Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, July 29, 2014

Trader Jack? As Seattle’s GM struggles to complete deals, some rival executives wonder | FOX Sports

Zduriencik sounds like a bad fantasy baseball trading partner. If you’ve ever played in a league, you know just the kind of guy I’m talking about. If you don’t, you are probably that guy.

Jim Furtado Posted: July 29, 2014 at 11:06 AM | 59 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: mariners, trade rumors

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 12:38 PM (#4759692)
If other GMs are talking to the press about this, it must be bad.

“He has made offers and then pulled back after we have said, ‘This is something we would do,”’ one executive said. “He responds (by saying) it wasn’t an offer and that he will need to discuss it with his guys.”


That's pretty damning.
   2. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 12:44 PM (#4759699)
Win 20 games and they call you eccentric. Don't and they call you a slob.
   3. madvillain Posted: July 29, 2014 at 01:19 PM (#4759726)
Every interview with Jack Z I've heard he comes off as a completely empty suit with an ego out of proportion to his skill at the job. His interview after the Cano signing made it seem like he was personally responsible for bringing Robbie to Seattle and not the owner's piggy bank. He was talking about how close he is with Robbie's people and how Jay Z was in his office and all this crap that had absolutely nothing to do with winning baseball games and everything to do with corporate glad handing.

I also heard a story reported by some White Sox people that Jack Z gave a completely low-ball, downright offensive offering (probably a PTBNL) for Dayan Viciedo, who granted isn't any great shakes, but who would certainly return more than Morales or Barney in a trade.
   4. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 01:56 PM (#4759741)
I know its beating a dead horse, but this is still fun to read.

The Mariners farm system isn’t among baseball’s best. They have a couple of premium prospects in Dustin Ackley and Michael Saunders, but they don’t match up with the systems that boast a lot of high ceiling guys. However, there is a reason this section is entitled young talent and not farm system.

Felix is 23. Franklin Gutierrez is 27. Jose Lopez is 26. Adam Moore is 25. Ryan Rowland-Smith is 27. Every single member of the bullpen is under 30. Simply looking at a ranking of their prospects misses the youth already on the team. They’re not overflowing with young talent like Texas or Tampa Bay, but there’s a young core to build around in place, and the guys on the farm who are legitimate prospects are generally close to the majors.



The Seattle front office knows how to evaluate talent, and they know how to value talent. Organizations that do both things well, and are given a payroll of $100 million to boot, win a lot of baseball games.

   5. Tom Nawrocki Posted: July 29, 2014 at 02:46 PM (#4759759)
I know its beating a dead horse, but this is still fun to read.


Thanks for republishing that link. I had forgotten that this genius organization had just traded for Milton Bradley, who would hit .205/.292/.348 for them that year. The final piece!

   6. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 02:47 PM (#4759760)
The thing about the famous Fangraphs piece is that he definitely knew it was bullshit as he was typing it. The very first sentence of the essay is:
The presumption is going to be that I put the Mariners at #6 because I’m a biased homer – I am well aware of that. The whole thing is dripping with self-delusion.

   7. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:00 PM (#4759769)
Thanks for republishing that link. I had forgotten that this genius organization had just traded for Milton Bradley, who would hit .205/.292/.348 for them that year. The final piece!

The BBTF thread on that was gold as well.
   8. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:00 PM (#4759770)
I know its beating a dead horse, but this is still fun to read.

It doesn't make me proud, but that thread was good times.
   9. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:06 PM (#4759778)
The "6th best organization" meme is the 1st best meme.
   10. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:08 PM (#4759780)
The revolutionary weight room is still the one that gets me. It was just so, so scientificky.
   11. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:09 PM (#4759781)
The Fangraphs comments section is also a fun read. There is an direct correlation between the number of downvotes and the veracity of each comment.
   12. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:09 PM (#4759782)
The "6th best organization" meme is the 1st best meme.

It had a great peak, but I don't know that it had the legs of the A-Rod/Centaur meme.
   13. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:14 PM (#4759786)
had the legs of the A-Rod/Centaur meme.

I see what you did there.
   14. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:16 PM (#4759787)
The Fangraphs comments section is also a fun read. There is an direct correlation between the number of downvotes and the veracity of each comment.

I wonder if some of the ardent defenders of that article ever go back and read their comments.
   15. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:19 PM (#4759789)
I still think it's funny that after ranking the Orioles in the middle of the pack for a couple years, he ranked them dead last before the 2012 season and said the previous ranking was a huge mistake.
   16. BDC Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:20 PM (#4759790)
I would rag on Seattle too, if they weren't 12½ games ahead of the Rangers :(
   17. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:21 PM (#4759791)
In fairness to Cameron, I don't think Bill James in his prime could have made that project seem un-dumb.
   18. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:26 PM (#4759799)
The 2010 Mariners are not a great team. It’s pretty easy to look at the roster and find problems – they lack offense, the back end of the rotation is a question mark, the closer has had one good major league season, etc… The upgrades on the roster pushed them into 83-85 win territory in terms of true talent level. Put them in the American League East, and they’d likely be fighting the Orioles for fourth place.


The Mariners have never won more than 75 games since this paragraph was written.
   19. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:28 PM (#4759802)
I would rag on Seattle too, if they weren't 12½ games ahead of the Rangers :(

I guess you'll just have to solace yourself with those AL pennants.
   20. DA Baracus Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:32 PM (#4759803)
The Fangraphs comments section is also a fun read. There is an direct correlation between the number of downvotes and the veracity of each comment.


We don't live in a perfect world, but the comment thread that starts with "The comments here turned out to be just as hilarious as I was anticipating they would be." is the stars aligning.
   21. Nasty Nate Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:38 PM (#4759809)
The Fangraphs comments section is also a fun read. There is an direct correlation between the number of downvotes and the veracity of each comment.


Haha awesome.
   22. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:39 PM (#4759810)
I know its beating a dead horse, but this is still fun to read.


What's funnier than Cameron's article is the reaction his sycophants (sockpuppets?) had in the comments section in the comments to any criticism- they just went nuts and basically accused comemnters of being a troll if they said that Seattle should have been ranked 12-15th rather than 6th.

12th-15th would have been reasonable in spring 2010, wrong in hindsight of course, but reasonable. But 6th? Pure fanboy delusion from start to finish.
   23. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:44 PM (#4759815)
What's funnier than Cameron's article is the reaction his sycophants (sockpuppets?) had in the comments section in the comments to any criticism- they just went nuts and basically accused comemnters of being a troll if they said that Seattle should have been ranked 12-15th rather than 6th.

Yes, that rose to the level of performance art. I'm pretty sure it was that discussion that got me banned from USSM.
   24. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:47 PM (#4759819)
This is a management team that turned a true-talent 68 win team from 2008 into a true-talent 83 win team in 2009. That is a simply staggering turnaround, and one I don’t expect we’ll see duplicated again for a while.

This comment is particularly funny. I haven't done a season-by-season analysis, but this kind of turnaround is pretty common in baseball. Hell, it's one of the things that makes MLB so much fun. The Tigers did it in 2006, the Rays in 2008, the Orioles in 2012,the Red Sox in 2013. The Reds have had several quick turnarounds (and collapses) in the last 20 years. If anything, gradual improvements are more unusual, which is why the whole concept of the success cycle is a little silly.
   25. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:52 PM (#4759821)
This comment is particularly funny. I haven't done a season-by-season analysis, but this kind of turnaround is pretty common in baseball. Hell, it's one of the things that makes MLB so much fun.


Well, there's that, but I also don't know where his numbers came from. The Mariners, per pythag, improved from 68 to 75 wins. Simply staggering!
   26. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:53 PM (#4759822)
Well, there's that, but I also don't know where his numbers came from. The Mariners, per pythag, improved from 68 to 75 wins. Simply staggering!

You forgot to adjust for the new weight room.
   27. Nasty Nate Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4759823)
I know its beating a dead horse, but this is still fun to read.
The ranking was followed up by 4 straight 4th-place finishes.

Does anyone know what the other top 10 organizations were in the list?
   28. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4759824)
This is a management team that turned a true-talent 68 win team from 2008 into a true-talent 83 win team in 2009. That is a simply staggering turnaround, and one I don’t expect we’ll see duplicated again for a while.


One (unexamined) assumption in the article and the comments thread was that the 2010 Mariners were an 82-85 win "true talent" team. Of course the 2009 team was 75-87 by Pythag, which was an improvement over 2008 (67-95 by pythag) but 2009's 3 best hitters were on the wrong side of 30, they brought in Kotchman to play 1b,and he was as bad as he'd been 2008-09, they brought in Chone Figgins, who hit exactly as poorly as he had 2 of the 3 previous years. The staff wasn't quite as good as 2009 (ERA+ of 100, midway between 2009's 110 & 2008's 90) but wasn't a trainwreck. Just eyeballing 2008-2009, I'd say that the 2009 team was a 70-75 win "true talent" team that got lucky and 2010 projected to be a 70-75 true talent team as well (minor offensive upgrades offset by some pitching regression- instead in 2010 the offense collapsed, the pitching regressed and the pythag gods stopped smiling and they lost 103 games
   29. DA Baracus Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:56 PM (#4759827)
Does anyone know what the other top 10 organizations were in the list?


Here.
   30. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:57 PM (#4759828)
And commence shitstorm from USSM lackeys who laud Dave with praise even when he says up is down. A ranking this high would seem to require success to be nearly guaranteed in the near future, I don’t see the prospect evidence to back that up. Perhaps in time, they have done a great job in fielding a team that is competitive while slashing payroll. They should be praised for finding cheap talent, but I feel that they have a ceiling with the ‘defense matters’ mantra, and will be looking to add offense soon.


This one has -17 votes. Dude understood the Mariners better than the Mariners did.
   31. madvillain Posted: July 29, 2014 at 03:57 PM (#4759829)
and will be looking to add offense soon.


...still looking...Morales...still looking.
   32. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:04 PM (#4759833)
re: 24

True-talent is such a misnomer for pythag. It still has the natural luck of the micro events, which is significant (random noise has a margin of error of +/- 14 wins, not a typo), and relatedly does not have any regression to the mean built in (a 68 win pyth team that is unchanged won't be projected for 68 games the next year but I'd guess more like 74ish).
   33. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:07 PM (#4759834)
To put the noise another way, each year, you'd expect on average one team to win 12 more games than its true talent, and one to win 12 fewer. 5 teams on average will exceed their true talent by 7+ wins and 5 will fall short by that amount. This even understates things, as there are macro events like injuries that aren't even included in that variance -- this is just assuming that all teams are constant ability wise throughout the season.
   34. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:09 PM (#4759836)
Never gets old:

I guess I should have nominated Cano in the most overrated prospect thread the other day. That he still gets talked up as some kind of top prospect (not pointing at John here, by the way) amazes me.

I’ve seen Cano play a lot, and I’m not even sure he’d be a productive Triple-A player. Let’s start with his defense; it’s brutal. He has terrible footwork and simply lacks any kind of instincts around the bag. There’s no way you want him playing up the middle. He might have the raw speed to not be awful in left field, but that’s about as kind as I can be regarding his glovework.

Offensively, he’s a fastball hitter. He sits dead red on every pitch and waits for a mistake. Any good breaking ball or offspeed pitch will have him out in front. He’s mostly a gap hitter, lacking the power to drive the ball consistently over the wall. To add insult to injury, he’s also a terrible baserunner.

In his prime, I think he could hit .280/.320/.400 while playing awful defense. Yipee.
   35. DKDC Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:11 PM (#4759839)
Re-reading the article, the tone isn’t nearly as bad as I remember it. If some random guy wrote the below, would anyone have batted an eyebrow?

“I know the facts on the ground don’t justify this ranking, but I just have a gut feeling about this front office and this team. They have some good, young, cost-controlled pieces, and the front office has added significantly to that stock in the last few years. I have a soft spot for teams that are well run, are improving rapidly, and have a long window of opportunity to compete. This ranking has high bust potential, but I’m rolling the dice because I believe strongly they have turned a corner.”

Of course, it was impossible for me or anyone here to read this article without thinking about Cameron’s history of homerism, overstating his case and displaying a lack of humility, and of course his loyal band of defenders made him even more annoying.

Who are those people, anyways? Do they still exist?
   36. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:16 PM (#4759846)
Re-reading the article, the tone isn’t nearly as bad as I remember it. If some random guy wrote the below, would anyone have batted an eyebrow?

“I know the facts on the ground don’t justify this ranking, but I just have a gut feeling about this front office and this team. They have some good, young, cost-controlled pieces, and the front office has added significantly to that stock in the last few years. I have a soft spot for teams that are well run, are improving rapidly, and have a long window of opportunity to compete. This ranking has high bust potential, but I’m rolling the dice because I believe strongly they have turned a corner.”

Of course, it was impossible for me or anyone here to read this article without thinking about Cameron’s history of homerism, overstating his case and displaying a lack of humility, and of course his loyal band of defenders made him even more annoyinh.

Who are those people, anyways? Do they still exist?


The problem is, he doesn't say nearly that. This,

The Seattle front office knows how to evaluate talent, and they know how to value talent. Organizations that do both things well, and are given a payroll of $100 million to boot, win a lot of baseball games.

I knew putting the Mariners at #6 would generate a significant amount of backlash and claims of bias. But, in my estimation, when you actually look at their chances of winning in 2010, the group of young talent they can build around going forward, the quality of the decision making in the front office, and their financial resources, this is where they belong. After years of being a joke, the Mariners have made one of the most impressive turnarounds in recent history.


evinces a tremendous amount of smug certitude. He doesn't say he a feeling that the front office is great and that they're going to turn it around, he states it as accomplished fact.

Also, you can't write that article about your favorite team.

   37. A Fatty Cow That Need Two Seats Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:23 PM (#4759852)
Thanks, Guys

It’s no secret that a Certain Other Baseball Site Dave Writes For is doing a major series right now that is generating a lot of, uh, discussion. (yeah, let’s call it that)

So, I just wanted to say, on behalf of all of the USSM crew:

Thanks to all of our regular commenters. Sometimes we take you for granted, and it takes something like watching a total trainwreck somewhere else to really make us appreciate what a good overall community we’ve managed to collect here at USSM.


To clarify one thing:

My point in making this post wasn’t to bring the comment silliness over here. That is what it is, and I’m hoping it can stay where it belongs.

It was to make sure that you guys know that, even if we occasionally delete your comments and/or make fun of you, overall the USSM crew really appreciates that the Mariners blogosphere has some of the best educated and level-headed fans anywhere.

We’re lucky to have the audience we have.


More than anything, thanks to you guys. It’s so refreshing to follow a blog that values an educated fan base and proper communication among it. But most importantly, I appreciate how much the crew has taught me about assessing baseball talent, the value of sabermetrics, and sports management in general. To be honest, I heavily underestimated the value of defense before becoming an avid follower of USSM. USSM has made my Mariner fanaticism a more educated and even a more worthwhile experience.

Kudos to the crew for creating what has become a necessary utility for many Mariner fans.


Right back at’cha, Jeff.

The awesomeness of this site is like the importance of Elvis Presley or James Brown to contemporary music- virtually impossible to overstate.

Coming to and commenting on this site is one of my little pleasures in life, I know that.

I’m just lucky that I get this much rational thought on my favorite team from somewhere…and don’t have to deal with single-brain-cell-operative thinking along the lines of “mariners sux, they should trade for puhols and holiday and then theyll be good”type of fare when I’m here.
   38. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:36 PM (#4759871)
Does anyone know what the other top 10 organizations were in the list?
Here.


How did the Twins get ranked so high (#5)? Was everyone in Joe Mauer-contract euphoria? I don't really remembering them having a ton of talent at that time. They had Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, Span, Hardy and some cromulent pitchers, but their prospect list was meh - Ben Revere, Miguel Sano, Aaron Hicks, Kyle Gibson, Wilson Ramos. They would win 94 games that year, but have lost 90+ every year since and are on pace for the same this year.

Its funny to see the Giants at #23 now that they've won two championships.

The good: Tim Lincecum, Buster Posey, Pablo Sandoval, and Matt Cain is a pretty sweet quartet to build around. Very few teams have four good young players that can stack up next to that group.

The bad: So much of the payroll is tied up in mediocre veterans that the team lacks the volume of good players it needs to surround that group in order to build a quality team. 47 percent of their 2010 payroll is tied up in Barry Zito, Aaron Rowand, and Edgar Renteria. That hurts. With Lincecum getting good so quickly, he’s no longer cheap, so there just isn’t much money to go around, and that leads to things like Aubrey Huff, Starting First Baseman.


He's actually right about that, but Huff ended up posting a 5.7 WAR for the 2010 World Champs (not that anyone would have seen that coming). But it seems kinda silly to rank a team that low when they have a great nucleus and obviously have the resources to have a pretty big payroll.
   39. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:37 PM (#4759873)
The awesomeness of this site is like the importance of Elvis Presley or James Brown to contemporary music- virtually impossible to overstate.

Since the dawn of time, man has tried to quantify how awesome the USSM community is...


Can somebody find the comments that got snapper booted? Or did they get the Joseph Stalin Memorial Eraser?
   40. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:46 PM (#4759879)
Can somebody find the comments that got snapper booted? Or did they get the Joseph Stalin Memorial Eraser?

I can't find my USSM comments mocking the #6 org, but I did find one mocking his plan to trade bits of string for Joey Votto and Yasmani Grandal a year later.

So, I'm guessing it was that thread that did it, not #6 Org.
   41. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:52 PM (#4759888)

I can't find my USSM comments mocking the #6 org, but I did find one mocking his plan to trade bits of string for Joey Votto and Yasmani Grandal a year later.


Ooh, that's a good one too.

Trade RHP Michael Pineda, RHP Brandon League, OF Greg Halman, 3B Chone Figgins (with Seattle absorbing $16 of remaining $17 million on Figgins’ contract), and SS Carlos Triunfel to Cincinnati for 1B Joey Votto and C Yasmani Grandal.....

The big move is obviously the Votto acquisition. The team pays a high price by surrendering Pineda+ to get him, but when you’re trying ta acquire MVP-caliber talent, you have to put a knockout package on the table.
   42. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:13 PM (#4759909)
In that thread even the echo chamber mostly agrees that Cameron is nuts.
   43. bookbook Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:30 PM (#4759917)
Pineda had an awfully nice rookie year... :-)
   44. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:41 PM (#4759928)
He had Washington at #28. They had a bad year in 2010 but then got a lot better and stayed a lot better since then.
   45. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:47 PM (#4759931)

He had Washington at #28. They had a bad year in 2010 but then got a lot better and stayed a lot better since then.


There just isn’t enough talent in the Nationals organization to contend any time soon. They need to be stockpiling assets that they control for multiple years at below market rates, and guys like Dunn and Willingham don’t fit the criteria.


The Nats lost 93 games that year, were almost .500 the next year, and won 98 the next. Its not like they didn't know Washington wouldn't have Strasburg and Harper either, they just drafted Strasburg, and had the #1 pick for 2010, and everyone knew who they were taking.

This does shows just how hard it is to project anything in baseball four years out - a lot can change quickly in this game.
   46. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 06:08 PM (#4759945)
Furthermore the Nationals should have held on to Willingham. Might very well have kept them from signing Werth that offseason plus Willingham would have been a great FA deal for them.
   47. zonk Posted: July 29, 2014 at 06:09 PM (#4759948)
#6 may have been the apex or perhaps even the point where the fonz jumps over the shark -

But my - at this point, admittedly vague recollection is that Jack Z was getting plenty of other friendly ink in other saber circles, too.

Just googling around a few minutes, he did at least say the things that certain quarters find encouraging (and certain other circles go all grumble grumble over).

It's amazing to me that he still has a job - I guess the M's are very much in the wildcard hunt.

Jack seems to be a master of selling himself...
   48. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 06:18 PM (#4759953)
I got into a huge argument with someone over the Bradley-Silva trade. I thought it was a terrible and pointless trade for Jack and one that would unneccessarily put him over the fire. At the time I think one of the defenses for the trade was that Jack Z was smart and he knew what he was doing.
   49. cardsfanboy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 06:28 PM (#4759967)
The BBTF thread on that was gold as well.


Can't seem to be able to locate that. :(.


   50. RJ in TO Posted: July 29, 2014 at 06:42 PM (#4759980)
Can't seem to be able to locate that. :(.


Here's the Bradley trade thread. And the TO thread on the trade.
   51. cardsfanboy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 06:46 PM (#4759984)
How did the Twins get ranked so high (#5)? Was everyone in Joe Mauer-contract euphoria? I don't really remembering them having a ton of talent at that time. They had Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, Span, Hardy and some cromulent pitchers, but their prospect list was meh - Ben Revere, Miguel Sano, Aaron Hicks, Kyle Gibson, Wilson Ramos. They would win 94 games that year, but have lost 90+ every year since and are on pace for the same this year.

Its funny to see the Giants at #23 now that they've won two championships.


It's now been 4.5 seasons since that article was written, and it's perfectly legit to backwards look and see how off or on he was.

The Giants, the 23rd organization, won the world series the year of the article, and two years later.405-349, .537 win%, 2 division titles, and 3(out of 5--counting this year to date) +.500 record. (in fairness, the Giants had posted losing records 4 of the 5 previous seasons...but the 2009 season they had a winning percentage of .533, so there was some evidence they were on the rise)


The Oakland A's were ranked 19th, 410-343, .544 win%. No WS, 3 1st place(including this year) and 4 .500 or better seasons. They had 3 consecutive losing seasons before the article was written, I can understand a little pessimism.


Detroit Tigers were ranked 21st, 414-336, .552 win%. 4 consecutive first place(including this year) and a.500 finish. But again in his defense 3 losing seasons prior to the article.

(Can also say the same thing about Cincinatti/Washingon decent since the article but before the article not really much to support a turn around)

Those are the teams that he really missed with negative rankings.

Let's credit him with the one positive rating that was a surprise and he more or less got right(whether his reasoning was correct or not) which is the Texas Rangers. He ranked them 4th overall, they went to two world series, and one playoff, and since this exercise was about what they would do in the next three or four years, that is a pretty good showing.

The problem is that the rest of his top ten was obvious(Yankees, Red Sox and Rays at 1-2-3 and Braves at 8) or just flat out wrong (Twins at 5, Mariners at 6, Rockies at 7,---From that group, he gets one first place finish/one season above .500 for the Twins, 4 out of 5 losing seasons from Seattle...current season is the only one above .500, but I imagine by the time they get done getting beat by the A's and Angels that won't be the case; Colorado posted one winning season, in 2010--so from that group, 15 seasons total, 3 winning seasons-If Seattle finishes with .500 or better this year.) I left the Cardinals and the Phillies off of the list because I'm not sure there was anything wrong with those picks based upon the evidence on hand along with track recent track record, sure the Cardinals probably should have been up just because of the several teams that he promoted above where they probably belonged, but at the time, it wasn't unreasonable to put the Cardinals behind Yankees/Red Sox/Rays/Braves/Phillies. And yes the Phillies were getting old even then, but back to back world series appearances gives you some faith in the front office going forward.

add in that the top 6 teams were AL teams, it was pretty much destined to look bad just because he was stacking the deck against his odds of being right.


Basically he was trying to predict which "down teams" would be the ones to bounce to being good versus which would be bad, and he missed on both sides of the equation.(along with his obvious homer pick or maybe it was baitclick)
   52. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: July 29, 2014 at 06:55 PM (#4759993)
Hey, for once I called it correctly: "Sure, and getting Bradley (while ridding themselves of Silva) is a good risk to take in this situation. My point is just that there's a good chance that this could turn out pretty badly."
   53. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 29, 2014 at 07:10 PM (#4759999)
Detroit Tigers were ranked 21st, 414-336, .552 win%. 4 consecutive first place(including this year) and a.500 finish. But again in his defense 3 losing seasons prior to the article.


Huh?
   54. cardsfanboy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 07:39 PM (#4760006)
Huh?


He had the Tigers ranked 21st, (this was prior to 2010 season) In the five seasons(including the current one) the Tigers have had 4 first place finishes(2014/2013/2012/2011)(including this year) and another season over .500(2010).

In his defense,(I was wrong) the Tigers had two losing(not three) prior to the article(2009/2008)
   55. Sonic Youk Posted: July 29, 2014 at 07:55 PM (#4760012)
this one is my favorite uss mariner thread:

http://www.ussmariner.com/2005/12/29/papelbon-and-lester/
   56. madvillain Posted: July 29, 2014 at 08:04 PM (#4760017)
this one is my favorite uss mariner thread:


The problem with Cameron, like a lot of successful salesman (and that's what he is imo) is that they totally, must, 100% at all times convince both themselves and the audience that the product they are hawking is the absolute best, end all be all. In this case Cameron is selling analysis, and there is no room for nuance.

Cameron also knows that you will never go broke telling people exactly what they want to here.

edit: to be fair to Dave, he's mellowed out a bit now that he's fairly established and he does at times bring fresh insight. That said, he still is annoyingly brash for a guy in the prediction business with quite a few bad ones.
   57. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 29, 2014 at 08:57 PM (#4760051)
He had the Tigers ranked 21st, (this was prior to 2010 season) In the five seasons(including the current one) the Tigers have had 4 first place finishes(2014/2013/2012/2011)(including this year) and another season over .500(2010).


I get that. You said they had three losing seasons prior to that. They had one (unless you go back before 2006, in which case they had 12 straight).
   58. cardsfanboy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 10:02 PM (#4760082)
I get that. You said they had three losing seasons prior to that. They had one (unless you go back before 2006, in which case they had 12 straight).


Yep I screwed that up. Was just quickly looking and had multiple windows open, may have looked at the wrong team or just overlooked it completely.
   59. Spahn Insane Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:58 AM (#4760178)
Heh. I did not exactly cover myself in glory with my analyses in the Bradley trade thread, as it turned out...

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogMLB creates pace of game committee
(63 - 12:22am, Sep 23)
Last: greenback calls it soccer

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-22-2014
(120 - 12:21am, Sep 23)
Last: boteman is not here 'til October

NewsblogMLB: Braves fire GM Frank Wren; John Hart to take over interim position
(137 - 12:17am, Sep 23)
Last: AJMcCringleberry

NewsblogMets near extension with GM Alderson
(11 - 12:17am, Sep 23)
Last: billyshears

NewsblogRays missing out shows how tough it is to consistently reach playoffs
(16 - 12:08am, Sep 23)
Last: Curse of the Andino

NewsblogHBT: Talking head says Jeter is “a fraud” and “you are all suckers”
(215 - 12:01am, Sep 23)
Last: Squash

NewsblogChad | Have a heart! Root for the Royals
(31 - 11:53pm, Sep 22)
Last: cardsfanboy

Newsblog10 teams that will soon face Jeter-like consquences with stars
(18 - 11:48pm, Sep 22)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8055 - 11:35pm, Sep 22)
Last: Kurt

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(364 - 11:31pm, Sep 22)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

NewsblogESPN (Crasnick): Free-agent missteps led to demise of Atlanta’s Frank Wren
(11 - 10:58pm, Sep 22)
Last: Jeff Francoeur's OPS

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(3449 - 10:33pm, Sep 22)
Last: The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB)

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(305 - 10:21pm, Sep 22)
Last: Der-K and the statistical werewolves.

NewsblogJeter Denies Gift Basket Rumors
(21 - 10:08pm, Sep 22)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogGene Collier: No shame in staying home for Pirates
(3 - 8:07pm, Sep 22)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.6455 seconds
53 querie(s) executed