Wade Miley to Reds - 2 years / $15 million

[TURBO]

Yes, fair enough, but wishing financial security for a pro athlete who has been in the business as long as he has just came off as comical to me.

 

I'm sure he has provided security for generations...

[JosephC]

I probably would have rather had Miley than Anderson even with the extra year but I am guessing they put up very similar numbers outside of Ks.

 

 

IMO the more significant number would be innings. Miley has thrown 765 innings over the last five years, Anderson with only 503.

 

Anderson was a top prospect, slotted into the A's rotation in 2009 and made 30 starts. Since that time, over the last 10 seasons, he's only hit the 20 start mark two times. Over those 10 years he's only averaged 82 innings per season.

 

That's easily my biggest concern with Anderson. I like the fact that Stearns brought in a ground ball pitcher, which could be a good fit for Miller Park. Low K total really doesn't concern me too much. But the guy isn't helping the team if he is on the DL, and that has been a major problem for Anderson throughout his entire career.

[jjfanec]

I probably would have rather had Miley than Anderson even with the extra year but I am guessing they put up very similar numbers outside of Ks.

 

 

IMO the more significant number would be innings. Miley has thrown 765 innings over the last five years, Anderson with only 503.

 

Anderson was a top prospect, slotted into the A's rotation in 2009 and made 30 starts. Since that time, over the last 10 seasons, he's only hit the 20 start mark two times. Over those 10 years he's only averaged 82 innings per season.

 

That's easily my biggest concern with Anderson. I like the fact that Stearns brought in a ground ball pitcher, which could be a good fit for Miller Park. Low K total really doesn't concern me too much. But the guy isn't helping the team if he is on the DL, and that has been a major problem for Anderson throughout his entire career.

 

Injuries are a question but Miley was hurt with the Brewers and really seemed to wear down last year and in 2017 he started solid only to falter after 10 or so starts. I wonder if he still should be looked at as a 30 start pitcher or if he is better at 20-25. Obviously a small sample size so maybe not.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I probably would have rather had Miley than Anderson even with the extra year but I am guessing they put up very similar numbers outside of Ks.

 

 

IMO the more significant number would be innings. Miley has thrown 765 innings over the last five years, Anderson with only 503.

 

Anderson was a top prospect, slotted into the A's rotation in 2009 and made 30 starts. Since that time, over the last 10 seasons, he's only hit the 20 start mark two times. Over those 10 years he's only averaged 82 innings per season.

 

That's easily my biggest concern with Anderson. I like the fact that Stearns brought in a ground ball pitcher, which could be a good fit for Miller Park. Low K total really doesn't concern me too much. But the guy isn't helping the team if he is on the DL, and that has been a major problem for Anderson throughout his entire career.

 

That's why Anderson was as inexpensive as he was, despite his solid numbers last year.

[clancyphile]

I like the Anderson signing - a lot. I think it is the kind of gem that the Brewers need to pull off until you get a flow of pitchers from the minors.

 

That said... at this price... Wade Miley would have been a good addition as well.

[sveumrules]

IMO the more significant number would be innings. Miley has thrown 765 innings over the last five years, Anderson with only 503.

 

Anderson was a top prospect, slotted into the A's rotation in 2009 and made 30 starts. Since that time, over the last 10 seasons, he's only hit the 20 start mark two times. Over those 10 years he's only averaged 82 innings per season.

 

That's easily my biggest concern with Anderson. I like the fact that Stearns brought in a ground ball pitcher, which could be a good fit for Miller Park. Low K total really doesn't concern me too much. But the guy isn't helping the team if he is on the DL, and that has been a major problem for Anderson throughout his entire career.

 

Anderson's injury history is very real & a legitimate concern.

 

If he does get hurt & misses significant time (or is ineffective) you plug in his spot & you're out 5 million bucks.

 

If Miley gets hurt or is ineffective this year (coming off a horrendous finish to last season increases the odds of this outcome, imo) you're out 7.5 million plus you have 7.5 million reasons to give him a shot again in 2021 coming off a possible injured/ineffective season to maybe provide zilch again.

 

Anderson provides much more flexibility & is likely to provide similar results as Miley in 2020. Viewed through that lens I can understand why Stearns & company preferred Brett at 1/5 to Wade at 2/15.

[Bulldogboy]

The Reds rotation is looking deep and impressive. A four game against Castillo Bauer Grey and Miley is trouble. Brewers rotation is still a mess if u ask me. Bad look by Stearns.

 

Reds starters 2019: 4.12 ERA (92 ERA-)

Brewers starters 2019: 4.40 ERA (99 ERA-)

 

Reds wins 2019: 75

Brewers wins 2019: 89

 

Somehow Stearns & company won 14 more games than the Reds last year even though their rotation was 7% worse by ERA.

 

I'd say the bad look is trying to find the negative in every transaction Stearns & company do or don't make when they clearly know more than we do & have the track record of success to prove it.

Disagree but do you. Anyone arguing that the Brewers rotation as it stands today is looking better than the Reds should switch to football takes.

[tmwiese55]

On paper the Reds clearly have the best starters in the NL Central. They have a solid closer and at a couple other proven reliable pen guys. I feel like their offense took a step back last year and safe to assume prime Votto isn't coming back, OF looks a little weak as of now. But with them going for it as hard as they are now it wouldn't surprise me if they sign an OF, say Ozuna. I wouldn't rule them out for the division by any means next year, if they're overlooked and only the 4th favorite for the division there's probably a solid value bet to be made on them.

[sveumrules]

The Reds rotation is looking deep and impressive. A four game against Castillo Bauer Grey and Miley is trouble. Brewers rotation is still a mess if u ask me. Bad look by Stearns.

 

Reds starters 2019: 4.12 ERA (92 ERA-)

Brewers starters 2019: 4.40 ERA (99 ERA-)

 

Reds wins 2019: 75

Brewers wins 2019: 89

 

Somehow Stearns & company won 14 more games than the Reds last year even though their rotation was 7% worse by ERA.

 

I'd say the bad look is trying to find the negative in every transaction Stearns & company do or don't make when they clearly know more than we do & have the track record of success to prove it.

Disagree but do you. Anyone arguing that the Brewers rotation as it stands today is looking better than the Reds should switch to football takes.

 

What do you specifically disagree with? The 2019 team ERA, ERA-, win totals & the differences between said numbers are all verifiable facts.

 

So you disagree that Sterans & company know more than we do or that they have a track record of success to prove it or both?

[areacodes]

The Reds rotation is looking deep and impressive. A four game against Castillo Bauer Grey and Miley is trouble. Brewers rotation is still a mess if u ask me. Bad look by Stearns.

 

Reds starters 2019: 4.12 ERA (92 ERA-)

Brewers starters 2019: 4.40 ERA (99 ERA-)

 

Reds wins 2019: 75

Brewers wins 2019: 89

 

Somehow Stearns & company won 14 more games than the Reds last year even though their rotation was 7% worse by ERA.

 

I'd say the bad look is trying to find the negative in every transaction Stearns & company do or don't make when they clearly know more than we do & have the track record of success to prove it.

Disagree but do you. Anyone arguing that the Brewers rotation as it stands today is looking better than the Reds should switch to football takes.

 

Was anybody arguing the Brewers rotation, as it stands today, is better than the Reds? I’ve seen people argue the Brewers team was better last year even if the Reds starters had better stats or that they won’t believe the Reds are a better team overall until it happens.

[Matty V]

The Reds rotation is looking deep and impressive. A four game against Castillo Bauer Grey and Miley is trouble. Brewers rotation is still a mess if u ask me. Bad look by Stearns.

 

Reds starters 2019: 4.12 ERA (92 ERA-)

Brewers starters 2019: 4.40 ERA (99 ERA-)

 

Reds wins 2019: 75

Brewers wins 2019: 89

 

Somehow Stearns & company won 14 more games than the Reds last year even though their rotation was 7% worse by ERA.

 

I'd say the bad look is trying to find the negative in every transaction Stearns & company do or don't make when they clearly know more than we do & have the track record of success to prove it.

 

I would keep in mind the Reds Pythagorean record had them with 80 wins while the Brewers were at 81. I think the two teams were much closer together in performance than the final records would indicate.

[owbc]

There are very few recent precedents for a losing franchise turning things around by spending a ton of money. Almost all of them have been failures, including large markets like the Phillies and Mariners. I'm skeptical that the Reds have done enough to do much better than a .500 finish.

 

That said, if there was ever a year for them to get a top-3 finish this is it. And maybe they will go shopping at the deadline if they get off to a good start.

[Fear The Chorizo]

The Reds rotation is looking deep and impressive. A four game against Castillo Bauer Grey and Miley is trouble. Brewers rotation is still a mess if u ask me. Bad look by Stearns.

 

Reds starters 2019: 4.12 ERA (92 ERA-)

Brewers starters 2019: 4.40 ERA (99 ERA-)

 

Reds wins 2019: 75

Brewers wins 2019: 89

 

Somehow Stearns & company won 14 more games than the Reds last year even though their rotation was 7% worse by ERA.

 

I'd say the bad look is trying to find the negative in every transaction Stearns & company do or don't make when they clearly know more than we do & have the track record of success to prove it.

 

I would keep in mind the Reds Pythagorean record had them with 80 wins while the Brewers were at 81. I think the two teams were much closer together in performance than the final records would indicate.

 

I would also keep in mind that the Pythagorean record has generally been awful at predicting where the Brewers win total winds up since Stearns took over as GM of the Brewers. The actual standings had the Brewers at 89 wins while the Reds finished with 75.

 

Speaking of the division, and it strays off topic here and probably deserves its own thread, exactly what "improvements" have any other teams made in the division that make them noticeably better? The Reds look to have improved their roster, yes - but the Cards and Cubs haven't done much of anything to date.

[tmwiese55]

Well a key move was also the Bauer trade, not just two FA signings. But as said, it's not like the Reds were brutal and you're trying to go from a 100 loss team to 90 wins. So this isn't like a Miami situation of a few years back when they went to the new stadium. This is taking a .500ish team and trying to pick up 10 more wins. Keep in mind their 75 wins (besides the pythagorean stuff mentioned) is hurt by being in such a brutal division thus costing them a few more wins getting to the .500ish area.

[KeithStone53151]

There are very few recent precedents for a losing franchise turning things around by spending a ton of money. Almost all of them have been failures, including large markets like the Phillies and Mariners. I'm skeptical that the Reds have done enough to do much better than a .500 finish.

 

That said, if there was ever a year for them to get a top-3 finish this is it. And maybe they will go shopping at the deadline if they get off to a good start.

 

The Reds in my opinion, significantly underperformed last year. I thought they'd be better. And their roster has only gotten better. Their rotation is certainly a top 5 rotation. Their lineup is stacked will probably look something like below, and they have 4 very solid bullpen arms. They are maybe a SS improvement and bullpen arm or two away from being really good...but as it stands now that roster is definitely a contender.

 

Senzel

Votto

Suarez

Moose

Aquino

Winker

Galvis

Barnhart

[Matty V]

 

I would also keep in mind that the Pythagorean record has generally been awful at predicting where the Brewers win total winds up since Stearns took over as GM of the Brewers. The actual standings had the Brewers at 89 wins while the Reds finished with 75.

 

 

I would say we disagree as to what the word "awful" means.

 

2019 +8

2018 +5

2017 +1

2016 -1

 

Pythagorean record is not perfect, but it is a meaningful statistic to consider when evaluating a team's performance over a full season.

[sveumrules]

I would say we disagree as to what the word "awful" means.

 

2019 +8

2018 +5

2017 +1

2016 -1

 

Pythagorean record is not perfect, but it is a meaningful statistic to consider when evaluating a team's performance over a full season.

 

Over the last two years the Brewers +13 differential versus their pythag is the second largest margin behind only Baltimore at -14, so over the last two years anyway, pyhtag has been awfuller at predicting the Brewers record than all but 28 other teams.

 

Full list if anyone is curious...

 

BAL -14

MKE +13

LAD -11

SEA +11

WAS -10

KCR -9

SFG +9

ARI -7

CIN -7

CLE -7

HOU -6

COL +6

PHI +6

CHC -5

NYY +5

MIN +5

ATL +4

TBR +4

CHW +3

PIT +3

DET -2

BOS +2

OAK +2

NYM -1

STL -1

LAA -1

TEX -1

SDP +1

MIA +1

TOR 0

[Matty V]

I would say we disagree as to what the word "awful" means.

 

2019 +8

2018 +5

2017 +1

2016 -1

 

Pythagorean record is not perfect, but it is a meaningful statistic to consider when evaluating a team's performance over a full season.

 

Over the last two years the Brewers +13 differential versus their pythag is the second largest margin behind only Baltimore at -14, so over the last two years anyway, pyhtag has been awfuller at predicting the Brewers record than all but 28 other teams.

 

Full list if anyone is curious...

 

BAL -14

MKE +13

LAD -11

SEA +11

WAS -10

KCR -9

SFG +9

ARI -7

CIN -7

CLE -7

HOU -6

COL +6

PHI +6

CHC -5

NYY +5

MIN +5

ATL +4

TBR +4

CHW +3

PIT +3

DET -2

BOS +2

OAK +2

NYM -1

STL -1

LAA -1

TEX -1

SDP +1

MIA +1

TOR 0

 

And what I'm saying is that I would not bet on that to continue in 2020.

[Fear The Chorizo]

 

I would also keep in mind that the Pythagorean record has generally been awful at predicting where the Brewers win total winds up since Stearns took over as GM of the Brewers. The actual standings had the Brewers at 89 wins while the Reds finished with 75.

 

 

I would say we disagree as to what the word "awful" means.

 

2019 +8

2018 +5

2017 +1

2016 -1

 

Pythagorean record is not perfect, but it is a meaningful statistic to consider when evaluating a team's performance over a full season.

 

To piggyback on Sveumrules' last post, Pythag record updates as the season goes on - so we're not talking about the skewed preseason win projections that have also significantly underestimated actual Brewer win totals.

 

+13 games of record error over 4 seasons based on actual runs scored/allowed over a few years is actually bad for the Pythag model. Not saying they got the Brewers wrong, just that it isn't a good model to compare win totals for a team like the Brewers.

[sveumrules]

 

Over the last two years the Brewers +13 differential versus their pythag is the second largest margin behind only Baltimore at -14, so over the last two years anyway, pyhtag has been awfuller at predicting the Brewers record than all but 28 other teams.

 

And what I'm saying is that I would not bet on that to continue in 2020.

 

I wouldn't count on it as a given either, but certain elements of team building (namely a strong bullpen, though I am sure there are others) can contribute to a team's likelihood of beating their pythag/baseruns estimated records. If anyone has figured out a way to gain even the most marginal of advantages in this realm, I would bet on Stearns & company being those anyones.

 

My predictions for 2020 given how things stand today would be pretty straight forward, I believe the Reds will have a better starting rotation than the Brewers (again) but the Brewers will win more games than the Reds (again) because their team is deeper & their front office has better processes.

[clancyphile]

I would say we disagree as to what the word "awful" means.

 

2019 +8

2018 +5

2017 +1

2016 -1

 

Pythagorean record is not perfect, but it is a meaningful statistic to consider when evaluating a team's performance over a full season.

 

Over the last two years the Brewers +13 differential versus their pythag is the second largest margin behind only Baltimore at -14, so over the last two years anyway, pyhtag has been awfuller at predicting the Brewers record than all but 28 other teams.

 

Full list if anyone is curious...

 

BAL -14

MKE +13

LAD -11

SEA +11

WAS -10

KCR -9

SFG +9

ARI -7

CIN -7

CLE -7

HOU -6

COL +6

PHI +6

CHC -5

NYY +5

MIN +5

ATL +4

TBR +4

CHW +3

PIT +3

DET -2

BOS +2

OAK +2

NYM -1

STL -1

LAA -1

TEX -1

SDP +1

MIA +1

TOR 0

 

Milwaukee arguably has made the best use of the talent they have acquired over the last two seasons. Speaks well to Counsell and Stearns.

[SeaBass]

The Reds rotation is looking deep and impressive. A four game against Castillo Bauer Grey and Miley is trouble. Brewers rotation is still a mess if u ask me. Bad look by Stearns.

 

Reds starters 2019: 4.12 ERA (92 ERA-)

Brewers starters 2019: 4.40 ERA (99 ERA-)

 

Reds wins 2019: 75

Brewers wins 2019: 89

 

Somehow Stearns & company won 14 more games than the Reds last year even though their rotation was 7% worse by ERA.

 

I'd say the bad look is trying to find the negative in every transaction Stearns & company do or don't make when they clearly know more than we do & have the track record of success to prove it.

 

I would keep in mind the Reds Pythagorean record had them with 80 wins while the Brewers were at 81. I think the two teams were much closer together in performance than the final records would indicate.

The only issue I'd have with comparing the two team's pitching staffs and then equating that to their final records is that the Reds had the 6th worst runs scored in all of baseball last season. Doesn't matter how successful the pitching is if they have trouble scoring runs it's harder to win.

 

Also the Brewers super power seemed to be their bullpen which would shorten the game in their favor and lead to more close wins. That's anecdotal from what I seem to remember the story lines were for the Brewers last season.

[Jaylyn]

I would love to know who the former teammate is, also a nice sideswipe regarding the Cubs and Alex Claudio! ha!

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/12/central-notes-reds-miley-cubs-twins-clippard.html

[Jaylyn]

I would love to know who the former teammate is, also a nice sideswipe regarding the Cubs and Alex Claudio! ha!

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/12/central-notes-reds-miley-cubs-twins-clippard.html

[Oxy]

 

To piggyback on Sveumrules' last post, Pythag record updates as the season goes on - so we're not talking about the skewed preseason win projections that have also significantly underestimated actual Brewer win totals.

 

+13 games of record error over 4 seasons based on actual runs scored/allowed over a few years is actually bad for the Pythag model. Not saying they got the Brewers wrong, just that it isn't a good model to compare win totals for a team like the Brewers.

 

Forgive me if I'm feeling pedantic and in the posting mood tonight, but the "pythagorean record" doesn't make any preseason predictions. I'm not a fan of the stat, as if Hernan Perez pitches in 12 losses in a year with a 36.00 ERA and the crew loses those 12 games by 100 total runs, it is still 12 losses in the standings, but the pythagorean record probably counts it as 40 losses or so (*no, I don't have any idea how many losses it says there should be, but it's definitely a lot more than 12)