Zim's has carved out a fascinating niche in the stathead world. Projection algorithms, humor, and bug-up-his ass rants is a strange mix.

But against that, you have the fact that people in their early-20s aren't exactly known for their amazing levels of immaturity

If they aren't known for immaturity, who is?

I wonder why the Nats are the worst team in baseball. Let Teddy Win? More like Let the Nats win

Oops, rewrote the sentence and didn't change immaturity to maturity!

My Skype Firefox add-on seems to think that Milledge's projection is a phone number.

But will the organization nurture Milledge as a player, treat him like a valued member of the organization

Hmmm....

GM Neal Huntington admitted on Sunday that he's tried to trade Snell for "several months" but hasn't been offered a legitimate baseball return, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports.

Huntington said he made a mistake signing Snell to a three-year deal that looked good on paper but didn't take into account the "human element". "Our focus now is to salvage something from this situation," Huntington said, "whether that's a trade, or Ian comes back -- maybe that's in the bullpen -- we'll see." For his part, Snell credited an escape from the "negativity" and the performance of his Triple-A catcher for his 17-strikeout performance on Sunday. "The guys made me feel welcome here," Snell said.

My first reaction to this trade is wondering who will be the first media member to worry that Milledge's bad habits will infect McCutchen without a similar concern for Brandon Moss.

But will the organization nurture Milledge as a player, treat him like a valued member of the organization

D: "Tell Spot that he's a good cat. And a pretty cat."

W: "I'll feed him."

I prefer the Klingon approach: sometimes the player just needs to be told that today is a good day to play ball.

That's the most interesting TO in a while, brah.

While I think Dan's got the theory down pat here, he overstates the case against the Nationals.

If Morgan is the only available player who can fix the Nationals' defensive woes—which are considerable, just look at tonight's game—they have to go for it if the price is reasonable. Milledge, as I said in the other thread, is surplus. Hanrahan - well, I wouldn't put it past Joey B lynching him given the opportunity. Hanrahan is probably the most hated pitched on the Nationals' staff at the moment, although the vast bulk of my ire is reserved for Jesus Colome. For his own personal safety, it's better for Hanrahan to be traded.

The interesting question at the moment in NatsTown is, who is going to be the outfielder they send down? Dukes? Harris? Kearns? Willingham? Dunn? Or will they send down an infielder? Or shorten the bullpen? Wow! As many Question Marks as on the Riddler's outfit!

Is it far to tag the Nats with the 'crusty white guy' sort of thing given their success with Dukes and Young?

Zim's has carved out a fascinating niche in the stathead world. Projection algorithms, humor, and bug-up-his ass rants is a strange mix.

Actually, projection algorithms and bug-up-the ass rants pretty much defines the on-line stathead world. Think MGL.

It is really the humor that makes ZIM stand out.

Wait, DZ is supposed to be funny?

I don't know why I gave him that abbreviation... but it felt good at the time.

Actually, projection algorithms and bug-up-the ass rants pretty much defines the on-line stathead world. Think MGL.

The funny thing is that Symborski's nowhere as mean as he seems to think he is. I don't think he could sustain a rant much past a paragraph or two. He's kind of the opposite of a lot of the statdonks in that, despite clearly being knowledgable, the lighter the topic, the more interesting his writing. I'll probably get banned for this, but the dude's closer to being a smart Bill Simmons than a Gassko/Silver type.

My Skype Firefox add-on seems to think that Milledge's projection is a phone number.

This is the first time that a stat-based projection suggests that a player will dial it in.

What is this, Dan Szymborski Evaluation Day?

This is the first time that a stat-based projection suggests that a player will dial it in.

If I ever see the combination, I will totally list the projection for a player as ".867 OPS, .530 SLG, 9 HR"

What is this, Dan Szymborski Evaluation Day?

I think it's Canada Day. Do they normally fall on the same day?

Bravo, vi.

I'll second the comments about this article...well written.

Having watched Morgan in a few games, he seems to me to be an outfielder who is much better defensively in LF than CF. He has great speed, but his routes looked less than stellar. I see that his UZR rating is better in CF than LF, which makes me question whether the sample size (54 games in CF for his career) allows us to get an accurate gauge of his defense in CF. Because McLouth held down CF for much of the season, Morgan played mostly in LF for the Pirates. Morgan will be an improvement defensively over what the Nats are used to in CF, but I wouldn't bet that he will be more than slightly above average in CF.

By the way, I find it interesting that two stats oriented sites (here and Fangraphs) come to completely different conclusions about this trade. The fangraphs article views it as a win for the Nationals.

By the way, I find it interesting that two stats oriented sites (here and Fangraphs) come to completely different conclusions about this trade. The fangraphs article views it as a win for the Nationals.

The analysts I saw on the MLB Network last night (former players, not statheads) were pretty much unanimous in their opinion that it was a terrible trade for the Pirates. The term "head-scratcher" was used more than once.

Millege is probably going to get jerked around enough that he never amounts to anything.

Millege is probably going to get jerked around enough that he never amounts to anything.

Maybe. An interesting thing to me is that the early rumors/media reports were Milledge for Morgan ... and sure the Pirates wanted a little more, but it was apparently the name Milledge that got them listening in the first place. The Pirates had no reason to trade Morgan -- he's not making any money, he's not blocking anyone -- so unless Huntington has a pathological obsession with trading starting OFs (his 4th such trade in a year), the Pirates wanted to make this trade. That should mean that they're looking to give Milledge a legit shot to reach his upside.

If a team other than the Nats had made this trade, I might call them the winner or at least a win-win. If his defense is as good as advertised, then Morgan is (give or take a few runs) an average OF. Dan's of course right that his defense will go in decline but he's still likely to in that average zone for the next 2.5 seasons and that's a perfectly good return for a "failed" prospect (though Hanrahan seems better than your typical throw-in). But the Nats are doing this to ... improve their chances of out-performing the 2003 Tigers? Still, given the Nats wanted to move Milledge and apparently have nightmarish flashbacks whenever the name Hanrahan is mentioned, they did OK here. The concern is more whether they're ever gonna get around to turning good young talent into good players.

The analysts I saw on the MLB Network last night (former players, not statheads) were pretty much unanimous in their opinion that it was a terrible trade for the Pirates. The term "head-scratcher" was used more than once.

I think the age difference between Milledge and Morgan is what's getting people. Milledge debuted a year earlier and has almost 400 more MLB PAs than Morgan. So at first glance this looks like a trade of guys around the same age/experience, except that one is a major-league regular and the other guy's scuffling in AAA.

What that misses, of course, is that Milledge made his major-league debut at age 21, Morgan debuted at age 27, and Milledge is still almost five years younger than Morgan. Actually, even BB-Ref understates the real age difference - they list Morgan's baseball age this year as 28; if he had been born two days earlier, they'd call him 29 (his birthday is tomorrow).

The analysts I saw on the MLB Network last night (former players, not statheads) were pretty much unanimous in their opinion that it was a terrible trade for the Pirates. The term "head-scratcher" was used more than once.

I think that analysis pretty much consisted of:

Morgan: .277 and 18 steals!

Milledge: .167 and clubhouse cancer!

Flipping around MLB's AtBat iPhone app (&, um, an actual TV), I heard way too many broadcasters sound off on how the Pirates are never going to get anywhere if they keep on trading established major league talent for no-name castoffs, as if these trades are anything like the Giles / Kendall / Schmidt (if you want to go back that far) deals. And the Mets radio guys were riding Milledge like he was Bernie Madoff's investment partner; maybe Gary Cohen was off-mic holding up cue cards. And they were getting on LM for NOT showing any enthusiasm for the game, which is pretty rich -- after the way the NY media crapped in his mouth for deigning to high-five fans after a late-game homer, would you blame him?

One of them mentioned that Milledge was supposedly late to the surgery for his hand injury earlier this year -- anyone know if there's any truth to that?

My Skype Firefox add-on seems to think that Milledge's projection is a phone number.

Phone home, LM!

Since trade

Milledge -2.1 WAR For Pittsburgh
Morgan 0.5 WAR for Washington

Net gain for Washington, 2.6 WAR

Ha! I don't have to admit jackshit in this thread.

Why long-term projections are for entertainment purposes only: Dan's Milledge Projection

Net gain for Washington, 2.6 WAR

Not totally. To date, Hanrahan has been 0.5 WAR better than Burnett, so that gets the gap down to 2.1.

Milledge has zero HRs this year. He led the Nationals in HRs in 2008.

instead of roid rage, Milledge had roid relaxation.

Since tradeMilledge -2.1 WAR For PittsburghMorgan 0.5 WAR for WashingtonNet gain for Washington, 2.6 WAR

since June 11:

Milledge:.340/.415/.511 in 53 PAs
Morgan: .254/.299/.268 in 76 PAs

Since tradeMilledge -2.1 WAR For PittsburghMorgan 0.5 WAR for WashingtonNet gain for Washington, 2.6 WAR

since June 11:

Milledge:.340/.415/.511 in 53 PAs
Morgan: .254/.299/.268 in 76 PAs

Since June 20:

Milledge: .222/.282/.333 in 40 PAs
Morgan: .283/.350/.302 in 63 PAs