Ray Durham a Brewer, Dillon to AAA

[brains and braun]

I think I've developed a man-crush on rluzinski. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

In all seriousness, I wonder why a lot of posters are quick to jump on the stat guys, but more accepting of a post that says, "maybe this move will light a fire under such and such player." (Not meant to single anyone out)

The assumption there is that the player will all of a sudden try harder, or that the pressure will make the player more productive, when typically a pressure/stress situation does the opposite. When I look at Rick, I'm not sure why he hasn't been able to maintain a high avg/obp at the big league level, but I doubt that it has anything to do with him not wanting it enough or not feeling an impetus to put up better numbers. In fact, I would say it was the opposite.

 

Just wanna say again that I love the stats, since I don't know much about them. I feel like they broaden my understanding of the game. When I first started on BF.net, I wasn't even sure what OPS or WHIP were. So I think I speak for many when I say thanks to Russ and all the great BF statheads!

[TooLiveBrew]

thanks to Russ and all the great BF statheads!

 

I can echo that, b & b. Brewerfan & the posters we have that are comfortable & knowledgeable with stats have been the main reason my understanding of baseball has completely evolved (imho). I feel like I have a miniscule level of understanding when it comes to "stats" -- but what I try to strive for is a basic, relative understanding of the different stats. A basic example of what I mean is that ERA+ & OPS+ are 'avg.' at the value of 100. I don't know the precise formula in each case, but I understand that those stats do their best to compare players across different eras & ballparks... and that's good enough for me.

[valpocrewsader]

I expressed some displeasure in the Trade Rumours thread and I'm still of that same mind. Doesn't it just seem way too convenient that the perfect fit for our club just happened to be on the team we were playing against this weekend? I'm not saying DM didn't look elsewhere (...he did, right?). I liked Ennder's summary ... wrong guy. I feel like it's 2002 and I'm trying to get excited about Eric Young all over again. And unless it's a hard platoon, it's just more for Yost to juggle and get right.

 

Is Durham better than Dillon? Yes, but I still have a hard time picturing him contributing to a win we wouldn't have gotten without him. And he'll cost us some dough. And we traded away two guys in our system that could have been used in a better trade. And pitching is a bigger concern than spelling Weeks two out of every seven games with a slightly better option than Counsell.

 

I've bashed Weeks a lot and am pretty much comepletely fed up with his carp, but this does nothing for me. Couldn't be less excited.

[danzig6767]

Is Durham better than Dillon? Yes, but I still have a hard time picturing him contributing to a win we wouldn't have gotten without him. And he'll cost us some dough. And we traded away two guys in our system that could have been used in a better trade. And pitching is a bigger concern than spelling Weeks two out of every seven games with a slightly better option than Counsell.

Ford and Hammond would pretty much be just throw ins if we had/do make anymore trades. If i was the GM to another team and had say a quality setup relief pitcher that multiple teams wanted, i can't see how the Brewers being willing to throw in either Hammond or Ford at the end of the trade having any impact whatsoever in me accepting or declining the overall offer. The odds of either guy even making the bigs are slim and even vastly more slim that if either made the bigs, that they'd be much more than 24th/25th man fodder. GM's in baseball know this also and is why Melvin didn't sweat tossing them away for a 2 month bench player.

If the Brewers do try acquiring a quality 8th inning setup guy, the GM owning that pitcher isn't going to be telling Doug, we could have had a deal, if only you still had Hammond or Ford to add to the package. Now i gotta pass.

 

[shelmark]

I am not a Weeks fan but he is the starter and should be the starter. Durham is headed for Kapleresque type playing with PH duties. I don't believe this was ever about the production, or lack thereof, of Weeks. By the way, how does Marcel and other stat projections account for a change of scenery...to a new park that Durham absolutely loves to hit in. I looked it up, and the stats don't lie. Other than the bubble in Minny, Miller is his best park.

[razzzorsharp]

In all seriousness, I wonder why a lot of posters are quick to jump on the stat guys, but more accepting of a post that says, "maybe this move will light a fire under such and such player." (Not meant to single anyone out)

I think it comes down to people using stats and only stats to make an arguement. There seems to be an overwhelming sense that by looking at stats can tell you everything you need to know about a player on this board and some may agree with that, I do not. I guess it comes back to the Moneyball back and forth.

 

Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!

[KCBrewerfan34]

This certainly isn't a blockbuster but it upgrades the team for basically nothing of consequence and we get a little more left handed, when necessary. I want 1 more bullpen guy and then let's sit back (or be on the edge of your seat) for the pennant race.

 

The NL Central could be a race for the ages (since the wildcard was born), The Cardinals are not folding and probably the 3 best teams in the NL are in the division (maybe the Mets can be included in there).

 

 

WOW I can't wait to go to these games!!!!

 

 

GREAT Job by Mr. Melvin, Ash & Mark A. Thank you gentlemen, its fun to a be a Brewer fan again!!!

[joepepsi]

Great trade. Trading for Brian Roberts would have cost good prospects at the very least and signaled the team had given up on Rickie Weeks. Instead, they get nearly the same player for little cost who can help the team this year, and may be a valuable, inexpensive bench player should he be interested in signing for next year. Should also be a good mentor for Rickie.

 

Durham 263 AB; 23 doubles, .293 .385 .414

Roberts 378 AB; 36 doulbes, .291 .373 .484

[GenoSeligPrieb]

I agree with Russ that the last 3 years tell you quite a bit about a player. A lot more than career numbers, that's for sure.

 

But I don't think we should be so quick to toss aside this year's production, either. It's how Durham's doing nowadays that counts. Weeks, too, for that matter.

 

There are quite a few others where Marcel's don't give you an accurate predictor as to what they're capable of still doing for you in 2008. Gabe Kapler, Cristian Guzman, Dioner Navarro, Jerry Hairston, Ryan Doumit, Johnny Damon, Xavier Nady, Troy Glaus, Nate McLouth and especially Ryan Ludwick.

 

If GMs and managers never took a chance, and steered clear of these guys, based on Marcel's, the pennant races would look a lot different.

[homer]

Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!

Did I write that?

[dlk9s]

Doesn't it just seem way too convenient that the perfect fit for our club just happened to be on the team we were playing against this weekend?

Melvin should have waited until we played the Phillies. Maybe he could've gotten Chase Utley.

 

[istanbultaye]

If GMs and managers never took a chance, and steered clear of these guys, based on Marcel's, the pennant races would look a lot different.

 

And that's exactly why smart baseball teams still use scouts AND stats instead of just switching over to computerized drafting and roster management.

[JoeHova]

Instead, they get nearly the same player for little cost who can help the team this year, and may be a valuable, inexpensive bench player should he be interested in signing for next year.

The problem with Durham being a bench player is that he has no versatility. He's 36 and has played 1 inning in his career at a position other than 2B. I don't see him learning 3B or OF on the fly. Then again, Yost did use Cirillo at SS a little, so who knows?

 

I doubt they keep Durham around though. They seem more likely to try to get a Counsell or Graffanino type who can at least pretend to play all 4 infield positions. Even Dillon and Branyan can play 4-5 spots.

[naivin]

The bad news:

 

3) Ned will probably try to STILL give his struggling guy every chance to play. Doug brought in Branyan, but Ned had a tough time accepting that his guy, Wes Helms, needed to play less often now. I suspect the same will happen again. Hope I'm wrong.

Weeks is not Ned's guy...He is the organization's guy, and yes, they are going to give him every opportunity, and when he exhausts all of those, they will give him one or two more.

[JoeHova]

And that's exactly why smart baseball teams still use scouts AND stats instead of just switching over to computerized drafting and roster management.

Actually, I don't think that's why teams don't use "computerized drafting" (what would that even mean?). The consensus seems to be that HS stats are basically meaningless because of the small samples and varying levels of competition. College stats are little better. If teams could come up with a formula that predicted success somewhat accurately based on HS or college numbers, I guarantee you they would use it. It hasn't been possible to do so though because of inherent limitations in the data.

 

[JohnBriggs12]

I wouldn't go nearly as far as shelmark who says this wasn't about the production of Weeks. It clearly was and not just his lack of production this year, but most of last year too. But I still think Weeks gets 3-4 starts a week for now.

 

But it was also about adding another bat from the left side in time to face righthanded dominant pitching staffs in the Cardinals and Cubs.

 

Durham gives them much more flexibility than does the man he replaces, Dillon. It also gives Dillon 6 weeks of regular ABs so come September, he should be a more potent bat off the bench.

[joepepsi]

Instead, they get nearly the same player for little cost who can help the team this year, and may be a valuable, inexpensive bench player should he be interested in signing for next year.

The problem with Durham being a bench player is that he has no versatility. He's 36 and has played 1 inning in his career at a position other than 2B. I don't see him learning 3B or OF on the fly. Then again, Yost did use Cirillo at SS a little, so who knows?

 

I doubt they keep Durham around though. They seem more likely to try to get a Counsell or Graffanino type who can at least pretend to play all 4 infield positions. Even Dillon and Branyan can play 4-5 spots.

Yeah, you're probably right. I hate to see another year or two of Counsell, but there really aren't that many utility guys who can fill in like he can. Chris Gomez maybe. Durham's probably headed to the AL or retirement.

 

[Postseason2006]

How can one even project when the system does not even know what games the guy will be starting in let along playing along with pinch hitting? If this guy was a pure genius, he would be working the economy.

[RightFieldCoder]

With Kapler, we have the ability to back up all of the outfield spots. Branyan may also cover a corner outfield but he is also the 3B and back up 1B. Counsell is the back up SS and 2B. Counsell is also one of the first off the bench. Of those 3, Counsell would be at the bottom of my list. Dillon didn't have much to back up anymore and being a RH bat wasn't a good option to pitch hit. We moved him out and got someone to back up 2B who hits LH. And when a team tries to use a LHP against our back up 2B (like I've seen done to Counsell), Ray-Ray switches over to become a RH bat. Besides the money (which is for half a year so only Mark and the investors should be worried about it), this deal is a good move. There is a worry because he's 36. But just like CC and his heavy work load, we only need Ray-Ray to last until November.

[Bucky Rules]

I wouldn't go nearly as far as shelmark who says this wasn't about the production of Weeks. It clearly was and not just his lack of production this year, but most of last year too. But I still think Weeks gets 3-4 starts a week for now.

I'm with shelmark. This deal wasn't about Weeks, and I think he'll start more than 3-4 times a week. I think it's more like 4-6 times a week with Durham getting 1-2. Durham is the LH veteran bat (and actually a bonus as a switch hitter) off the bench that they were looking for. And they were able to get him cheap.

[Fatter than Joey]

Great trade. Trading for Brian Roberts would have cost good prospects at the very least and signaled the team had given up on Rickie Weeks.

 

I think trading prospects for Brian Roberts even good ones, is not necessarily a bad thing -- and I think that this trade has absolutely signaled that the team has put Weeks on the hot seat at the very least. I am not buying the idea that we made this trade to upgrade Dillon's 20 ABs per month -- we made this trade because the Brewers need better production from 2b.

 

Instead, they get nearly the same player for little cost who can help the team this year, and may be a valuable, inexpensive bench player should he be interested in signing for next year.

 

Roberts is a MUCH better player than Durham -- Roberts is a top four 2b in OPS in MLB -- Durham is a bit below that (#8 which is not bad), Roberts can steal bases, has more power, and plays much better D.

 

Durham would cost us about $6M next year -- I'd rather have Roberts for $8M, or even Counsell at $3.4M for that matter.

 

Should also be a good mentor for Rickie.

 

Weeks is 25, and probably is past the point of mentoring. I am not sure what Durham can mentor that Counsell hasn't.

 

I think the only mentoring Durham will do, will be saying -- "Hey Rickie, watch what I do, as I get more and more of your starts"

[cwolf2012]

He's only a left handed bat. His split against lefties is just horrid, even though he's batting right-handed.

[FVBrewerFan]

If you are using fewer than 1000 AB to judge a hitter you are not getting very useful results. Sorry but trying to judge a hitter by 3 months of play is just futile. If you want to judge Weeks you use his career stats and not just this season.

I disagree. Current trend is more relevant than career numbers- especially for a young player. If the player has at least 5 full seasons under his belt, I would feel comfortable looking at the career stats. But with a young hitter, the sample size is still too small to make any viable judgement. Which year is a "fluke"? His BA, OBP, and OPS has fluctuated pretty drastically every year, which tells me we still don't know what kind of hitter Weeks will be.

 

I think the Brewers are doing the right thing. Don't give up on him, but now you have insurance with Durham for the rest of the year. Whther it ever goes public or not, I'm sure Melvin will have some trade discussions involving Weeks during the off-season. Not that he will try to trade him, just keep his ears open to see what you can get.

[homer]

How can one even project when the system does not even know what games the guy will be starting in let along playing along with pinch hitting? If this guy was a pure genius, he would be working the economy.

I think people see 'projection' and think 'prediction'. Even the guy who came up with Marcels had this disclaimer:

 

Note: I do not stand behind these forecasts. These forecasts are the minimum level of competence that you should expect from any forecaster. Do not attach my name to these forecasts in any kind of evaluation experiment. They should only be referred to as Marcel The Monkey Forecasting System, or simply The Marcels.

[istanbultaye]

Actually, I don't think that's why teams don't use "computerized drafting" (what would that even mean?). The consensus seems to be that HS stats are basically meaningless because of the small samples and varying levels of competition. College stats are little better. If teams could come up with a formula that predicted success somewhat accurately based on HS or college numbers, I guarantee you they would use it. It hasn't been possible to do so though because of inherent limitations in the data.

 

You just said what I did basically. There are situations where you can't just plug numbers into a computer and go with the result. But you can't just ignore the numbers either, so you balance your decisions with stats and scouting.