Author Topic: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread  (Read 71572 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MorseTheHorse

  • Posts: 2058
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2975: December 19, 2012, 01:30:34 PM »
Pitching can mask a lot of ills.  If we see the injuries in the rotation equivalent to what we saw in the lineup last year, we won't be repeating.  It's not really an apples to apples comparison.

I don't' see why we can't compare the impact of an injury to a pitcher to the impact of an injury to a position player.  8 position players had a WAR over 7 last year.  Verlander had the best WAR for a pitcher at 6.8.  Why are pitchers so much more important? 

Now I'm getting curious if there is a metric out there that tries to measure how many wins are lost to injury, or poor performance due to injury, each year by every team.  Make a couple assumptions about performance and it shouldn't be too hard to do this...

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 14681
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2976: December 19, 2012, 01:33:43 PM »
I don't' see why we can't compare the impact of an injury to a pitcher to the impact of an injury to a position player.  8 position players had a WAR over 7 last year.  Verlander had the best WAR for a pitcher at 6.8.  Why are pitchers so much more important? 

Now I'm getting curious if there is a metric out there that tries to measure how many wins are lost to injury, or poor performance due to injury, each year by every team.  Make a couple assumptions about performance and it shouldn't be too hard to do this...

position player goes down, lombo or moore start, depending on the player. Gio goes down dukes is starting- I thin the drop off in the former is less than the latter

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 17981
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2977: December 19, 2012, 01:40:14 PM »
I don't' see why we can't compare the impact of an injury to a pitcher to the impact of an injury to a position player.  8 position players had a WAR over 7 last year.  Verlander had the best WAR for a pitcher at 6.8.  Why are pitchers so much more important? 
Because a good pitcher on a bad team can make them a good team for a night, or in the case of a a great rotation, almost every night.  In the early to mid part of the season, you could make a decent argument that the Nats weren't very good offensively, you could make a better than decent one, actually.  Even bad teams are going to put up two to three runs on most nights.  If you've got the pitching at the level of what the Nats got the first half of the season where they were only giving up a couple of runs a game, then you're going to keep yourself in every game, even with a bad offense and the Nats offense was just good enough to get one more than the other guy, but that was because their pitching was very good to dominant nearly every night.  Now, if you take out Gio and JZimm for, say a month each, and replace them, even with Lannan, who's serviceable and to good with an occasional outstanding night, you're going to see guys who give up three to five runs a game.  That wouldn't have been good enough in May and June.  Once everyone got back and was healthy again, you saw the offense substantially improve and that was when you saw the Nats pull away.  If you've got the rotation the Nats have put together and they stay healthy, that can mask a lot of the issues the offense went through early in the year.  That wouldn't have been the case, at least not night in and night out if it was the other way around.

Offline nobleisthyname

  • Posts: 2103
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2978: December 19, 2012, 02:04:22 PM »
Because a good pitcher on a bad team can make them a good team for a night, or in the case of a a great rotation, almost every night.  In the early to mid part of the season, you could make a decent argument that the Nats weren't very good offensively, you could make a better than decent one, actually.  Even bad teams are going to put up two to three runs on most nights.  If you've got the pitching at the level of what the Nats got the first half of the season where they were only giving up a couple of runs a game, then you're going to keep yourself in every game, even with a bad offense and the Nats offense was just good enough to get one more than the other guy, but that was because their pitching was very good to dominant nearly every night.  Now, if you take out Gio and JZimm for, say a month each, and replace them, even with Lannan, who's serviceable and to good with an occasional outstanding night, you're going to see guys who give up three to five runs a game.  That wouldn't have been good enough in May and June.  Once everyone got back and was healthy again, you saw the offense substantially improve and that was when you saw the Nats pull away.  If you've got the rotation the Nats have put together and they stay healthy, that can mask a lot of the issues the offense went through early in the year.  That wouldn't have been the case, at least not night in and night out if it was the other way around.

You're right. I would choose a kickass and healthy rotation over a kickass and healthy lineup simply because the former is harder to replace. But it's not like we need to go into next season expecting the injury bug to simply tradeoff. It would be unreasonable to expect several of our top starters to miss multiple months to injury. I don't expect all five starters to make 30 starts next year but I'm not expecting another extreme either.

Offline welch

  • Posts: 8365
  • Griff says "Call young Mr. Souza"
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2979: December 19, 2012, 03:39:11 PM »
You're right. I would choose a kickass and healthy rotation over a kickass and healthy lineup simply because the former is harder to replace. But it's not like we need to go into next season expecting the injury bug to simply tradeoff. It would be unreasonable to expect several of our top starters to miss multiple months to injury. I don't expect all five starters to make 30 starts next year but I'm not expecting another extreme either.

I do remember Shawn Hill and John Patterson...those Nats teams were going to be right up at .500 or above, except...

I wish the Nats still had Lannan as number 6 starter...although maybe Lannan would rather play with the Phillies at $2.5M than shuffle around SDyracuse for $5M. Interesting question...

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 22799
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2980: December 19, 2012, 08:26:17 PM »
I do remember Shawn Hill and John Patterson...those Nats teams were going to be right up at .500 or above, except...

I wish the Nats still had Lannan as number 6 starter...although maybe Lannan would rather play with the Phillies at $2.5M than shuffle around SDyracuse for $5M. Interesting question...

Honestly, if I made 5 million last year, I'd rather play every day for less. Especially if that "less" still makes me a millionare, ya know?

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 17981
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2981: December 19, 2012, 08:31:31 PM »
Everything I've ever heard from professional baseball players is that there's nothing like playing at the big league level.  I'd imagine Lannan would take less money for a full year in the bigs, especially if he's been smart with it.

Offline MorseTheHorse

  • Posts: 2058
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2982: December 19, 2012, 09:08:04 PM »
You're right. I would choose a kickass and healthy rotation over a kickass and healthy lineup simply because the former is harder to replace. But it's not like we need to go into next season expecting the injury bug to simply tradeoff. It would be unreasonable to expect several of our top starters to miss multiple months to injury. I don't expect all five starters to make 30 starts next year but I'm not expecting another extreme either.

I'm surprised by the start of this post from this poster, since you seem to be one of the more saber-oriented guys around here and WAR for pitchers and position players seem fairly similar.  So, I'm curious what you mean by pitchers being harder to replace.  Are you talking specifically about the 2013 Nats?

Offline nobleisthyname

  • Posts: 2103
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2983: December 20, 2012, 12:18:27 AM »
I'm surprised by the start of this post from this poster, since you seem to be one of the more saber-oriented guys around here and WAR for pitchers and position players seem fairly similar.  So, I'm curious what you mean by pitchers being harder to replace.  Are you talking specifically about the 2013 Nats?

Mostly because pitchers are more injury prone and volatile in general (though I may be mindfacting that second part).

Online NJ Ave

  • Posts: 1139
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2984: December 20, 2012, 09:58:22 AM »
Replacement level is completely subjective by team. Danny Espinosa is a 3-4 win player over a theoretical player that we could call up from AAA. He is not a 3-4 win player over Nats replacement level, since Lombardozzi is probably a 2-win player and would be his replacement.

Here's my list of worst injury replacements on the Nats:

Zimmerman to Chad Tracy
Strasburg to 6th SP
Gio to 6th SP
Harper to Moore
Zimmermann to 6th SP
Desmond to Lombardozzi (Espinosa stays in the lineup at SS and Lombardozzi replaces Desmond in lineup)



Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2985: December 20, 2012, 10:04:22 AM »
Was it Tracy or Lombo that played 3B last year when Zim was hurt?

Online NJ Ave

  • Posts: 1139
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2986: December 20, 2012, 10:13:01 AM »
Lombo played 10 games there, Tracy 6, however, Lombo played 3B in April, and Tracy played 4 games there in September.

Neither is a good option, however. Lombardozzi doesn't have the arm or the bat for 3B.

Online NJ Ave

  • Posts: 1139
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2987: December 20, 2012, 10:18:53 AM »
It would be interesting if the Nats could shift Desmond or Espy to 3B when/if Zimmerman goes down, however, so they can put Lombardozzi in at 2B. But for some reason teams besides the Rays don't do that kind of thing.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2988: December 20, 2012, 12:03:56 PM »
It might be Rendon getting called up if Zim goes down.

Offline welch

  • Posts: 8365
  • Griff says "Call young Mr. Souza"
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2989: December 20, 2012, 12:36:39 PM »
Was it Tracy or Lombo that played 3B last year when Zim was hurt?

Both, as mentioned above. I think Tracy is more of a natural 3B...seems to have the stronger arm. Lombo has much more range.

Offline Mr Clean

  • Posts: 1896
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2990: December 20, 2012, 05:32:30 PM »
What about either Hanrahan or Brian Wilson? 

Online Baseball is Life

  • Posts: 10442
  • Proud member of the Sunshine Squad.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2991: December 20, 2012, 05:48:42 PM »
Both, as mentioned above. I think Tracy is more of a natural 3B...seems to have the stronger arm. Lombo has much more range.

Lombo's arm seems to be way below average. But I'd like to see him more before I can say for sure. Anyone else see that?

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 6181
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2992: December 20, 2012, 06:00:59 PM »
What about either Hanrahan or Brian Wilson? 

pretty sure the bucs want a starter for hanrahan and we really don't have the SP depth to give any more up.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 40374
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2993: December 20, 2012, 06:27:58 PM »
Speaking of Brian Wilson...

http://bit.ly/WsVOG7

Offline madj55

  • Posts: 4764
  • October.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2994: December 20, 2012, 07:45:13 PM »
Danny needs to shave that crap

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 6181
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2995: December 20, 2012, 07:48:55 PM »
Speaking of Brian Wilson...

http://bit.ly/WsVOG7


it makes me like him more.  He should keep it until his average tops .270

Offline welch

  • Posts: 8365
  • Griff says "Call young Mr. Souza"
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2996: December 20, 2012, 08:24:32 PM »
Lombo's arm seems to be way below average. But I'd like to see him more before I can say for sure. Anyone else see that?

Can't tell. Lombo seems to have a weak arm for an OF or 3B, but he seems about normal for a 2B or SS. When comparing, need to remember that Desmond and Espinosa have unusually strong arms.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 17981
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2997: December 20, 2012, 08:32:47 PM »
Danny needs to shave that crap
No way, dude.  That thing rocks.  Needs to keep at least until opening day.

Online varoadking

  • Posts: 5408
  • King of Goodness
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2998: December 20, 2012, 08:36:59 PM »
He should keep it until his average tops .270

He'd never shave again...

Offline PC

  • Posts: 40374
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2999: December 20, 2012, 08:42:09 PM »
Ian Desmond didn't cut his hair or shave before spring training last year.  I remember him distinctly reporting to camp very unshaven with very uncut hair.

http://www.natsenquirer.com/2012/02/drew-storen-has-longish-hair-now.html