Gregg's closed the last few years

One full season plus part of another, actually; he didn't actually become the closer in 2007 until near the end of May.

Gregg became the first pitcher to lead the Marlins in saves in two consecutive seasons since Alfredo Alfonseca did it from 1999-2001. The Marlins had a different save leader in every season from 2001 through 2007 (in order, Alfonseca, Vladimir Nunez, Braden Looper, Armando Benitez, Todd Jones, Joe Borowski, and Gregg).

-- MWE

Why the Cubs would trade Ceda for Gregg, a year after they would not include him in a deal for Brian Roberts, is beyond me.

Ceda reminds me of Jose Mesa. He has stretches where he'll absolutely blow you away - and stretches where it looks like he has no clue.

-- MWE

"ERA %
66th 53
50th 81
33rd 90"

I understand the other part of the prediction, but how do you read this?

The Fruto comp for Ceda feels pretty good on a gut level, not that it tells us much.

Ceda reminds me of Jose Mesa. He has stretches where he'll absolutely blow you away - and stretches where it looks like he has no clue.

Sounds more like Juan Cruz part deux... though, I guess Cruz seems to have settled into life as a solid middle reliever.

I understand the other part of the prediction, but how do you read this?

He has a 53% chance of being in the 66th percentile in ERA (and so forth)?

Why the Cubs would trade Ceda for Gregg, a year after they would not include him in a deal for Brian Roberts, is beyond me.

I don't remember hearing this ever. I have no idea how close the Cubs and O's really were, but I'd be surprised (and upset) if Ceda was the holdup.

I'm fine with this trade, on the surface. Better than giving another Howry-type a big, long deal.

"66th percentile"

Among whom, though? His teammates? His league? All MLB? All projected players?

I meant that Gregg had a 53% chance at being in the top third of relievers that pitch 30 innings, an 81% chance of being better than league average, and a 90% chance of not being in the bottom third.

Would you guys find this better, then?

Top Third 53%
Middle Third 37%
Bottom Third 10%

I'm still tweaking formatting.

"Would you guys find this better, then?"

Seems a little more intuitive to me.

Thanks for the clarification.

The Marlins had a different save leader in every season from 2001 through 2007

Which, in a roundabout way, brings me to this trivia question -- is Ryan Dempster the first pitcher to lead his team in saves one season then wins (tied) the next? And I'll quickly answer it no -- wow, Derek Lowe won 21 games in his first year as a starter.

Better than giving another Howry-type a big, long deal.

Gregg made $2.5 M last year and I assume has a couple years of arb left and 61 saves the last two years. He won't be cheap at all. Some protection if he stinks it up. And I wasn't a fan at the time but the Howry deal worked out just fine. The Eyre deal -- not so much.

As long as Ceda's just going to be a reliever as Dan says, then I'm fine with this deal. Still, somewhat disappointed in the Cubs here. I'm guessing they're looking to Gregg to close with Marmol still being set up -- I'm OK with that because I don't believe in the cult of the closer but I fear it's a sign the Cubs don't think Marmol can handle closing. And either way, I think it shows their continued lack of confidence in Wuertz who's been a very solid reliever. And it makes me wonder how many parts of Angel Guzman's arm currently work. I'm also pretty sure this means Wood is gone which is understandable but I'm kinda sad to see him go.

Basically I think I'd rather have gone Marmol, Wuertz, Samardzija, Guzman, Ceda, Hart, etc. for my bullpen righties but I won't really complain about this.

RA %
66th 9
50th 31
33rd 47


And so he has a 13% chance of falling outside [0/1]? :-)

Or a 13% chance of not meeting the 30 IP threshhold (surely the chances are higher than that).

Or a 13% chance of not meeting the 30 IP threshhold (surely the chances are higher than that)

I mean a 13% chance of being in the bottom third of pitchers that throw 30 IP.

guessing they're looking to Gregg to close with Marmol still being set up

Nope, every article about Wood leaving (which is official), mentions that it's likely Marmol's job but Hendry said the final decision won't be made now. I don't see Marmol not winning the job.

Lou doesn't like Wuertz. He's got to be out of options, so if he's around Lou's going to have to learn to like him. I'd like to see Guzman stick, but he needs to stay healthly for more than a week or two before they count on him again. I'd also like to see Hart turn it around, hopefully his big league appearances last year were just a slump.

Kevin Gregg's gonna be like the 6th best pitcher in the Cubs pen next year.

The more I think about it, the more I'm starting to agree with everyone. So I take it back, I don't like this trade. Maybe Hendry just shouldn't trade with the Marlins.

Gregg will be better than Ceda next year.

Sounds more like Juan Cruz part deux

Actually, Ceda is more like deux parts Juan Cruz: big Jose weighs 275.

That might be a good reason behind the Cubs thinking. If Cerda is that big, he might eat his way out of baseball.

Dan, any thoughts on how Gregg compares to Wood? Somehow I think Gregg won't be that much worse than Wood, and not nearly the injury risk or cost.

Certainly, this was one place we could afford the lesser, cheaper option. Our bullpen is a good one, in spite of our ########.

I mean a 13% chance of being in the bottom third of pitchers that throw 30 IP.

Wait, doesn't it mean he has a 53% chance of being in the bottom third? Otherwise, how would one read the Gregg projection?

Also, why are you doing it based on ERA in some cases, RA in others, and ERA+ in others?

Dave, I just didn't read Walt's question correctly.

I don't use RA anywhere!

Oh, I guess it's just a typo under Ceda's projection then? Do you actually use ERA for the first set of percentiles or is that also a typo?

Sorry, not trying to nitpick, just trying to understand the new format.

Oh, I guess it's just a typo under Ceda's projection then? Do you actually use ERA for the first set of percentiles or is that also a typo?

Yeah, 'twas a typo - I didn't cut and paste the whole block. The % sign is one space over, too.

I made an explanation post on TO earlier tonight, which should hopefully answer any questions.

One year of Kevin Gregg? I assume he'll be a type A free agent after 2009. Even if Wood were to give the Cubs a discount, it might be better to let him walk with his balky arm, his desire for a longterm deal and his Type A status. It's still a little sad.

Sorry Dan, my head still hurts. The "problem" I'm having with Ceda's numbers is that they only add up to 87%. A 9% chance of being in the top 1/3, a 31% chance of being in the middle third and a 47% chance of being in the bottom third ... and a 13% chance of going Rick Ankiel on us? :-)

For a while I was thinking they were threshholds -- i.e. that he had a 53% (100-47) of being in the bottom third but then you'd have just two cutoffs not three. So then I thought maybe the 50% was 50% and they were indeed cutoffs ... which maybe it was/is but isn't consistent with the explanations. And then I decided to stop thinking about it and start drinking.

"Kevin Gregg's gonna be like the 6th best pitcher in the Cubs pen next year."

Which gives them like 6 relief pitchers who are better than anyone in the Brewers bullpen. The Cubs have to have better odds than any team in baseball of winning their division next year, right? Best rotation in the division, best bullpen, arguably the best offense, an above average defense...

I love the Brewers, and I hate going into an off season hoping to figure out a way they can win the wild card again.

The Cubs have to have better odds than any team in baseball of winning their division next year, right?

I can't imagine anyone coming within ten games of the Angels, barring a rash of injuries or freak occurrences.

Which, in a roundabout way, brings me to this trivia question -- is Ryan Dempster the first pitcher to lead his team in saves one season then wins (tied) the next? And I'll quickly answer it no -- wow, Derek Lowe won 21 games in his first year as a starter.

Smoltz also tied for the team lead in wins in his return to the rotation in 2005.

Walt, I think the percentages on Ceda read as:
9% chance of being in the top third
31% chance of being above average
47% chance of being outside the bottom third

They're not supposed to add up to anything, at least if I'm interpreting them correctly. If you want percentages on his landing in specific thirds, those would be:
9% chance of being in the top third
38% chance of being in the middle third
53% chance of being in the bottom third

If Cerda is that big, he might eat his way out of baseball.

The typo in this sentence makes the whole thing even funnier, because "cerda" is Spanish for "pig."

Dave's got a post up now explaining the odds, but for anyone too lazy to click over to the other thread, the percentages are the chance that he beats that benchmark. So

RA %
66th 9
50th 31
33rd 47

Can be read as a 9& chance he is in the top third in baseball, a 31% chance he's above the top half, a 47% chance he's top two-thirds, and a 53% chance he busts out his best Jeff Weaver impression.

Hopefully this will help ease the strain on all those overtaxed index fingers out there.

Dave's not here, man.

Where's Gregg?
Where's Gregg?
He's not here
Where's Gregg?

We're in his room
But he's not here
Where's Gregg?
He's not here.

I can't imagine anyone coming within ten games of the Angels, barring a rash of injuries or freak occurrences.

1: The Angel's pythag was only 88-74
2: the Angel's offense is unusually reliant upon high average contact hitters- and they bounce around quite a bit- see 2002 vs 2003.

I have the Angels down for a wider spread than virtually any other team a a matter of course. I can see another 100 wins, I can also see 80.

I can see another 100 wins, I can also see 80.

With Oakland, Seattle, and Texas in that division, I can see 80 winning the thing.