Cameron Trade Idea

[endaround]

At the time the $10m was targeted to replace McClung in the rotation. Looper has been signed and no one else is out there anyway.

[joepepsi]

People don't like Cameron because they can't look beyond his low batting average and high strikeouts. The same people probably love Torii Hunter. Everyone seems to...

 

Career rates:

Cameron: .250/.340/.448 106 *OPS+

ToHunter: .272/.326/.468 105 *OPS+

 

Granted Hunter is 2-1/2 years younger, but he's also much more expensive without providing any more value:

 

2008 Cameron: .331obp/.477slg

2008 ToHunter: .344obp/.466slg

[TooLiveBrew]

Great comparison, joepepsi. Gotta wonder if Mike had night sweats after Hunter signed that deal with LAA.

[endaround]

Hunter also was terrible defensive last year. To the tune of -11.3 runs by UZR. He really hasn't been good for a long time.

[RockCoCougars]

If they were going to move Cameron, they certainly should have done it months ago. At this point they have no options to replace him. Simply put, Duffy is not a starting center fielder for a winning team. Plus I want no part of the vastly overrated Kennedy or the vastly overpaid Igawa for him. We are not Waste Management for the Yankees, and should do them no favors.

 

I'd package Cameron with a prospect for Phil Hughes, and nothing less. Since the Yankees probably wouldn't go for that, I'd stand pat.

[RobertR]

And, again, it's not like there's any better options out there. Cameron is easily worth $10 million more than Gwynn Jr. and Duffy. I'll take Cameron easily over Bourn and the Fukudome/Johnson platoon. Or Brett Gardner. Or Dewayne Wise. Or Willy Taveras. Or Ryan Spillborghs. Or Ryan Sweeney. Or Franklin Gutierrez. Or Carlos Gomez. It's not like Ellsbury or Crisp are amazingly valuable outside of fantasy leagues due to their SBs. Schafer is going to be better in the future, but how good is he going to be in 2009? Or Maybin? Rowand and Rios don't project to be better any better than Cameron either.

Yeah, Cameron doesn't compare to Hamilton, Beltran, and Sizemore. McClouth and Gerut project as better than him as well, offensively at least, although I'm sure the margin shrinks when you factor in defense. But, after that, Cameron's very comparable to pretty much the next tier of centerfielders offensively who all group between 20 and 30 VORP projected by Baseball Prospectus. Yeah they get at those values in different ways, some ways that might fit with the Brewers better than Cameron's skill set, but there's a reason that the Brewers just didn't give him away over the offseason. He's still plenty valuable.

And, I don't know why we should look at worst case scenarios rather than probable scenarios like Baseball Prospectus's PECOTA projections which project him as plenty valuable in 2009. The .320 OBP is like the 20% percentile by BP.

Robert

[3Putt]

We need some defensive stability while our young guys continue to develop. Some like Weeks & Hall may never be average defensively so a solid defensive outfielder like Cameron helps both in games and as a role model. The guy's a pro. Cameron, Hardy, Kendall and maybe Braun are about the only regular players I'd consider above average defensively. Considering we don't have pitchers that garner a lot of Ks that seems more critical now than ever.

[endaround]

The fact that you keep pretending that Hall isn't above average defensively doesn't make it so.

[logan82]

Cameron, Hardy, Kendall and maybe Braun are about the only regular players I'd consider above average defensively.

 

All of our regulars should be expected to be at least average defensively except Weeks and Fielder. Even Weeks has a chance to improve to average. Hart is as good in right as Braun in left. He was a little worse last year, but over his career Hart has been average in right.

[TheCrew07]

The fact that you keep pretending that Hall isn't above average defensively doesn't make it so.

I guess that depends on how willing we are to accept how heavily range is rated in defensive metrics. I understand why emphasis is placed on the extremes as it's the proper way to separate similar defenders, I just feel it's weighted too high. I admit to bias though, Hall absolutely has always rubbed me the wrong way, every time he holds the ball just so he can fire it across the diamond at the last second I want to throw something at my TV.

[TooLiveBrew]

Oh man do I agree about that pet peeve with Hall. I thought Branyan was a better fielder at 3B honestly in watching them both play. Hall has better range, but 3B is less about range than it is good, soft hands & an accurate (non-rushed!) throw.

[3Putt]

The fact that you keep pretending that Hall isn't above average defensively doesn't make it so.

I see some other posters beat me to the punch. I respect your knowledge of stats but sometimes things are so blatantly obvious that we can overanalyze them. If you watch Hall for even half a season you'll do what I and the others do and cringe whenever a ball is hit in his direction. Hall was leading the league in errors last season before being platooned. I know errors don't seem to impress you but are we to believe the player leading the league in errors is above average defensively? Hall would have to have the range of a grey whale to make him above average. Can't buy it.

[endaround]

Hall has great range. Hall has a strong if inaccurate arm. He has mediocre hands. I watched like 120 games last year. I know what Hall can do. Errors are meaningless especially given how Milwaukee does score keeping.

[logan82]

I don't like Hall. I think of a matador whenever I see him field. Always off to the side. Annoys me to no end. Stats seem to back up that he is a good 3B though. I think he got better towards the end of the year. He was a butcher in the first couple months though. His range lets JJ play a little more up the middle.

[TooLiveBrew]

I don't like Hall. I think of a matador whenever I see him field. Always off to the side. Annoys me to no end. Stats seem to back up that he is a good 3B though

 

This is the problem when people come back with, 'Well I don't need facts to tell me I'm wrong! Hall sucks!'

 

He's not a great fielder at 3B, but that people keep pushing that he's bad is just literally indefensible.

[sheetskout]

It's going to get weird around here if Hall actually has a good season.....

[logan82]

He's not a great fielder at 3B, but that people keep pushing that he's bad is just literally indefensible.

 

Exactly, and I would love to go on and on about how bad I think Hall is, but it just isn't true. Heck, last offseason I thought that we were gong from historically bad defense in Braun to bad defense in Hall. I was wrong.

 

I don't like Hall is a little to strong of a statement really. He isn't on the level of Wes Helms pre game winning HR. He is more like Capitol Brewery Island Wheat. I don't dislike it, but there are many wheats I like better.

[JohnBriggs12]

If everyone spent all year watching 90% of the 3rd basemen, they'd realize that Hall's more than adequate defensively. Almost everyone who plays the position looks bad from time to time. That's why the great ones stand out so much. It's a tough position. Fielder isn't the greatest at digging out balls either and that's going to make guys look worse.

 

Hall's natural position is SS, so one could expect continued improvement at 3B too.

[3Putt]

It's going to get weird around here if Hall actually has a good season.....

 

I'll be the first to admit I was wrong if that happens. I'm sticking with my story that Hall is a liability at 3B but let's all watch and learn together. Hopefully I'll be eating crow but I haven't for the last two years. I'll check in from time to time to see how we're doing. I'm sure you'll all do the same.

[TooLiveBrew]

Except that you only haven't been eating crow because of the point JBriggs makes

 

If everyone spent all year watching 90% of the 3rd basemen, they'd realize that Hall's more than adequate defensively.

 

 

I also really like how logan says it: I would love to go on and on about how bad I think Hall is, but it just isn't true. Heck, last offseason I thought that we were gong from historically bad defense in Braun to bad defense in Hall. I was wrong.

[Invader3K]

If Hall can just perform somewhere between his '06 and '07 numbers, that would be great.

[3Putt]

"Except that you only haven't been eating crow because of the point JBriggs makes

 

If everyone spent all year watching 90% of the 3rd basemen, they'd realize that Hall's more than adequate defensively. "

 

The other 90% didn't LEAD the league in errors. I'm talking ALL players and not just 3B. Again, I'll let Billy's play speak for me. Catch you back in a couple months or so.

 

One final item which I think illustrates my point. The stat guru's on this board love to point out how Hall's range offset's his errors. I went to the game last Friday night. Hall's playing 3B. Texas has a runner on 2b with one out. The hitter hits a hard two hopper about 2 feet inside the 3B line. Hall made no effort to get to the ball. Even if he couldn't make the play at 1B, if he would have gotten a glove on the ball it would have kept the runner from scoring. Do plays like that (which are the norm for Hall) show up in UZR? It's not an error but it potentially cost us a run.

[TooLiveBrew]

The other 90% didn't LEAD the league in errors. I'm talking ALL players and not just 3B. Again, I'll let Billy's play speak for me. Catch you back in a couple months or so.

 

E is just about the worst way to evaluate defenders. All that tells you is that Hall got to a lot more balls than many of his peers.

 

Honestly, the smug way you just say all this wouldn't bother me if the facts weren't lined up against you on this one.

 

 

One final item which I think illustrates my point. The stat guru's on this board love to point out how Hall's range offset's his errors. I went to the game last Friday night. Hall's playing 3B. Texas has a runner on 2b with one out. The hitter hits a hard two hopper about 2 feet inside the 3B line. Hall made no effort to get to the ball.

 

A) It's ST

B) It's one play

[JohnBriggs12]

The other 90% didn't LEAD the league in errors. I'm talking ALL players and not just 3B. Again, I'll let Billy's play speak for me. Catch you back in a couple months or so.

 

E is just about the worst way to evaluate defenders. All that tells you is that Hall got to a lot more balls than many of his peers.

 

Honestly, the smug way you just say all this wouldn't bother me if the facts weren't lined up against you on this one.

 

 

One final item which I think illustrates my point. The stat guru's on this board love to point out how Hall's range offset's his errors. I went to the game last Friday night. Hall's playing 3B. Texas has a runner on 2b with one out. The hitter hits a hard two hopper about 2 feet inside the 3B line. Hall made no effort to get to the ball.

 

A) It's ST

B) It's one play

That game was televised on my satellite package. I remember the play you are referring to. The Texas telecast replayed that hit. Hall was shading toward the hole on that play and couldn't have flagged that one down with a broom not could any 3rd baseman alive or dead.

[TheCrew07]

This is really a matter of opinion, UZR isn't the end all be all... just because UZR likes player A better than player B, it doesn't make it so, or make it true.

 

Back in the day when we were debating Hall vs Hardy at SS, I was always of the opinion that I wanted a player who coverts every play he could get to, I used the 99 out of 100 analogy, than a player would make the fantastic plays but will boot the easy one occasionally. Which is why I always came down on the Hardy side of the fence even when metrics didn't like him so much. Certain metrics have evolved to the point now where Hardy is viewed very favorably defensively so there isn't much to discuss, but going into 2006 it was a very hot topic around here.

 

I prefer consistency, I'll take it over flash every single time, not just in a baseball, in every sport. It's extremely difficult to win with inconsistent players, and defense is the one aspect of baseball that lends itself to consistency, the odds are not stacked against you in the field like they are at the plate. If a player doesn't consistently execute the routine play I don't think he should be considered a good defender. It doesn't matter if it's Weeks or Hall, if they fail to execute the routine I will not consider him a good defender. Can you make a mathematical arguement that he is? Sure, you can treat all situations and misplays like they are equal but that's baseball in a vacuum, it's a tough sell to me that those mathematics carry through to production or lack there of in the field.

 

In all my sports watching through the years, and it's an emabarrasingly large percentage of my life, I've only ever seen one player do everything fundamentally wrong and become an all-star/HOF caliber player and Favre played in the NFL. Occasionally a player's immense physical ability allows him to overcome shortcomings in other areas. I'm on record that I believe Hall may be the best natural athlete on the team, but it would be a stretch to suggest to me that his ability overcomes the rest of what he does. They last 2 years no single player on the team has gotten less out of more ability than he has. It doesn't matter if it's in the field, at the plate, or on the bases, he always seems to sabotage the good with the horrendous "what the heck was he thinking" type mistake.

 

UZR says Hall is a + defender, that's a fact... but if Hall is actually a good defender isn't that black and white and I think is open to debate. This is where I disconnect with the statisticians... posters will go to a blog or site and see a well thought out theory, good methods, good discussion, and treat a metric as fact when in truth it's simply a hypothesis. There is some fascinating work being done, but all these metrics are a work in progress are not absolutes, and I think it's important to keep perspective of their place in baseball.

 

If you were a scout on another team would you think Hall is a good defender? If you were going to draft him would you? If you were BA how would you rate his defense vs his tools? I'd think they'd all pretty much say the same thing, he has good range (which is a tool) but is a poor defender. The question then becomes how important is range? What's the proper mathetical weight for range as a component of defense as a whole? I personally believe that they are giving players too much credit for the least statistically significant factor, which would be plays at the extremes of range, because the fewest balls will be hit there. It's an excellent way to separate defenders who are similar up a to a certain percentage going left or right. However a misplay on a ball hit right at someone is not the same as misplay on a ball that a player has to utilize all his talents to get to. The routine play should carry a higher weight than that of the fringe play.