Desipio Message Board

Quote from: Yeti on July 25, 2016, 09:01:14 AM

Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 25, 2016, 08:51:05 AM
I will also say that from a strictly baseball standpoint, if they land him for Torres and Warren (as Twitter currently has the deal), that's pretty fucking incredible.

So, Starlin and Gleybar for Chapman for 60 days plus as long as the post season lasts.

Starlin had a sexual assault accusation, and a couple of nightclub incidents he was asked about. And we loved Starlin, so..................................

Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 25, 2016, 08:51:05 AM
I will also say that from a strictly baseball standpoint, if they land him for Torres and Warren (as Twitter currently has the deal), that's pretty fucking incredible.

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 09:11:32 AM

Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 25, 2016, 08:51:05 AM
I will also say that from a strictly baseball standpoint, if they land him for Torres and Warren (as Twitter currently has the deal), that's pretty fucking incredible.

I don't think that's incredible. Torres, Warren, plus two unnamed (presumably lesser) prospects for 2 months seems like a steep price to pay. I'm fine with paying it, as I think Chapman is one of the few elite relievers you can actually count on going forward as opposed to any number of relievers who can go from dominant to terrible in the span of a week ('sup Grimm) and in a postseason series I really do think he could make a difference and Joe especially will not hesitate to use him against Bryce Harper in the 6th or 7th rather than waiting for a save opportunity that may never come. Also it sounds like fans/publications appear to have a higher opinion of Gleyber than actual GMs (several sources saying Happ and Eloy are both coveted by more teams than Gleyber), so I'm guessing Theo wouldn't "sell low" on Gleyber if he thought he could get much more for him elsewhere.

So, baseball only I don't think this is a terrible overpay but I think portraying it as *not* an overpay, let alone "fucking incredible" is probably a stretch.

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 09:11:32 AM

Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 25, 2016, 08:51:05 AM
I will also say that from a strictly baseball standpoint, if they land him for Torres and Warren (as Twitter currently has the deal), that's pretty fucking incredible.

I don't think that's incredible. Torres, Warren, plus two unnamed (presumably lesser) prospects for 2 months seems like a steep price to pay. I'm fine with paying it, as I think Chapman is one of the few elite relievers you can actually count on going forward as opposed to any number of relievers who can go from dominant to terrible in the span of a week ('sup Grimm) and in a postseason series I really do think he could make a difference and Joe especially will not hesitate to use him against Bryce Harper in the 6th or 7th rather than waiting for a save opportunity that may never come. Also it sounds like fans/publications appear to have a higher opinion of Gleyber than actual GMs (several sources saying Happ and Eloy are both coveted by more teams than Gleyber), so I'm guessing Theo wouldn't "sell low" on Gleyber if he thought he could get much more for him elsewhere.

So, baseball only I don't think this is a terrible overpay but I think portraying it as *not* an overpay, let alone "fucking incredible" is probably a stretch.

Quote from: Eli on July 25, 2016, 09:34:08 AM

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 09:11:32 AM

Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 25, 2016, 08:51:05 AM
I will also say that from a strictly baseball standpoint, if they land him for Torres and Warren (as Twitter currently has the deal), that's pretty fucking incredible.

I don't think that's incredible. Torres, Warren, plus two unnamed (presumably lesser) prospects for 2 months seems like a steep price to pay. I'm fine with paying it, as I think Chapman is one of the few elite relievers you can actually count on going forward as opposed to any number of relievers who can go from dominant to terrible in the span of a week ('sup Grimm) and in a postseason series I really do think he could make a difference and Joe especially will not hesitate to use him against Bryce Harper in the 6th or 7th rather than waiting for a save opportunity that may never come. Also it sounds like fans/publications appear to have a higher opinion of Gleyber than actual GMs (several sources saying Happ and Eloy are both coveted by more teams than Gleyber), so I'm guessing Theo wouldn't "sell low" on Gleyber if he thought he could get much more for him elsewhere.

So, baseball only I don't think this is a terrible overpay but I think portraying it as *not* an overpay, let alone "fucking incredible" is probably a stretch.

Moving back to the baseball side of things -- I don't think it's necessarily an overpay from a value standpoint. But I think it's a little bit of a weird allocation of resources. The playoffs are crapshoot-y and so are bullpens, even elite ones. So making a move that is specifically "for" the playoffs seems kind of un-Theo & Co.

This is total back-of-the-napkin math, but it seems like a reasonably safe bet that the Cubs will be one of the final 8 teams left in the playoffs (assumption is they win the division). If every team has an even chance of winning the World Series, that's 12.5% odds. Give the Cubs a small bump because they're good and maybe they start off at 15%. How much does Chapman improve those odds? Does he bump them to 16% or 20%? The latter is a 33% jump in their chances and that's pretty huge. But that's making a lot of assumptions. It's not like Chapman would have done a damn thing to help in the NLCS last year.

I don't know any of that and I also know that front offices can't think exactly the same way since they have actual jobs they're trying to do. But I'm just a bit surprised that this is how they're allocating their resources.

Quote from: Eli on July 25, 2016, 09:34:08 AM
Moving back to the baseball side of things -- I don't think it's necessarily an overpay from a value standpoint. But I think it's a little bit of a weird allocation of resources. The playoffs are crapshoot-y and so are bullpens, even elite ones. So making a move that is specifically "for" the playoffs seems kind of un-Theo & Co.

This is total back-of-the-napkin math, but it seems like a reasonably safe bet that the Cubs will be one of the final 8 teams left in the playoffs (assumption is they win the division). If every team has an even chance of winning the World Series, that's 12.5% odds. Give the Cubs a small bump because they're good and maybe they start off at 15%. How much does Chapman improve those odds? Does he bump them to 16% or 20%? The latter is a 33% jump in their chances and that's pretty huge. But that's making a lot of assumptions. It's not like Chapman would have done a damn thing to help in the NLCS last year.

I don't know any of that and I also know that front offices can't think exactly the same way since they have actual jobs they're trying to do. But I'm just a bit surprised that this is how they're allocating their resources.

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 09:59:59 AM

Quote from: Eli on July 25, 2016, 09:34:08 AM
Moving back to the baseball side of things -- I don't think it's necessarily an overpay from a value standpoint. But I think it's a little bit of a weird allocation of resources. The playoffs are crapshoot-y and so are bullpens, even elite ones. So making a move that is specifically "for" the playoffs seems kind of un-Theo & Co.

This is total back-of-the-napkin math, but it seems like a reasonably safe bet that the Cubs will be one of the final 8 teams left in the playoffs (assumption is they win the division). If every team has an even chance of winning the World Series, that's 12.5% odds. Give the Cubs a small bump because they're good and maybe they start off at 15%. How much does Chapman improve those odds? Does he bump them to 16% or 20%? The latter is a 33% jump in their chances and that's pretty huge. But that's making a lot of assumptions. It's not like Chapman would have done a damn thing to help in the NLCS last year.

I don't know any of that and I also know that front offices can't think exactly the same way since they have actual jobs they're trying to do. But I'm just a bit surprised that this is how they're allocating their resources.

Realistically speaking, Chapman would be our new closer, or at the very least, sharing in the role.
It is very un-Theo like, but I mean it's a case where they have the resources to overpay and Chapman definitely has an effect on their October gameplan. They can shorten outings from their starters, they can use Chapman to face Harper/Murphy in a key spot in the 6th or 7th knowing Strop and Rondon are still there to lock things down late, etc. It's hard to account for how that probably ups their chances.

I hate to default to "I trust Theo" but I mean, I trust him. He knows his prospect stockpile and how it is valued around the league, and he also knows he's going to need to make that move for a controllable starter at some point as well. If he thinks he can afford to make this move and still make others, he's probably right. In the end though history is going to judge this by whether or not they win the title this year.

Quote from: Canadouche on July 25, 2016, 10:12:10 AM

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 09:59:59 AM

Quote from: Eli on July 25, 2016, 09:34:08 AM
Moving back to the baseball side of things -- I don't think it's necessarily an overpay from a value standpoint. But I think it's a little bit of a weird allocation of resources. The playoffs are crapshoot-y and so are bullpens, even elite ones. So making a move that is specifically "for" the playoffs seems kind of un-Theo & Co.

This is total back-of-the-napkin math, but it seems like a reasonably safe bet that the Cubs will be one of the final 8 teams left in the playoffs (assumption is they win the division). If every team has an even chance of winning the World Series, that's 12.5% odds. Give the Cubs a small bump because they're good and maybe they start off at 15%. How much does Chapman improve those odds? Does he bump them to 16% or 20%? The latter is a 33% jump in their chances and that's pretty huge. But that's making a lot of assumptions. It's not like Chapman would have done a damn thing to help in the NLCS last year.

I don't know any of that and I also know that front offices can't think exactly the same way since they have actual jobs they're trying to do. But I'm just a bit surprised that this is how they're allocating their resources.

It is very un-Theo like, but I mean it's a case where they have the resources to overpay and Chapman definitely has an effect on their October gameplan. They can shorten outings from their starters, they can use Chapman to face Harper/Murphy in a key spot in the 6th or 7th knowing Strop and Rondon are still there to lock things down late, etc. It's hard to account for how that probably ups their chances.

I hate to default to "I trust Theo" but I mean, I trust him. He knows his prospect stockpile and how it is valued around the league, and he also knows he's going to need to make that move for a controllable starter at some point as well. If he thinks he can afford to make this move and still make others, he's probably right. In the end though history is going to judge this by whether or not they win the title this year.

Realistically speaking, Chapman would be our new closer, or at the very least, sharing in the role

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 10:23:29 AM
https://twitter.com/MATrueblood?s=09

This asshole is going full Vlahos over this.

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 07:47:43 AM
TL:DR, I don't think you're a bad person if you're fine with this move and just want to say "he's served his suspension, most of these guys probably suck, I'm rooting for the laundry." Just let the people who are disgusted by him be disgusted and let's all just not try to seek the moral high ground against each other. As long as you aren't the subhumans in my twitter mentions calling people a "pussy" and telling them to "get the fuck over it, winning is all that matters", it's fine.

Quote from: ChuckD on July 25, 2016, 10:41:42 AM

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 10:23:29 AM
https://twitter.com/MATrueblood?s=09

This asshole is going full Vlahos over this.

You should meet this other guy I know. Coincidentally, his name also happens to be SKO.

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 07:47:43 AM
TL:DR, I don't think you're a bad person if you're fine with this move and just want to say "he's served his suspension, most of these guys probably suck, I'm rooting for the laundry." Just let the people who are disgusted by him be disgusted and let's all just not try to seek the moral high ground against each other. As long as you aren't the subhumans in my twitter mentions calling people a "pussy" and telling them to "get the fuck over it, winning is all that matters", it's fine.

Quote from: SKO on July 25, 2016, 11:01:39 AM
I can't seem to get screenshots to work but these are his actual tweets, all of which are his objection to the trade for baseball reasons, not even considering the DV:

"Sustained success is the key and should be the goal for every team. That's what makes this move just unbelievably stupid"
"my objection is that the thing the cubs get back in this deal- chapman, a three month rental of a relief pitcher-is almost fundamentally worthless"
"just bad asset management. traded a lottery ticket for a gas station cheeseburger"

So I don't think his staunch opposition to domestic violence is the key here. I think he once again thinks he's the smartest guy in the room and that Theo, the guy who built a team around Rizzo/Bryant/Russell/Scwharber/Baez/Heyward/Contreras, doesn't know the value of controllable talent.

If your take is "I don't want this wife beater no matter the cost" I respect that, totally. If your argument is "I know how to manage assets better than Theo, he should be traded to the Twins", mayyyybe fuck off.