sox are doing.

The reality too is that there's more than one way to win - so yeah, it may be working for the Diamondbacks this year, but it might not next year.

[lou]

The whole Realmuto discussion has gone off line. The entire point was this: Do you shell out what may amount to 20-25% of team payroll to sign him or not? To me that's a big no. It makes no sense for Miami. Other teams in bigger markets will have lesser problems signing him.

Whose fault is that? It's entirely a different conversation regarding signing/trading Realmuto. The problem is you two coming in and saying catcher's are replaceable, teams have never built around a catcher, etc., and then trying to defend yourselves saying Buster Posey, of all the examples you could picked, isn't valuable enough to keep because he mortgages the future despite winning the world series. Then saying HR/RBI are a real metric to evaluate players. You have to realize this is a pit of sadness of your own creation.

If you want to say Realmuto is too costly for the Marlins expected budgets, trading him makes more sense given the Marlins personnel, especially with catcher wear and tear, FUCKING GREAT. We all get those valid concerns. Trust me, we do. The problem is adding to that Realmuto is replaceable because other teams have won without a catcher? That's idiotic. He's super valuable as a player as much as any other player that produces at any position. He's easily a top 3 player on a contending team right now and probably for the next few years. Still might make sense for the Marlins to trade him given where the organization is, but that's not because he is a "low RBI" guy or because the Red Sox have a bad catcher so hey, I guess it's not important.

I hope you guys can understand this difference one of these days. You can easily backup an argument to trade Realmuto, just don't say stupid things. K?

[Lee Stone]

"We all get those valid concerns. Trust me, we do."

If you have a moment, who's "we"? Do you have a like-minded poster on board? I have a son that contributes, and we agree only occasionally. Catchers have to be replaceable because their position is prone to wear and tear. That's baseball. Don't gamble on the health of a backstop.

[rmc523]

"We all get those valid concerns. Trust me, we do."

If you have a moment, who's "we"? Do you have a like-minded poster on board? I have a son that contributes, and we agree only occasionally. Catchers have to be replaceable because their position is prone to wear and tear. That's baseball. Don't gamble on the health of a backstop.

I'm pretty sure the whole board agrees with you/your son on this one.

By that definition, any player is replaceable.

[Finsanity]

The Marlins have zilch, zero, nada in the way of catching aside from JT, and they certainly don't have the pieces around the diamond to make up for that spot being a black hole like the Red Sox are doing.

And the Rockies, Diamondbacks, Philles, Braves, Nationals, Brewers, Mariners, A's, Astros and Yankees. The only contending team with a "good" catcher is the Cubs with Contreras... and he's hitting .269 with 9 HR and 40 RBI.

- - - - - - - - - -

The Indians are getting nothing at 1B this season. 1B is replaceable by this logic because a team can succeed without a 1B, just as teams succeed without catchers. Its about having better players wherever you can get them, and those CAN be catchers(!)

Let's see... Posey is great and the Indians are getting nothing from 1B. That's an interesting take.
Buster Posey 5 HR, 40 RBIs, 746 OPS
Edwin Encarnacion 25 HR, 81 (EIGHTY-ONE) RBIs, 778 OPS
Yonder Alonso 20 HR, 70 RBI, 740 OPS

[lou]

And the Rockies, Diamondbacks, Philles, Braves, Nationals, Brewers, Mariners, A's, Astros and Yankees. The only contending team with a "good" catcher is the Cubs with Contreras... and he's hitting .269 with 9 HR and 40 RBI.

- - - - - - - - - -



Let's see... Posey is great and the Indians are getting nothing from 1B. That's an interesting take.
Buster Posey 5 HR, 40 RBIs, 746 OPS
Edwin Encarnacion 25 HR, 81 (EIGHTY-ONE) RBIs, 778 OPS
Yonder Alonso 20 HR, 70 RBI, 740 OPS

And yet Buster Posey is objectively having a better season then both of them - combined.

You know what would be fun, if you realized defense matters, base running matters, the fact Jose Ramirez and Francisco Lindor bat in front of you so you always have dudes on base matters which directly correlates to the amount of RBIs one gets.

Winning your 5x5 fantasy league with HR and RBIs is not real baseball. Maybe we'll get there one day.

[rmc523]

And the Rockies, Diamondbacks, Philles, Braves, Nationals, Brewers, Mariners, A's, Astros and Yankees. The only contending team with a "good" catcher is the Cubs with Contreras... and he's hitting .269 with 9 HR and 40 RBI.

- - - - - - - - - -

Let's see... Posey is great and the Indians are getting nothing from 1B. That's an interesting take.
Buster Posey 5 HR, 40 RBIs, 746 OPS
Edwin Encarnacion 25 HR, 81 (EIGHTY-ONE) RBIs, 778 OPS
Yonder Alonso 20 HR, 70 RBI, 740 OPS

You're again missing the point. They can hide the fact they have a bad catcher because of great lineups around them. And that's ignoring the defensive/pitching side.

It's not that hard to understand.

[Finsanity]

And yet Buster Posey is objectively having a better season then both of them - combined.

Objectively, when you subjectively select your criteria. And no matter how many times you say it, Posey is a below average defensive catcher.