2024 Game Thread

[fish16]

And I say look at the statcast for Bleday, it’s not real and overachieving. DLC has a higher expected slugging today than Bleday for some perspective here. The punching bag. An OF like Bleday is going to need to hit.

Bleday is gonna be a CF like Yelich is a CF, or Edwards a SS, or Burger a 3B, or Arraez a 2B. He’s going to shift to LF with Butler (who is better than Bleday) is in RF and Rooker DH unless they trade him because he’s older. They need a CF too. I mean good for Bledsy he is absolutely a viable low/mid end starter now, but he’s not a premium player at a premium position at all.

This all started with Nick commenting about lamenting Bleday and it’s a nothing burger to me. Puk was great and cross your fingers on DDLS. I’m scared on this one but we shall see.

Just like dlc is heading for that breakout any minute now because statcast says so. He has flatly, objectively, been a top 8 cf in baseball this year. That’s more valuable than a reliever. It’s a bad trade to have traded him for puk. Hopefully ddls power translates to the mlb level

youre a slave to what fangraphs tells you to think

[lou]

…..and bleday is 8th this year in war, as an everyday player, at a premium position. That’s the entire point. I never said puk sucks as a reliever, hes just not reliable in high leverage and he’s not as valuable as an every day player at a premium position. Hence why it would take puk 3 years to produce the war bleday can produce in 1

And I say look at the statcast for Bleday, it’s not real and overachieving. DLC has a higher expected slugging today than Bleday for some perspective here. The punching bag. An OF like Bleday is going to need to hit.

Bleday is gonna be a CF like Yelich is a CF, or Edwards a SS, or Burger a 3B, or Arraez a 2B. He’s going to shift to LF with Butler (who is better than Bleday) is in RF and Rooker DH unless they trade him because he’s older. They need a CF too. I mean good for Bledsy he is absolutely a viable low/mid end starter now, but he’s not a premium player at a premium position at all.

This all started with Nick commenting about lamenting Bleday and it’s a nothing burger to me. Puk was great and cross your fingers on DDLS. I’m scared on this one but we shall see.

[fish16]

Asked/Answered, but here you go again:

Since the start of 2022, Puk is 37th in RP WAR (7th lefty)

Start of 2023, 14th (# 4 lefty)

Start of 2024, 13th (# 2 lefty)

"But he looks bad" is something Lee Stone would say and you would fucking MURDER him (probably rightfully so substantively in your defense).

You aren't wrong he pitches worse in high leverage versus low/medium leverage. And we can also say that about genuinely every pitcher in baseball because it's harder to pitch in high leverage versus low/medium leverage positions. I mean what? For instance, Puk is .75 ERA worse in high leverage versus low leverage outings for his career. Tanner Scott? 1.00 ERA worse for his career in high/low outings. This is just puzzling. How one thinks Puk is not very good when he's 13th-37th overall in production for all relievers over 3 years, and effectively top 5 overall for a lefty, is beyond me. It goes to everyone remembers the RP blowups, and not the whole performance. Everyone hates their bullpen. That's all I can try and rationalize this for you. Everyone hates their own bullpen.

…..and bleday is 8th this year in war, as an everyday player, at a premium position. That’s the entire point. I never said puk sucks as a reliever, hes just not reliable in high leverage and he’s not as valuable as an every day player at a premium position. Hence why it would take puk 3 years to produce the war bleday can produce in 1

[lou]

also, puk is simply not an elite rp to anyone who has actually watched the guy pitch in high leverage situations. as nick said earlier, you overrate him quite a bit.

Asked/Answered, but here you go again:

Since the start of 2022, Puk is 37th in RP WAR (7th lefty)

Start of 2023, 14th (# 4 lefty)

Start of 2024, 13th (# 2 lefty)

"But he looks bad" is something Lee Stone would say and you would fucking MURDER him (probably rightfully so substantively in your defense).

You aren't wrong he pitches worse in high leverage versus low/medium leverage. And we can also say that about genuinely every pitcher in baseball because it's harder to pitch in high leverage versus low/medium leverage positions. I mean what? For instance, Puk is .75 ERA worse in high leverage versus low leverage outings for his career. Tanner Scott? 1.00 ERA worse for his career in high/low outings. This is just puzzling. How one thinks Puk is not very good when he's 13th-37th overall in production for all relievers over 3 years, and effectively top 5 overall for a lefty, is beyond me. It goes to everyone remembers the RP blowups, and not the whole performance. Everyone hates their bullpen. That's all I can try and rationalize this for you. Everyone hates their own bullpen.

[fish16]

What are you doing? You said "relievers have significantly reduced value" without any qualifiers, except SP are also valuable and look what crappy ones like Rogers get. Your exact quote:

It's the exact reason why SP's, even crappy one's like rogers, have good value in trades while relievers have significantly reduced value.

Relievers are *not* significantly reduced in value. Estevez and Adam, and a lesser extent Scott, got completely irrational and massive trade hauls for purposes of contending now. So what are you arguing, because this has nothing to do about quality SP's have significantly more value than a quality reliever. You did not say that. You said "relievers have significantly reduced value," I proverbial said LOL no, and now you are changing the subject in an attempt of deflecting from the sheer stupidity?

Please feel free to clarify the record if you think Estevez, Adam, and Scott were traded at a reduced value. Note, you loved the Scott trade which suggests it wasn't a reduced value trade, so this will be interesting if you try and reconcile. You can also just admit you are wrong or talking out of your ass, but we all know you are incapable of that and will then project and say that's what you do lou! When I just sit here sad and say for a 100th time Amed Rosario feel apart defensively and it was a bad idea to suggest trading him for SS, i.e. I was wrong.

The circle of life.

This entire conversation is about reliever value relative to other positions. All else being equal- does an average reliever get as much as an average starter. No, because starters are more valuable. Doesn’t mean no relievers have significant value. You think you have this gotcha moment. I’ve never said they have no value, I said they don’t have nearly as much value as position players or starting pitchers, all else being equal, which is 100% true

compare a thoroughly mediocre to bad starter like rogers to a mediocre to bad reliever.

[lou]

yes, quality SP's have significantly more value than a quality reliever. Are you really arguing that?

What are you doing? You said "relievers have significantly reduced value" without any qualifiers, except SP are also valuable and look what crappy ones like Rogers get. Your exact quote:

It's the exact reason why SP's, even crappy one's like rogers, have good value in trades while relievers have significantly reduced value.

Relievers are *not* significantly reduced in value. Estevez and Adam, and a lesser extent Scott, got completely irrational and massive trade hauls for purposes of contending now. So what are you arguing, because this has nothing to do about quality SP's have significantly more value than a quality reliever. You did not say that. You said "relievers have significantly reduced value," I proverbial said LOL no, and now you are changing the subject in an attempt of deflecting from the sheer stupidity?

Please feel free to clarify the record if you think Estevez, Adam, and Scott were traded at a reduced value. Note, you loved the Scott trade which suggests it wasn't a reduced value trade, so this will be interesting if you try and reconcile. You can also just admit you are wrong or talking out of your ass, but we all know you are incapable of that and will then project and say that's what you do lou! When I just sit here sad and say for a 100th time Amed Rosario feel apart defensively and it was a bad idea to suggest trading him for SS, i.e. I was wrong.

The circle of life.

[fish16]

also, puk is simply not an elite rp to anyone who has actually watched the guy pitch in high leverage situations. as nick said earlier, you overrate him quite a bit.

[fish16]

Relievers have significantly reduced value in trades? My dude, look at the deadline with Scott, Adam, Estevez. What are you talking about?

yes, quality SP's have significantly more value than a quality reliever. Are you really arguing that?

[lou]

calling out your stupid position doesnt make me angry. I dont need to provide a "compelling position", youre providing a really stupid position. Bleday is more valuable because he can produce the same WAR in 1 year that Puk takes 3 years to produce. It's really not that complicated. It's the exact reason why SP's, even crappy one's like rogers, have good value in trades while relievers have significantly reduced value.

Wagner may have been better at his role than kent, but kent played a signicantly larger role, which is why he put up over 2x the production of wagner by WAR.

Is lenny harris as the best pinch hitter of all time better than a mediocre back end of the rotation SP? No, because a SP throwing 180 innings, even mediocre innings, is more valuable than a guy getting 1 plate appearance every night.

You're comparing 5 years of AJ puk production by WAR compared to this years production of JJ Bleday by war. it shouldnt have to be spelled out why it's a stupid comparison and why 1 is significantly more valuable than the other.

And again, i get that you dont actually watch baseball, but JJ bleday is not this albatross in CF. He has been below average this year, but he has one of the best arms in baseball to make up for it. Acting like he is this dumpster fire is just not backed up by numbers.

Relievers have significantly reduced value in trades? My dude, look at the deadline with Scott, Adam, Estevez. What are you talking about?

[lou]

And again, i will point out that you said the same shit about desperately needing a lefty for months before 2022 or 2023. IT worked out because quality relievers are infinitely easier to find than position players who can give you top 10 production at their position, especially a premium position like CF.
.

And I should have responded on this which is the attempt at shifting to baseball - Puk is playing as a top 10 lefty RP for 3 years. Yes, I think this is a valid point on your end as maybe Bendix is objectively good at finding RP (Cronin, Faucher, Bellozo(?), etc.). But this is a top 10 lefty RP for years, and he is entering his prime. He's cheap. You can extend him. That is going to be tough to find - look at what .33 of a season of Tanner Scott is worth via trade. You love that trade! These guys are valuable and hard to get.

Does this team need a starting SS, CF, and probably 3B a lot more than two high leverage righty and lefty relievers? For sure. But they did have 1 in Puk and now they don't. I'd say getting a 1B/DH is easier than a top 10 lefty reliever on a big picture level, hence, I prefer Puk to DDLS and probably Bleday to DDLS too as he seems like a higher floor and LF is better than DH at the end of the day.

So that's the response ultimately. It's harder to find an elite LHP reliever versus a 1B/DH IMO. I hope Peter is right here, but I'd have stuck with Puk here and Brazoban versus Lara.

[fish16]

Being angry isn't an argumentative position against an analysis. As discussed, quantity matters when the outcome is relative - and the outcome isn't relative between the career's of Bleday or Puk who is producing a win more per year when he has played - but as mentioned numerous times, maybe some things are shifting this year. You can keep pounding sand here, but the numbers aren't changing and you're not providing a compelling position. Puk has been better for his career. Who cares if he is a reliever versus a starting pitcher? I mean seriously. Who cares? It's an irrelevant point. What are they doing when they are on the field? I note, this is how Tampa thinks when they have their litany of annoying guys who are all good.

Wagner was better than Kent when he played. It's why he is in the hall. I can't help you here. If you want a non-steroid example, Andrew McCutchen won't be a hall of famer and its close to the same Kent/Wagner figures. There are plenty of examples.

Bleday is a CF like Edwards is a SS. Come on. Why do you think they got Ruiz and Pache and now forced into Bleday as they don't have anyone else? He's their Edwards positionally.

Not a basketball fan so I don't understand, but I would mention baseball is not akin to a team sport where baseball is neutralized to individual performances not dramatically relying on others.

calling out your stupid position doesnt make me angry. I dont need to provide a "compelling position", youre providing a really stupid position. Bleday is more valuable because he can produce the same WAR in 1 year that Puk takes 3 years to produce. It's really not that complicated. It's the exact reason why SP's, even crappy one's like rogers, have good value in trades while relievers have significantly reduced value. Who cares if he is a reliever versus a SP? Literally all of baseball. You compared one over 180 IP vs the other over 600 PAs. If it takes one guy 3 years to do that and the other 1 year, that is an extremely important quality to have. If puk had to pitch 180 innings over the same time that bleday got 600 pa's, he would have negative WAR like he did in his embarrassment of a role as a starter to start the year.

Professor, pitchers arent judged by their production over 180 IP, starting pitchers are, and that's because that is generally an annual amount of innings that a healthy starter will throw.

Wagner may have been better at his role than kent, but kent played a signicantly larger role, which is why he put up over 2x the production of wagner by WAR. andrew mccutchen has also been a much more valuable player than billy wagner ever was.

Is lenny harris as the best pinch hitter of all time better than a mediocre back end of the rotation SP? No, because a SP throwing 180 innings, even mediocre innings, is more valuable than a guy getting 1 plate appearance every night.

You're comparing 5 years of AJ puk production by WAR compared to this years production of JJ Bleday by war and then claiming that puk is better because he has a better WAR. it shouldnt have to be spelled out why it's a stupid comparison and why 1 is significantly more valuable than the other.

And again, i get that you dont actually watch baseball, but JJ bleday is not this albatross in CF. He has been below average this year, but he has one of the best arms in baseball to make up for it. Acting like he is this dumpster fire is just not backed up by numbers.

[lou]

it's not a lack of reading comprehension, it's the exact comparison you made. You compared Puk over 180 IP to Bleday over 600 PAs, one of which is 1 season for one guy and 3 seasons for the other. in this instance, yes, quantity absolutely matters. Do me a favor, please explain why puk isnt pitching 180 innings this year? It's because he's an awful SP who couldnt last a month. The fact is, because puk is a terrible SP, it will take him 3 years to match the production that bleday can produce in 1 year. Quantity absolutely does matter, it's the entire reason good SP's who can give you 180+ innings every year are infinitely more valuable than a quality reliever

Jeff kent isnt in the hall of fame because he did steroids, not because his value wasnt significantly higher than billy wagner. He was a significantly better player than Kent. Maybe not at his specific role, but his role was bigger because he was capable of handling a higher workload, which has higher value.

And again, i will point out that you said the same shit about desperately needing a lefty for months before 2022 or 2023. IT worked out because quality relievers are infinitely easier to find than position players who can give you top 10 production at their position, especially a premium position like CF.

It's like saying an 8th man in the NBA who can give you 10 PPG in a reduced role on 50% shooting is the same value over 3 games as lebron averaging 30 ppg on 50% shooting is over 1 game. it's a dumb fucking argument because being able to handle a higher workload has a ton of value.

Being angry isn't an argumentative position against an analysis. As discussed, quantity matters when the outcome is relative - and the outcome isn't relative between the career's of Bleday or Puk who is producing a win more per year when he has played - but as mentioned numerous times, maybe some things are shifting this year. You can keep pounding sand here, but the numbers aren't changing and you're not providing a compelling position. Puk has been better for his career. Who cares if he is a reliever versus a starting pitcher? I mean seriously. Who cares? It's an irrelevant point. What are they doing when they are on the field? I note, this is how Tampa thinks when they have their litany of annoying guys who are all good.

Wagner was better than Kent when he played. It's why he is in the hall. I can't help you here. If you want a non-steroid example, Andrew McCutchen won't be a hall of famer and its close to the same Kent/Wagner figures. There are plenty of examples.

Bleday is a CF like Edwards is a SS. Come on. Why do you think they got Ruiz and Pache and now forced into Bleday as they don't have anyone else? He's their Edwards positionally.

Not a basketball fan so I don't understand, but I would mention baseball is not akin to a team sport where baseball is neutralized to individual performances not dramatically relying on others.

[fish16]

A 1 WAR 40 IP RP is pretty fucking awesome player my dude just so you know. That is obviously now equivalent production on the field per your example, so of course if players are equal production when they play (ignoring $$/service time), the one who plays more is more valuable. This isn't a gotcha question at all.

Per our instance, Bleday plays more and isn't as good, so normalize the performance which is all I did here and Puk is better when he plays, but Bleday plays more. Do you want quality or quantity? Also, I *AM* right for the bold (using Fangraph's totals) so no, there is not a which is not the case but for the sake of argument sure comment. What I have posted *ARE* the numbers. If we did the analysis and Bleday was more of a 2.2 WAR guy per 600 PA and Puk 2.5 per 180 IP, I think we'd obviously defer to Bleday being "better" due to a neglible difference now on the field with the quantity playing time of Bleday overcoming it and that has value. But he's not doing that for each of these guys careers. It's a win behind per season of time. And no, it doesn't matter that Puk's seasons take more time to compile via multiple years. It's just a silly position. One clear example is Billy Wagner is in the HOF with 24 career WAR, and Jeff Kent will never get in with 56 WAR. Is Kent better? Fuck no. Kent per 600 PA? A very healthy 3.5 WAR. He was really good. Wagner? 4.8 WAR per 180IP. Bingo. Billy Wagner was so much better when he played. It's a no brainer.

In any event, Bleday and Puk are both exploding upwards this year, so we'll see what happens moving forward, but look at the statcast at how red Puk is and how not red Bleday is and it's not a huge leap to suggest Puk is likely going to keep this up moving forward and Bleday has improved to being "OK." I don’t know what to tell you here. I’d rather have extended Puk with like a 4/$16m contract which is a fair comp, then have Bleday for the next 4 years via arbitration for probably that same money, or DDLS (too volatile) for the next 6 years. If I’m wrong and the Puk yips come back? Well, I guess I will be wrong then and that’s OK to admit when you are wrong. I'll be happy to be wrong here and DDLS blows out Puk. That would be awesome.

For some final perspective here about Puk:

Since the start of 2022, Puk is 37th in RP WAR (7th lefty)

Start of 2023, 14th (# 4 lefty)

Start of 2024, 13th (# 2 lefty, ahead of Scott BTW)

This is an elite baseball player, but yes he is a relief pitcher and doesn’t play as much as starting hitters and pitchers. It is all ultimately, all relative.

Practically, the Marlins 100% need a major lefty reliever longterm unless you are a huge believer in Simpson. I don't think they need a DH type more than they need a guy like Puk. This is why I don't like the trade, but I like what Peter is doing overall, so in Bendix we trust to find elite relievers as he just traded away a few of them.

it's not a lack of reading comprehension, it's the exact comparison you made. You compared Puk over 180 IP to Bleday over 600 PAs, one of which is 1 season for one guy and 3 seasons for the other. in this instance, yes, quantity absolutely matters. Do me a favor, please explain why puk isnt pitching 180 innings this year? It's because he's an awful SP who couldnt last a month. The fact is, because puk is a terrible SP, it will take him 3 years to match the production that bleday can produce in 1 year. Quantity absolutely does matter, it's the entire reason good SP's who can give you 180+ innings every year are infinitely more valuable than a quality reliever

Jeff kent isnt in the hall of fame because he did steroids, not because his value wasnt significantly higher than billy wagner. He was a significantly better player than Kent. Maybe not at his specific role, but his role was bigger because he was capable of handling a higher workload, which has higher value.

And again, i will point out that you said the same shit about desperately needing a lefty for months before 2022 or 2023. IT worked out because quality relievers are infinitely easier to find than position players who can give you top 10 production at their position, especially a premium position like CF.

It's like saying an 8th man in the NBA who can give you 10 PPG in a reduced role on 50% shooting is the same value over 3 games as lebron averaging 30 ppg on 50% shooting is over 1 game. it's a dumb fucking argument because being able to handle a higher workload has a ton of value.

[lou]

It’s also super funny to compare yourself to a tenured college professor in your analogy when you’re making a dumb argument

It's super sad you think that is what I said, because I didn't. Are you seriously a lawyer with this sheer lack of reading comprehension?

[lou]

what's beyond groan inducing is trying to compare 3 years of one person's production to 1 year of the other. 180 IP is used because that is the typical year for a normal fully healthy SP. So yes, you might be right that 180 IP of Puk produces more WAR than 600 PA's of Bleday (which is not the case but for the sake of argument sure), you're still comparing 3 years vs 1 year of production, which is pretty funny considering the reason puk is only going to pitch 180 IP over 3 years is because he was a complete fucking embarrassing failure as a SP.



Again, what is a more valuable piece, a SP who puts up 4 WAR over 160 ip or a reliever who puts up 1 WAR in 40 IP. do you think those are equally valuable pieces?

A 1 WAR 40 IP RP is pretty fucking awesome player my dude just so you know. That is obviously now equivalent production on the field per your example, so of course if players are equal production when they play (ignoring $$/service time), the one who plays more is more valuable. This isn't a gotcha question at all.

Per our instance, Bleday plays more and isn't as good, so normalize the performance which is all I did here and Puk is better when he plays, but Bleday plays more. Do you want quality or quantity? Also, I *AM* right for the bold (using Fangraph's totals) so no, there is not a which is not the case but for the sake of argument sure comment. What I have posted *ARE* the numbers. If we did the analysis and Bleday was more of a 2.2 WAR guy per 600 PA and Puk 2.5 per 180 IP, I think we'd obviously defer to Bleday being "better" due to a neglible difference now on the field with the quantity playing time of Bleday overcoming it and that has value. But he's not doing that for each of these guys careers. It's a win behind per season of time. And no, it doesn't matter that Puk's seasons take more time to compile via multiple years. It's just a silly position. One clear example is Billy Wagner is in the HOF with 24 career WAR, and Jeff Kent will never get in with 56 WAR. Is Kent better? Fuck no. Kent per 600 PA? A very healthy 3.5 WAR. He was really good. Wagner? 4.8 WAR per 180IP. Bingo. Billy Wagner was so much better when he played. It's a no brainer.

In any event, Bleday and Puk are both exploding upwards this year, so we'll see what happens moving forward, but look at the statcast at how red Puk is and how not red Bleday is and it's not a huge leap to suggest Puk is likely going to keep this up moving forward and Bleday has improved to being "OK." I don’t know what to tell you here. I’d rather have extended Puk with like a 4/$16m contract which is a fair comp, then have Bleday for the next 4 years via arbitration for probably that same money, or DDLS (too volatile) for the next 6 years. If I’m wrong and the Puk yips come back? Well, I guess I will be wrong then and that’s OK to admit when you are wrong. I'll be happy to be wrong here and DDLS blows out Puk. That would be awesome.

For some final perspective here about Puk:

Since the start of 2022, Puk is 37th in RP WAR (7th lefty)

Start of 2023, 14th (# 4 lefty)

Start of 2024, 13th (# 2 lefty, ahead of Scott BTW)

This is an elite baseball player, but yes he is a relief pitcher and doesn’t play as much as starting hitters and pitchers. It is all ultimately, all relative.

Practically, the Marlins 100% need a major lefty reliever longterm unless you are a huge believer in Simpson. I don't think they need a DH type more than they need a guy like Puk. This is why I don't like the trade, but I like what Peter is doing overall, so in Bendix we trust to find elite relievers as he just traded away a few of them.