Heyman said he feels the Braves, Giants and Mets will compete for Holliday, though he ‘wouldn’t be shocked to see him go to the Yankees, Red Sox or Cardinals.’
In the end, he believes Holliday will stay in National League.
Heyman on MetsBlog.
I didn't know we had money to spend on a Boarass client.
over 2 years ago
GoBravesNY
41 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Lol…I had the same thought.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Oct 20, 2009 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions
eh, i dont think so
if we either trade DLowe for nothing but prospects or straight up DFA him ala Alex Rios, we would have the money. Not to mention there’s a good chance either KJ or Church will be non-tendered (I’d prefer Church, b/c BJones basically gives us the same thing for 2 or 3MM less).
I would LOVE to signHolliday, but for the money he’ll require, im not sure it would be the best move to benefit the entire team.
President of Marteeeny's Weeenies: The Official Fan Club for Martin Prado.
WE WANT PRADO AT 2B IN 2010!
by Scott Coleman on Oct 20, 2009 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions
forget the money
that gives us a heck of a logjam in our OF.
Holliday, McLouth, Diaz, Heyward, and Schafer will all be able to play at some point next season. Sure we could trade McLouth and use Diaz as a 4th OF’er. i would rather save money and use Diaz, Schafer and Heyward and just trade McLouth when Schafer is ready.
We honestly need to be signing a closer FIRST. no matter how good our offense is we cant have a Brad Lidge for our closer
by drumzalicious on Oct 21, 2009 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I disagree. We can work out the pitching somehow, the lack of competent offense has been a year in and year out problem. If you have that OF logjam you can work it out with trades for pitching.
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
Agreed...
sign Holliday, and I assume probably Diaz (unless you give him right until Heyward in June), and certainly one of Schafer/McLouth become trade bat, along with possibly a starter to bring back a closer, 1B, or batch of prospects.
Why does every1 wanna trade McLouth?
MATT DIAZ IS THE F**K*NG MAN.
They made me change my signature...
I don't.
If I were the Braves, I’d have an opening day OF of Diaz/McLouth/FA OF or a guy we bring in via trade. In June, after he qualifies as a super-2 player, call Heyward up and stick him in RF, moving the FA OF/Guy we bring in via trade into LF.
I’d let Schafer play at least half the season in AAA to get some needed AB’s and then call him up later in the season in June. If he’s healthy and hits well in AAA, I’d let him play a few games and see how he does. If he hits well (like he did in April of 2009), then we could consider dealing McLouth to add some prospects.
This is JMO, tho. If Heyward gets healthy and starts tearing up the AFL and then has a crazy spring training in 2010, I’d probably change my mind and let him start in RF.
President of Marteeeny's Weeenies: The Official Fan Club for Martin Prado.
WE WANT PRADO AT 2B IN 2010!
by Scott Coleman on Oct 22, 2009 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Because he's highly overrated
His defense is atrocious (and I swear to God if anyone tries to prove this statement wrong by mentioning he won a Gold Glove I shall unleash unholy vengeance upon you the likes of which this world has never seen, that award means nothing) He has moderate speed, but Bobby won’t use it so that’s moot. He has moderate power, but we need big sticks in the outfield since our infield doesn’t really have them (especially if we’re dumb enough to let LaRoche walk). His on-base skills are just decent, not great, and he is no leadoff man, though everyone seems to think that he is.
It boils down to this- we know right field is Heyward’s, probably in short order. Schafer is a monumental defensive upgrade in center, and what we lose in power between him an McLouth we will supposedly make up for in average and OBP (though I will admit to Schafer being a fairly unproven commodity, thus mucking up any attempted analysis of the two), in left field we will either have Caveman or, preferably, that’s where we’ll stick this phantom “big bat” we’re going to go out and get this offseason. That leaves no room or McLouth, but he’s still under cheap team control for I believe another 3 seasons, which will make him a very attractive trade chip to some other club and we can probably recoup the prospects we gave up for him, or better yet find another Major League piece like a reliever, if we move him.
Atrocious!?!?!?
Have you watched this guy. His reads are amazing. Great closing speed. Easily a top 5 defensive OF in the NL. I don’t care what stat u throw at me. I have seen this guy, he is amazing.
MATT DIAZ IS THE F**K*NG MAN.
They made me change my signature...
And by the way.
I don’t like McLouth Leading off either.
MATT DIAZ IS THE F**K*NG MAN.
They made me change my signature...
Haha McLouth had a positive UZR/150 in CF this season, whereas Schafer was close to -7.5 iirc
by McCann's the Man on Oct 22, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions
McLouth was also the worst major league centerfielder in 2008 by the plus/minus system, to the tune of -40. The 09 figures are not out yet, but I doubt he’s gone from bottom-of-the-pile to defensive asset in a season.
Link: http://www.billjamesonline.net/fieldingbible/charts/leaders2-08.gif
See, this is where statistics lose me.
There is no way that Nate Mc Louth is the worst fielding CF in baseball.
MATT DIAZ IS THE F**K*NG MAN.
They made me change my signature...
Why?
Because you don’t want him to be?
I don’t think he is the worst, fundamentally. But his performance in 2008 wasn’t just bad, it was the worst in the game.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
yeah his 08 was bad no doubt but to only consider 08 is too small of a sample size to make that big a generalization. as i said uzr had him as a plus in 09
by McCann's the Man on Oct 23, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
These fielding stats are often misinterpreted. 1-year isn’t a big enough sample size to draw any conclusions. You need a 3-year sample to get a true sense of how valuable a player is on defense.
When you see a -37 for McLouth in ’08, all that is doing is reporting what happened. We can see how good he was using a 1-year sample. But to see how good he truly is or will be, we need a larger sample size.
McLouth is probably worth -10 to -15 runs in center field. Not -37 and certainly not above-average. Like always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
the rating isn't "what happened"
Its debatable whether a 3 year sample is enough and in fact there is no evidence that the results correlate well to reality at all regardless of the amount of data you accumulate.
the rating isn’t “what happened”
Yes it is. That’s what statistics do. They report what happened.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
Data are pieces of information. The quality and veracity of that information isn’t a mirror of reality.
So you're questioning the quality of the of the theory?
It’s pretty clear to me that +/- mirrors reality. They look at video from every single play and determine whether or not the average player would’ve made it. I don’t see how that’s debatable.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
Right there you pointed out several debatable things. Who are “they”? How does “their” definition of an “average player” compare to others? These are subjective, not objective things.
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
They is John Dewan
It’s not just he looks at it and says, “oh, an average player makes that play”. Using intense video studies with hitF/X, factoring in things like speed of ball, angle, spin, etc.. It’s scientific and quantitative, not qualitative and subjective.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
So is it one guy looking at every play for every game for a whole season? Cause otherwise, you’re running into questions about judgement. From the descriptions you guys are giving, it sounds subjective.
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
Nothing subjective about it
It’s scientific. And as far as your quibble with him judging average, it’s a definition. If you add up all the +/- from each position (every player in the game, that is), you come up with 0.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
Do you understand what subjective means?...
It’s one guy, watching a play, and saying whether or not an “average” player would have made that play? Yeah, sure sounds pretty “scientific”.
No, that's not what happens.
They gather data from the video using hit f/x. Not looks at the plays and say, “that’s an above-average play”.
My book, The Fielding Bible, goes into great length (ad nauseum to some) describing the new fielding system we developed at Baseball Info Solutions, the Plus/Minus System. Video Scouts at BIS review video of every play of every major league game and record detailed information on each play, such as the location of each batted ball, the speed, the type of hit, etc. Using this in-depth data, we’re able to figure out how each player compares to his peers at his position. How often does Derek Jeter field that softly batted ball located 20 feet to the right of the normal shortstop position, for example, compared to all other major league shortstops?
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
So it goes by things like...
“normal SS position”, not where the guy is actually standing on that particular play?
I get the data factor, but in the words of Homer Simpson, “people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forfty percent of all people know that.”
by Mr. Sanchez on Oct 26, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions
The way Sanchez is trying so hard to discredit the process...
this argument could end up going all the way down to the quantum measurement argument. “Jus the fact that you’re trying to measure his performance affects said performance and thus renders your original intent to measure his performance moot.” The plus/minus system is widely respected and is as close as you can possibly get to making an objective, scientific analysis of defensive performance without becoming psychic and climbing into every player’s head at the moment they make every play. Good luck with that.
actually the correlation with multiple seasons of data is pretty high
by McCann's the Man on Oct 24, 2009 7:51 PM EDT up reply actions
atrocious? Come on.
I think you are getting a little carried away. sure, he may not be a gold glover, he may not even be above average, but he isnt terrible.
hohohhohohoh its the offseason, time to rosterbate in public places
diaz 4th OF, Schafer in AAA for 2010, and then in the offseason trade either Schafer or McLouth depending on performance in 2010. Not saying we have the means to get Holliday but it’s a pretty simple solution
by McCann's the Man on Oct 21, 2009 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Schafer did pretty well before the wrist injury...
why do people think he goes back to AAA? Maybe for a month or so if he struggles in the spring, but if the club was willing to give him CF on opening day last year, why would they want to send him back down more (unless he hasn’t healed or really struggles in the spring)?
because we have Nate McLouth now. Last year, if was pretty much Schafer or bust. No one wanted Gregor Blanco or Anderson (cant recall his first name at the moment) in CF. That isn’t the case in 2010. I’d like to see Jordan get some extra seasoning in AAA, especially since he’s not gonna be playing in any fall leagues.
President of Marteeeny's Weeenies: The Official Fan Club for Martin Prado.
WE WANT PRADO AT 2B IN 2010!
by Scott Coleman on Oct 22, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree
He just hasn’t played enough over the past two seasons between the wrist injury and the HGH suspension. He’s basically gotten a full season of PA’s in 2 years. Hard to stay sharp that way. But if he starts at AAA and scouts/numbers suggest he can be an impact player in the bigs right now, please call him up!
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
in a perfect world...well, to me anyways
We’d start out with Diaz/McLouth/and a power hitting FA/traded for OF. Schafer and Heyward would rake in AAA for 1/2 a year and both would be called up in June. the power hitting OF we added would shift over to LF, Schafer would move into CF and Heyward would become our new RF. We would then deal McLouth for some infield prospects, cause lord knows we need em. MattyD then becomes the best 4th OF in baseball and would start every couple days whenever we faced a tough lefty.
President of Marteeeny's Weeenies: The Official Fan Club for Martin Prado.
WE WANT PRADO AT 2B IN 2010!
by Scott Coleman on Oct 23, 2009 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions
If the Braves DFA and release Lowe, they’re still responsible for his entire salary minus the pro-rated portion of the league minimum (and that’s only if another team signs him). The Rios situation was different. He was claimed off of trade waivers. The kind of waivers that happen exclusively from August 1 to August 31 (well, through the end of the world series, but for all practical purposes through August 31).
If a player clears trade waivers he can be traded after the July 31 non-waiver trade deadline. If he’s claimed off waivers the team that placed him on waivers has three options:
1) Give him away. Like Rios. The claiming team is responsible for the entire contract and the team that placed him on waivers receives nothing in return.
2) Pull him back. They can’t be placed on trade waivers again for another year if they’re pulled back, so they can’t be traded until the end of the world series. This is the most common option. Frequently teams will place 60+% of their team on trade waivers to gauge interest (not necessarily for the current trading period) and pull them back.
3) Work out a trade with the claiming team.
Major League Baseball contracts are all guaranteed. Unless the Braves trade Lowe or he’s claimed off of waivers, they’re still responsible for the contract.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
Heyman is an asshat
This man has no clue what he’s talking about. He’s the guy that peddled the bogus rumor that the Mets turned down an offer of four spare parts for Halladay this summer, and tried to convince everybody he was serious even after everybody else in the industry was quick to point out that it never happened.
There’s no way we’re getting Holliday, don’t anybody even get your hopes up. In the physical universe we occupy, it ain’t gonna happen. Heyman is only trying to use basic logic to predict who would go after Holliday if all things were created equal- “who really needs outfield help? Ah! The Braves, Mets, and Giants! therefore they’ll all go after Holliday.” Real world restrictions of this scenario didn’t even enter his thought process.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
