2024 Game Thread

[fish16]

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

[fish16]

Mocking extrapolating playing time to 600 PA (which you have done before) is *foundational* to baseball player evaluation. It is beyond groan inducing, similar to how a college freshman would challenge a tenured professor about the established use of math or a theory. It's why some of the systems are 600PA based to this day. Like, if you don't want to respect the evolution of sabermetrics, it's not forth chatting about this at all. Puk is much better when he plays for his career, but Bleday has played more. If we can't get there, no one can help you, as this one is a softball.

The only point one can make here is - which I already said - is I'm ignoring service/time money. Puk is going to scale up faster now and is approaching FA, so what's his price over how many years to match Bleday or DDLS service time? Puk for 2 years and some FA prices? Bleday for 4 years and 3 arb years in those? DDLS for a full 6+ years? The value in having additional club controlled years way outweigh the overall better production from a player for sure. For me, and I said this back in June, I'd look to extend Puk for 4 years to build out his window for the team longer. But they opted to trade. So I fully can agree maybe Bleday and DDLS for the years is a more valuable asset than Puk as-is due to just time, but Puk is likely going to be better on the field even if that is a more limited role. Adding to this, Puk is going to be cheap as he's a reliever 2 years from free agency so it's likely not very impactful $$$ here as batter arbitration will scale up faster netting it all out. Ultimately, he's just a better player on the field unless Bleday has another jump in production and Puk stays the same or regresses. I am a quality kind of guy, not quantity. Fantasy baseball guys want quantity. Counting stats. I want more quality on the field impact. But that's me.

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?

[Nick]

The historical equivalent is 600 PA for a full time batter and 180 IP for a full time pitcher.

Starting Pitcher. I fixed it for you.

You guys throw a lot of stats out I don't know what they are, but this one is pretty simple. Bleday will get 600 PAs a year for a full healthy season. Puk will get 60-70 IP if he stays healthy as a relief pitcher.

[lou]

im pretty sure i do know ball, and you just used a relievers WAR for the period of time you like for him only, for some reason extrapolated over 180 innings, nearly 3 years of production for him, as opposed to the WAR of bleday extrapolated over 600 PA's, which would be 1 season of his production, purposely including the last 2 years of initial young mlb player production when he has gotten significantly better this year. It's pretty obvious what you were trying to do there.

Please do tell what Puk's war would be extrapolated over 70 innings (being nice since he gets injured every year) compared to Bleday's production from this year extrapolated over 600 pa's. that's an actual comparison of their relative annual value.

Mocking extrapolating playing time to 600 PA (which you have done before) is *foundational* to baseball player evaluation. It is beyond groan inducing, similar to how a college freshman would challenge a tenured professor about the established use of math or a theory. It's why some of the systems are 600PA based to this day. Like, if you don't want to respect the evolution of sabermetrics, it's not forth chatting about this at all. Puk is much better when he plays for his career, but Bleday has played more. If we can't get there, no one can help you, as this one is a softball.

The only point one can make here is - which I already said - is I'm ignoring service/time money. Puk is going to scale up faster now and is approaching FA, so what's his price over how many years to match Bleday or DDLS service time? Puk for 2 years and some FA prices? Bleday for 4 years and 3 arb years in those? DDLS for a full 6+ years? The value in having additional club controlled years way outweigh the overall better production from a player for sure. For me, and I said this back in June, I'd look to extend Puk for 4 years to build out his window for the team longer. But they opted to trade. So I fully can agree maybe Bleday and DDLS for the years is a more valuable asset than Puk as-is due to just time, but Puk is likely going to be better on the field even if that is a more limited role. Adding to this, Puk is going to be cheap as he's a reliever 2 years from free agency so it's likely not very impactful $$$ here as batter arbitration will scale up faster netting it all out. Ultimately, he's just a better player on the field unless Bleday has another jump in production and Puk stays the same or regresses. I am a quality kind of guy, not quantity. Fantasy baseball guys want quantity. Counting stats. I want more quality on the field impact. But that's me.

[fish16]

Sigh.


It is a comparison on playing time. The historical equivalent is 600 PA for a full time batter and 180 IP for a full time pitcher. This has been the baseline for decades when comparing guys with different playing times, you have to assess them on the same level for impact. So Bleday's generated 2.7 WAR in his career in 1,045 PA. Puk has generated 2.8 WAR in 202.2 IP. This isn't apples to apples. So Puk has produced more value in really 1+ full time season of work, and Bleday is around 1.8 seasons of full time work. Hence, when you normalize their actual playing time, you see the real vast difference. Puk has had a profound more impact when he plays. Said another way, let's give Puk another 120 innings and see how much more WAR he has versus Bleday right now. This is not close to me.

Also, I do understand all of Bleday's value is this season so he likely is ticking up as the above is the career rate, but so is Puk who is having the best season of his career by far. It's not a debate to me that a 1.3+ WAR RP is more valuable than a 2.6+ WAR LF type (ignoring payroll/surplus value issues). You're just aggregating quantity on the fielder who plays much much more, but the reliever is actually impacting games at a higher level. Those guys are harder to find. It's why team's have gone to irrational levels to get Scott/Adam/Estevez types. Puk is simply an elite RP right now. Doesn't mean he holds up forever, but he is showing really enormous performance and upside. Much more than Bleday. I will absolutely give you DDLS has the power upside and agree with fish16's comment about DDLS popping those elite EVs so there is major hope. I am just fearful the whiffs show up in force against MLB pitching. Basically, I think Puk is the safest player of these three and 2nd highest upside option of these three. Bleday is lowest upside by a good margin, and a middle floor. And DDLS is highest ceiling with the power, but highest risk with the whiffs. I prefer Puk here as he is great and pretty safe as a lefty.

that's awesome, except they dont have the same playing time specifically because puk is not good enough or durable to start. so what you're actually doing is using the cherry picked statistics you want to use for Puk extrapolated over what is actually 3 years of production, compared to purposely including Bleday's first 2 seasons instead of just this one, extrapolated over 1 year.

it's also very transparent what you are doing with bleday by purposely including his first two years instead of only the improvement this year, while then using whatever cherry picked sample you want to use for puk and then extrapolating that over 3 full years of production.

What's more valuable, a SP who can put up a 4 WAR Season over 160 innings or a RP who puts up 1 WAR in 40 innings? You think that's equal production?

[fish16]

Tell me you don't know ball without telling me you don't know ball

im pretty sure i do know ball, and you just used a relievers WAR for the period of time you like for him only, for some reason extrapolated over 180 innings, nearly 3 years of production for him, as opposed to the WAR of bleday extrapolated over 600 PA's, which would be 1 season of his production, purposely including the last 2 years of initial young mlb player production when he has gotten significantly better this year. It's pretty obvious what you were trying to do there.

Please do tell what Puk's war would be extrapolated over 70 innings (being nice since he gets injured every year) compared to Bleday's production from this year extrapolated over 600 pa's. that's an actual comparison of their relative annual value. not comparing 3 years of one guy for some reason compared to 1 year of the other.

[lou]

now divide that 2.5 by the 3 years it will take him to pitch 180 innings considering he was a fucking terrible starter. and then try using bleday's production this year extrapolated over 600 PAs because young hitters do in fact improve over time, especially ones drafted so highly with a lot of talent. bleday is far and away the more valuable asset.

Tell me you don't know ball without telling me you don't know ball

[lou]

Huh? You're whole argument is Puk is an amazing relief pitcher ignore what he did as a starter.

How the fuck is Puk going to pitch 180 innings in a year as a reliever? That's going to be at least 3 years for him.

Sigh.


It is a comparison on playing time. The historical equivalent is 600 PA for a full time batter and 180 IP for a full time pitcher. This has been the baseline for decades when comparing guys with different playing times, you have to assess them on the same level for impact. So Bleday's generated 2.7 WAR in his career in 1,045 PA. Puk has generated 2.8 WAR in 202.2 IP. This isn't apples to apples. So Puk has produced more value in really 1+ full time season of work, and Bleday is around 1.8 seasons of full time work. Hence, when you normalize their actual playing time, you see the real vast difference. Puk has had a profound more impact when he plays. Said another way, let's give Puk another 120 innings and see how much more WAR he has versus Bleday right now. This is not close to me.

Also, I do understand all of Bleday's value is this season so he likely is ticking up as the above is the career rate, but so is Puk who is having the best season of his career by far. It's not a debate to me that a 1.3+ WAR RP is more valuable than a 2.6+ WAR LF type (ignoring payroll/surplus value issues). You're just aggregating quantity on the fielder who plays much much more, but the reliever is actually impacting games at a higher level. Those guys are harder to find. It's why team's have gone to irrational levels to get Scott/Adam/Estevez types. Puk is simply an elite RP right now. Doesn't mean he holds up forever, but he is showing really enormous performance and upside. Much more than Bleday. I will absolutely give you DDLS has the power upside and agree with fish16's comment about DDLS popping those elite EVs so there is major hope. I am just fearful the whiffs show up in force against MLB pitching. Basically, I think Puk is the safest player of these three and 2nd highest upside option of these three. Bleday is lowest upside by a good margin, and a middle floor. And DDLS is highest ceiling with the power, but highest risk with the whiffs. I prefer Puk here as he is great and pretty safe as a lefty.

[fish16]

Now this is major LOL we can all agree on!

I wonder if they are about to make him a 1 time through 2+ inning reliever and throwing max velocity. I do think Rogers will be around another decade in some lefty role. Everyone always be needing lefties.

i think rogers will be a fringe roster pitcher soon if he doesnt change what he's been doing for 3.5 years now. as ive been saying for months, the guy has been living off the status of his first half in 2021 for 3.5 years. he's a bad starter. the fact that the orioles gave up what they did for him was a joke. the guy has been wheezing through 4.2 shitty IP every 5 days for 3 years.

[fish16]

Sure, and now extrapolate those numbers to their time played:

Bleday per 600 PA 1.5 WAR

Puk per 180 IP 2.5 WAR


Puk is a much better baseball player.

now divide that 2.5 by the 3 years it will take him to pitch 180 innings considering he was a fucking terrible starter. and then try using bleday's production this year extrapolated over 600 PAs because young hitters do in fact improve over time, especially ones drafted so highly with a lot of talent. bleday is far and away the more valuable asset. i think you know what you're doing using bledays first 2 years in that sample as opposed to what he's done this year

[Nick]

Hell he's only pitched 202.2 innings in his career right now. The man made his debut in 2019.

[lou]

Orioles sent Rogers to AAA. LMAO

Now this is major LOL we can all agree on!

I wonder if they are about to make him a 1 time through 2+ inning reliever and throwing max velocity. I do think Rogers will be around another decade in some lefty role. Everyone always be needing lefties.

[Nick]

Sure, and now extrapolate those numbers to their time played:

Bleday per 600 PA 1.5 WAR

Puk per 180 IP 2.5 WAR


Puk is a much better baseball player.

Huh? You're whole argument is Puk is an amazing relief pitcher ignore what he did as a starter.

How the fuck is Puk going to pitch 180 innings in a year as a reliever? That's going to be at least 3 years for him.

[lou]

not everyone hates their own relievers, they hate their own unreliable relievers, and that's what puk was in high leverage situation. He was completely unreliable when it mattered most. He looks great in meaningless low leverage situations.

Bat options in FA, which we never spend any money, cost 10+ million outside of fringe roster guys. Full time starters in premium positions like CF cost 10-15 million +. You can find very quality relievers every single offseason for the minimum, just like they found pretty much the entire bullpen this year for either minor league deals or very minor trades.

I will eat all the crow you can find if they find a 1.5+ WAR LHP reliever next year for the minimum. And I say that fully acknowledging they might actually have done that with Cronin and Faucher (or close enough) who analytically, are really excelling. It's pretty hard to do that IMO. I just like Puk a lot more than you guys. And that's OK. I do hope DDLS is better and I am wrong.

[lou]

A.J. Puk's Career WAR:

Fangraphs: 2.8
BR: 2.5

JJ Bleday's WAR 2024:

Fangraphs: 2.6
BR: 2.9

Sure, and now extrapolate those numbers to their time played:

Bleday per 600 PA 1.5 WAR

Puk per 180 IP 2.5 WAR


Puk is a much better baseball player.